Review by treywillwest

Of course the first thing people talk about is this film's politics- and they are some of the most militant in any film to ever get fairly mainstream, American distribution. I think it could only have played mainstream cinemas in the early 1970s. But the politics are far from the only thing that is remarkable about this work. I don't know how to label it with the vocabulary of genre- its a thing unto itself. A completely unique narrative tone that oscillates between satire, legitimate, hard-nosed agit-prop and even moments of (I think) self-deprecation. Its at once assertive and yet it questions everything, even its own place as an object of the culture industry. As legitimate as its Nationalist message is, its still only a message, and in this way the work is as much an exploitation of Black Rage as it is a vehicle for it. I think the filmmakers understand this, and want to live up to it. Because it is not ultimately a Messianic narrative. The protagonist only brings a message of unity and revolt and suggests, through the narrative, a possible course of study and action. The protagonist does not replace, or even lead, the masses. He is left to narrative space, and he can only toast the potential revolutionary actors, the audience.