Panther

1960's inner city America. Tired of non-effective prayer meetings, vigils and pleas to God, a group within the black community decide to take more direct action. Taking the principles of Malcolm X, the group study their rights and begin to bear arms and take a stand against the inequality and the brutality towards their community.

The subject is worthy of a film and is an interesting piece of civil rights history but this film is not the one to do it. The blame for much of this much sadly rest with Peebles in his role as director. If Spike Lee and Denzel Washington could be seen as the black A-list, then Peebles must be very much a C-list star, and his films are often worthy of B or C grades. This is the problem here, the film is not great as a film. It is told in a simplistic, fist raising way that takes away from the impact of it as reality. The focus on Judge's involvement rather than the story of the movement itself, turning the film into more of a action film than one of historical interest.

This is a shame as, even embellished with pro-black slant, the subject would have been interesting. As it is, the fact about whether this was true or not didn't matter to me because I didn't get the impression of history, I got told a story of a man who tries to act as a mole for the group, while some militant group spreads throughout the country. It's a real shame - cause that's not the story I was hoping to be told.

If Peebles is a C-list member, then the rest of the cast comes across like very much a second rate version of Malcolm X. Hardison is a poor comic, never mind requiring him to do a dramatic role. Chong is OK as Huey but he isn't really well served by a film that doesn't pull back well enough and see what the panthers grow to become (and the `finally' bit at the end doesn't cut it). Generally the cast feel like they wouldn't be out of place in a TVM and their performances mostly reflect that. Again, it is a shame but it's hard not to blame the material for their inability to rise above it.

Overall this film was a major letdown for me. I was expecting or hoping for a film that had some historical context and would have the force and impact of Malcolm X. Sadly I was expecting too much from it and this would have been better enjoyed as a thriller that happens to be set in the middle of a Panther cell rather than anything else.

...this film receives a TEN. No other movie captures the fire of the Panther better than that of Mario van Peeble's production. However, just as well for entertainment purposes, some facts were tampered and skewed to fit into the film. This isn't a documentary, folks. Nor is it a bio about Huey P. This is a historically correct film based on a NOVEL. If that doesn't tell you enough about what you're in for, I don't know what will. Historical fiction is what this is. If you're looking for a interesting, socially conscious film that will keep you on the edge of your seat, this is it. If not - you may as well keep moving, jack.

How interesting it is that some of the supporting comments regarding the politics of this movie come from Ireland and England. The comment regarding Patty Hearst, especially intriguing. The error by the poster gives you an idea of how flawed people's perceptions of the Panthers were and still are. Hearst was kidnapped by Sinque, who was purported to be an ex-Panther member.

The Panthers were an interesting phenomena borne from the rough streets of Oakland,California, my hometown. They brought ideals of self-awareness, pride and self-defense. Some say that the theory of J.Edgar Hoover dumping drugs into the black neighborhoods to bring about its downfall was preposterous. As a resident of Oakland, it was absolutely factual that drugs were put into the community to destabilize it. COINTELPRO had insurrectionists cast into the Black Panthers as well as Campus student movements.

The FBI sought the downfall of Martin Luther King, and celebrated on the day of his assassination. Not all parties were in cahoots, but he was thought of as a communist agitator. Funny how no major motion picture of him was done following JFK, isn't it? Some aspects were quite fictitious, the "Judge" character and the shootout in the warehouse as well. The Panthers were considered an enemy to the established order and it was seeded with "inside" people to ferment internal conflict. The film may not be completely historically accurate, but it does portray the need then and now for a Black Panther Movement. The concept of Government conspiracy isn't new; see Operation Mongoose, Operation Northwoods, Watergate, Iran-Contra, etc. this was a flawed, but intriguing film about an organization that sought to improve the conditions of the community. And how the establishment created methods to destabilize and destroy it.

'Panther' is a superb movie, Exposing the Black Panther Party for what it was before Eldridge Clever took over. It is disturbing, with a lot of blood and swearing, but it tells (most of) the truth, the side no one wants to listen to, that no one wants to believe. Marcus Chong's portrayal of Huey P. Newton is the best part, showing the Revolutionary in a light people never see. Marcus Chong made him a person that people can identify with, carrying his immortality to our modern world. Bravo.

Very little can be told about PANTHER, which amazingly didn't capture the attention of so many. Based on the past turbulent history of 1967-68, it shows off its mean-spiritedness and hatred on the screen. It's a disturbing account involving brutal, racial violence during the era, and a story of the Black Panthers Party who finds truth for justice. There is just one small point of huge proof: an average "blaction" movie that's made as simple-minded entertainment. A far better directing job would have made it stand out with its head held high over the surface.