Panther

How is it possible that anyone can like a movie like "Braveheart" (a "fact-based" movie about Scottish people in the Middle Ages taking a stand against the tyranny that was going on) and then have the idea that this "fact-based" movie is any different?

Here were people in bad living conditions (to put it very lightly) and, along with using their Constitutional Right for a Well-Regulated Militia to Bear Arms for Necessary Protection, did all sorts of other things to improve their communities. The Black Panthers were mostly exposed as angry Blacks running around with guns, but that would be like saying the operetta version of "Les Miserables" is about a little girl named Cosette who dreams of a "Castle on a Cloud". As was shown in the film, they also had free breakfast programs and, in some areas in the country, free lunch programs so they could send the kids to school on full stomachs and thus be able to learn better. There was also the medical care they provided, and educational programs, etc. It was also shown that it went downhill once the founding members were in jail and were unable to run the show, so to speak.

As far as conspiracy theories are concerned, keep in mind that anybody during that time who asked "What's wrong with this picture?" (let alone did something about it) had FBI files started on them. And, in this extreme case, given that at the time the country was still in the crawling stage of getting used to the idea of equality of all races and sexes (among other things), is it really that hard to believe that "Big Brother" would flood the place with narcotics and other means of self-destruction? All I can say is "Well, DUH!"

Anyway, if you like movies based on history that deal with groups of people at the bottom (and in a worst case scenario) struggling against those up high to improve their situations, then just like "Braveheart", you should enjoy this film.

It's uncomfortable to watch at times, but, as we all know, there's no comfort in struggling; that's what makes victory more appreciable, assuming we achieve that victory in the first place.

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.

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.

I am actually watching Panther as I write this. Thus far it has borne the flaw of every historical/political film dealing with complex issues, there is a lot of talking, a lot of montage and things are definitely simplified. However, looking through the comments by users there is at least one major error in a prior comment. Patty Hearst was kidnapped by the Symbionese Liberation Army, a tiny ultra-left wing sect. As to Eldridge Cleaver, he indeed was not a pleasant person by all accounts. His failing do not mean that every Black Panther was so misogynistic or brutal. In many cases, the Panthers were more sinnned against than sinning-the major sin being the existence of a massive and legally and morally dubious COINTELPRO program which seeded the Party with agents provocateurs and informers, and which seems to have coordinated a number of violent incidents agianst Panther officials and supporters, including fatal shootings. That destroyed the Party, and destroyed the lives of many associated with it.

Panther (1995) is not to meant to be a dead on account of the Black Panther Party. This is what they call historical fiction. That is when you make up a story involving real life characters. The book this movie was based upon was writing a few years back by Melvin Van Peebles. The story is nothing more that a fictional account dealing with real life people.

It's a movie. Not a documentary. So please keep this in mind when watching it. But the dramatic elements and acting were quite good. I enjoyed it as a drama. If you want to learn about the Black Panther Party this is a good launching pad. From here I suggest you go to your local library and study up on these revolutionaries who tried to make some decent changes to the poor communities but were sabotaged by the F.B.I. and their army of rats and snitches.

I thought it was a bold step for Mr. Van Peebles to try and make a mainstream movie about a group of local heroes who have been buried by the mainstream and the far right. Stars Kadeem Hardison, Bokeem Woodbine, Joe Don Baker, Courtney B. Vance, Chris Rock, Bobby Brown and Angela Bassett. Directed by Mario Van Peebles. Co written by Mario and Melvin Van Peebles.

Recommended.