I JUST re-watched a couple of clips from the movie Cry Freedom. I observed a trend that is evident in this and several other movies showcasing black/African issues, which is, the story somehow subliminally or overtly ends up pushing a white agenda.
Rita Kempley’s review of Cry Freedom in the November 6th, 1987’s Washington Post summarised points made by critics of the time.
She wrote, “Attenborough (filmmaker) has been criticised for the second half, an action thriller that tags a white hero onto what some felt was a black hero’s story.
But that’s a little like whipping Paul Simon for introducing Ladysmith Black Mambazo to American audiences. In both cases, the ends justify the means.”
But do the ends really justify the means?
While the power and gravity of this movie would have been nothing short of a phenomenal vehicle to highlight a cause as serious as apartheid, my thoughts are that these issues are never given their due, but instead are overshadowed and replaced by a white agenda.
There are numerous examples, from movies like The Constant Gardener to Blood Diamonds. However, one that is particularly relevant to this post is the 2009 movie Invictus.
This movie is based on the book, Playing the Enemy: Nelson Mandela and the Game That Made a Nation.
Nelson Mandela (Morgan Freeman) and a rugby player (Matt Damon) are portrayed in South Africa before and during the 1995 Rugby World Cup.
Mandela sought to quell the tension brewing in South Africa, post-Apartheid, between the white and black South Africans by using the camaraderie of sports.
I went to see Invictus with a South African and a Basotho (a native of the country Lesotho). While they were positively moved by the script — it had a ‘bigness’ quality about it and portrayed Mandela as so forgiving — I thought the movie was nothing short of brainwashing.
It was just another ‘feel-good’ movie, with a white hero and black folks with hearts so enormous… enormous enough to forgive the unforgivable.
I am tired of the forgiving black male; the humble, pacifist black male portrayal.
However, this is often the direction movies take because they are written, produced and financed by whites.
This only serves to distort history, not come to terms with it. This sort of portrayal contributes to our ignorance because we are eager to sweep things under the carpet without assessing how events in the past have had consequences that affect us now.
As a reminder of just how that instant ‘softening’ is rendered onto serious issues, here is another statement from Kempley.
She says, “Though Attenborough is heavy handed in his treatment of the ruling whites, his seems a just and mighty anger.”
Kempley made the above statement even after seeing the list of persons at the end of the film who by Act of Parliament in 1962, were subjected to imprisonment without trial by the South African government.
The government’s official explanation for over 80 known deaths in detention, were suspicious and spurious ranging from “suicide”, “slipped in shower” and “natural causes”.  
The film states in the end that “After the re-imposition of Emergency Regulations on June 11 1987, no further information regarding political detainees has been forthcoming.”
One is left to wonder if these were the only deaths of a questionable nature of persons in police custody during this period (1962-1987).
The reality is that in multi-racial societies, blacks are too quick to take front for whites, taking the “it was in the past, let’s let bygones be bygones” position.
This collective historical dwarfing has created a situation where disenfranchised blacks do not have the basis nor the tools (history) to address issues that affect them.
As a consequence, they depend on other uninformed ones for survival and economic advancement.
Discrimination meted out to blacks by whites, particularly in the physically violent form still exists but is less direct as it involves whites who finance and take political positions that encourage black on black violence and oppression.
It is this violence that is heavily reported in the media and portrayed in film, particularly in America but which is relevant in many societies and indeed on the African continent.
Conversely, violence against and abuse of blacks by whites is downplayed or given far less coverage in the media:whites are not portrayed in roles as being violent towards blacks, even though this has historically been the case.

Source — https://www.africaspeaks.com