To: EdnaMode
From the trailer I watched, it seems the movie features a highly technologically advanced country in Africa... If so, it raises the "fantasy" level of this film considerably. No nation in Africa, populated and governed by actual Africans, has produced anything much more advanced than a mud hut since the Egyptians, and of course, the Egyptians were not "sub-Saharan" Africans.
But of course, as any liberal/leftist will tell you, that is only because whitey has been keeping them down and stealing everything from them for hundreds of years.
20 posted on
02/14/2018 12:03:18 PM PST by
Sicon
("All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others." - G. Orwell)
To: Sicon
That's because Whitey came in and stole the brightest among them to pick our cotton.
Don't you know your history?
< /SARC>
35 posted on
02/14/2018 12:18:13 PM PST by
Aevery_Freeman
(There are far too many Sh*thole-Americans! Especially in government.)
To: Sicon
If it's true to the classic vision of the comics, Wakanda SHOULD be a crown jewel of capitalism.
The Wakandans discover that they've an entire mound of the rarest metal known to man. So what do they do? Their chief has them sell minute quantities of it to the outside world which is willing to pay extremely high price for it. Meanwhile the chief has the best and brightest of his people be sent abroad to study modern science, technology, economics, politics etc. They come back to Wakanda with their new learning. The Wakandans invest in themselves with the money from vibranium metal and knowledge they've acquired. In a short amount of time one of the poorest and most primitive nations in Earth becomes the wealthiest per capita and the most technologically advanced.
THAT should be the focus of the movie. It's message of pro-capitalism and self-sufficiency.
36 posted on
02/14/2018 12:18:52 PM PST by
Ciaphas Cain
(Liberalism, as with all else evil, can never create. It can only corrupt.)
To: Sicon
No nation in Africa, populated and governed by actual Africans, has produced anything much more advanced than a mud hut since the Egyptians, and of course, the Egyptians were not "sub-Saharan" Africans. Really?
What are Ethiopians if not "sub-Saharan" Africans?
The Churches of Lalibela
37 posted on
02/14/2018 12:21:08 PM PST by
Harmless Teddy Bear
(Not a Romantic, not a hero worshiper and stop trying to tug my heartstrings. It tickles! (pink bow))
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson