Talk:Blaxploitation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
United States Portal
This article is within the scope of the United States WikiProject. This project provides a central approach to United States-related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards.
??? This article has not yet received a rating on the Project's quality scale. Please rate the article and then leave a short summary here to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article.


Contents

[edit] Pictures

This article definitely needs some images to liven things up. I'll add some images of posters from a few related articles --Do Not Talk About Feitclub (contributions) 12:57, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm, does that violate fair use? --Do Not Talk About Feitclub (contributions) 13:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I'm not entirely, but I don't believe so. This is one of the few Wikipedia articles that includes critical commentary about these films, and to use an image like the cover or poster in order to illustrate the work (ie in its own article) or to accompany critical commentary (ie here) appears to be covered by fair use. --Cheeser1 (talk) 17:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] site resource tag

which part exactly need to "cite resource". this article seems pretty supported by examples and directed to each specific explanation sources, i think. GSPbeetle complains Vandalisms 15:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] "by, for, and about black people"?

"This film [Sweet Sweetback's] is also noteworthy in that it was written, directed, produced, and funded by Melvin Van Peebles, an African American. This remained the premise of the early blaxploitation films; film by, for, and about black people."

The concluding statement here seems to me wrong. While Sweetback was 'by black people,' the genre it in some ways spawned was for the most part NOT by black people. While the films did star black actors, they were mostly written, produced and directed by white people. And in the few 'blaxploitation' films that attempted to break out of the B movie/exploitation film ghetto to some cross-over success, white actors were cast in lead roles, paired with black actors, as it was felt there was no 'mainstream' audience for a film with only a black lead - see, e.g., 'Across 110th Street."


The quoted statement from the article actually has a citation, but it is only to the homepage for the fan website blaxploitation.com, and this homepage does not contain anything supporting the statement. Even if it did, though, the claim would still be wrong. Zerodeconduite 00:07, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

I changed it. Be bold, guys, don't leave things lying there for 10 months.142.167.163.202 23:42, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

It seems pretty sketch to me to have Sweet Sweetback’s in here at all, save in discussion about precipitating Blaxploitation. I don't know where the topic stands re original research, but Sweet Sweetback’s is a world apart from the likes of Shaft, Cleopatra Jones, Foxy Brown, etc. ENeville 04:26, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I pulled the Sweet Sweetback’s poster pic because it's misleading to feature a non-representative film so prominently. ENeville 04:34, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Merging with Jewsploitation?

No way. Two different things entirely. Guroadrunner 03:52, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

I concur. CynicalMe 03:59, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
    • They are not even related subjects. It would be very misleading to merge the two topics. One is a farce, the other is a serious topic but also a bit misleading in a different sense. Stevenmitchell 08:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Shaft Movie.jpg

Image:Shaft Movie.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:46, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shaft as main pic?=

I think Sweet Sweetback's Baadasssss Song should be the main pic because it is considered the first blaxploitation film. Aside from that, many don't consider Shaft to be a blaxploitation film at all, but rather a straight-up action/detective flick.

The article should read, 'ironically, the film that kicked off the blaxploitation era was not a blaxploitation film itself.' That would clear things up. Sweet Sweetback is not a blaxploitation film. It does this wiki a grave disservice if we cannot be clear on this very important and quite central point. Marc Garvey (talk) 22:39, 9 February 2008 (UTC)Marc Garvey

I concur, Shaft doesn't seem to fit as the ultimate blaxploitation film. And as for Sweet Sweetback, the film seems to be more like an avant-garde kind of film. I nominate Superfly. --DavidD4scnrt (talk) 08:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

The statement about Shaft is actually sourced. I'd say we're better off with that one as the image. --Cheeser1 (talk) 17:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Confused

Yes, is shaft considered a blaxploitation movie? It doesn't exploit blacks it seems, it seems a black pro movie, it says blaxploitation is a term of movies where blacks are exploited, that's not one. 68.189.248.12 07:37, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

BKYU responds: Most blaxploitation films had pro-black themes and represented strong black characters; they were meant to appeal to black audiences. Exploitation films in general "exploit" cultural trends and particular audiences to make money. "Shaft" was not a blaxploitation film strictly speaking, as it was a mainstream hollywood production, but it set the stage for the strong black man, comfortable in all New York settings, unapologetic for being black. Notice, however, that in shaft, black power is a negative group (thus making the film safe for white audience consumption as well); where as in blaxploitation films proper, black power/black nationalist themes often underly the aesthetic and the message (african american organizations' objections notwithstanding). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.245.142.133 (talk) 02:24, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List

Should we spin off the list of blaxploitation films? It's pretty lengthy and has quite a bit of substance. It might be better as a spin-off list instead. --Cheeser1 (talk) 17:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)