Here is a review from someone who actually watched all four parts of “Roots” (2016): me:
As slave films go, it is one of the better ones, even compared to the old “Roots” of 1977:
- It is less sugar-coated. (Notice the word “less”. It was still sugar-coated, just less so.)
- It is better atshowing how terrible it was, so much so it was hard to watch at times.
- It is less Whitecentric, easily passing the Bechdel Test for Race. Whites were supporting characters, unlike in, say, “Amistad” (1997) or even “12 Years a Slave” (2013). If anything, the White characters were too flat, lacking moral complexity.
- It showed more of Africa (though not as much as the book).
Because of advances in film-making and scholarship since 1977, the remake was more true to life than the old “Roots” and better made.
But in some ways it was worse than…
View original post 401 more words