Should the one who makes the supreme sacrifice not be based on race?

thats one I just cant answer. I will have to watch more and pay attention more to this fact. and see for myself. and I just watch the movies I have never realy took them apart and anolized them .

I always wanted movies to be fair, and sometines when an ethnic group has been put upon, you expect sympathy, but my opinion you do not reverse a wrong by making the former top dogs, bad guys. So if two hundred years ago, the blacks were enslaved, you do not decide now "we are going to make the descendants of the plantation owners horrible villains" Years ago, we did not do that, but now there is this revenge policy. So in my view, you want someone to make the supreme sacrifice, he should be of any ethnic group and not just making up for the guilt of his ancestors. After all, I am part German, part English maybe there should be films of the descendants of those horrible Vikings who ravaged our nations making the supreme sacrifice for us. Makes just as much sense.

well there has been plenty of movies made about the whiteman killing Indians but they havent really made the white man the bad one here they made the Indians the bad ones and they never scalped any one the white men did that! and got paid for it!

I think they are being stereotyped, like if you have blond or light brown hair and blue, gray, or green eyes, you are a potential Nazi. I do not see blacks because they are dark skinned, as being potential Idi Amins. If the writers can get over that idea, that not all whites will turn out to be vicious murderers, and not all blacks were descended from misrably created slaves, then they will come to their senses. Besides it gives the wrong idea - we all should be willing to sacrifice something, and it should be based that we are all of the human race, not because an ancestor or an ancestor of someone of our Caucasian ancestors was a horrible person. Why there is a photo of a relative of mine who resembles this evil Viking who before he became a Christian, slaughtered hundreds of people. And I am sure there is this horrible Angle who massacred Britons back in the fourth century. Does it mean that because of these two bad people in my ancestry that anyone who has that ancestry in them should be willing to sacrifice themselves while someone who was descended from an African chief who slaughtered those of his tribe who did not bow to him should be exempt?

thank you, suspenseful, for the rating. that was very kind of you. I do agree with much that you have said.

Your welcome. It amazes me that many shows still bow to the precept that they have to make up for what was done wrong to certain ethnic groups in the past by, well for example, letting them be in an explosion and walk away when the other man of the majority race gets killed and they were often besides them and yet there is no mention in the script of "you have extra ordinary powers. When you were a baby, you were dipped in this special portion," etc.

It used to be in the old movies, that it did not matter. But in the last ten years or so, the movie and tv writers want to make up for the former evils. So if Nazis killed Jews in a concentration camp back in World War 11 and previous, then the villains have to have blue, green, and gray eyes, and blond hair because that was the Nazi ideal. The Southern whites enslaved Negroes from the 17th to the mid 19th century, so bad guys say you-all and are rednecks, Negroes were hung and beaten up, so in order to show how unjust society or the evil white men, you have to show that the person being frauded, wrongly accused is of that race, unless it is a satire. So rather than show the injustice as an injustice, or a sacrifice that all should endeavor to, they make it a racial thing.

I was reading an article a while ago about Hollywood still having this racial guilt, and that while others had forgotten it, they were still at it, so we have to wait until they get over it.