User reviews

Quentin Tarantino has called Mandingo one of the few big budget exploitation films Hollywood has ever produced, and you can definitely see a lot of this film in his Django Unchained. I'm not sure I'd go as far as calling this an exploitation film, but it's certainly startling at times and deals with the subject of slavery without backtalk or ambiguity.

The movie takes place in Deep South prior to the American Civil War. Slavery is at its highest bloom and it's just as bad as you've probably heard. First night rights are freely exercised, slaves are just one step above animals, sold like cattle and while they're not beaten daily – they still need to work, and it's not like you beat your cows daily, either – it doesn't take much for them to incur the wrath of their masters.

The movie is also notable in that it uses the term 'mandingo' somewhat correctly. The term referred to any slave of the highest quality and not just to those who fought against one another. Though even that fighting might be a myth. The movie tells the tale of one particular manor, its owners and the pair of mandingo slave that were brought there, one of them to be trained as a fighter.

It's a tough movie to sit through if you're squeamish and while it's not overly gluttonous in its depictions of violence, like Django Unchained is, it doesn't shy away from them either or pull its punches. A very good movie to check out if you liked Django and/or are looking for a darker historical piece.

Mandingo seems to divide it's audience strongly between love and hate and that's not really surprising; the film features some real nasty elements and the way that it's all done with a highly quality 'period drama' sort of style means that it will likely miss it's supposed intended audience - although it seems to have found a good fan base among exploitation fans. The film is liable to shock modern audience for its racial themes and strong racial tone; it didn't bother me all that much to be honest as it suits the film within it's context and helps to enforce its exploitative nature, which in turn makes Mandingo more powerful. The film takes place in the south of America during the 1840's and the main focus of the plot is on slavery. White farm owner Hammond Maxwell one day discovers the fighting talent of one of his black slaves and soon decides to toughen him up for battle with other slaves. He's sympathetic with his slaves and soon becomes affectionate with one of the women, which doesn't sit well with his wife Blanche who, for revenge, forces the top fighter to sleep with her.

Anyone going into this film expecting a serious look at slavery will be either disappointed or annoyed (maybe both), but if you go into it expecting some nasty exploitation, you might find a lot to like. The film gives an unflinching look at a more primitive society and it actually more shocking for its tone and implications than the events that take place in it (although the film does include plenty of racism, torture and rape scenes). The way that the film depicts the black slaves as animals makes for uncomfortable viewing and the way that society was segregated into 'white masters' and 'black slaves' is always enforced on the viewer. The performances sit better with the exploitation side of the film rather than the serious drama side as none of them are particularly brilliant; although the three leads do fit into their roles well. Overall, this is clearly not a film for everyone and I'm not in any way saying that the film's bad reputation is in any way undeserved; but Mandingo is certainly an interesting film and I would say it is at least worth seeing.

1975's "Mandingo" earned much scorn from such highbrow critics as Roger Ebert, such was its unflinching look at slave relations in the Antebellum South, including numerous interracial couplings featuring full frontal nudity. The series of Falconhurst novels began with Kyle Onstott's original 1958 publication of "Mandingo," named for a specific type of fighter from the West African Niger region, also known for its later use by Alex Haley in his largely fictional yet compelling family history "Roots," the miniseries still two years away from its debut broadcast. Producer Dino De Laurentiis spent a number of years trying to finalize a deal, and with the relaxation of the old ratings system could never have filmed such a sordid tale until the 70s, a decade of untold exploitation where 'anything goes,' and often did. Director Richard Fleischer initially turned the assignment down but finally relented, James Mason earning top billing as plantation owner Warren Maxwell, in a role rejected by James Cagney and Charlton Heston, Perry King as son Hammond in place of Jan-Michael Vincent, Jeff Bridges, Beau Bridges, and Timothy Bottoms. Hammond is mostly portrayed as a sympathetic figure toward his slaves, often at odds with his harder edged father, his subsequent marriage to cousin Blanche (Susan George) soured on their wedding night by her less than virginal countenance under the sheets (as was so often the case, the girl was deflowered by her own brother). Hammond's purchase of new 'bed wench' Ellen (Brenda Sykes) does not go unnoticed by an increasingly irrational Blanche, eventually taking revenge on her faithless spouse by summoning Mandingo fighter Mede (Ken Norton) to her bed, producing a non white child that is quietly allowed to bleed to death, poor Blanche poisoned and defenseless Mede shot, scalded, and butchered by pitchfork. Critics were appalled by the brutality of Norton's no holds barred fight scenes, and the nihilistic climax left audiences appropriately stunned, a game cast putting forth a great effort to bring such unhappiness to vivid life. Interiors are effectively dark and gloomy, furniture sparse and guests rarely in evidence, slaves variously bought and sold to keep the rundown plantation afloat (location shooting in Louisiana). Susan George gives an uncanny rendition of Bette Davis in a part that few actresses would brave, and even at the end still earns sympathy making tearful entreaties to her unfeeling husband. James Mason and Perry King also acquit themselves well, as does Richard Ward as the intelligent Agamemnon punished for being able to read, and Ji-Tu Cumbuka, later Kunta Kinte's Wrestler on ROOTS, making the strongest impression as a runaway slave who prefers death to a life enchained. Personal preference impacts how one sees this picture, slowly gaining increased stature over the years, and certainly better than its immediate sequel "Drum," Ken Norton returning as a new character.

I just watched Mandingo and can't for the life of me figure out why this film would get any critical reviews. You can't criticize the truth unless you yourself are part of the lie or involved in hiding the truth or you just want to ignore the truth and live in a fantasy world. Like those freaks that refuse to acknowledge the holocaust really happened or say it wasn't that horrible. This film hits you with the truth about 1840ish slavery with a vengeance, shocking, sickening, and uncomfortable as it should be. It doesn't sugar coat the South and especially the Deep South with shades of romantic Gone with the Wind feel sorry for us we lost our culture nonsense, but shows in detail all the dehumanizing, sickening, savage racist attitudes that existed in the south at that time. The buying and selling of human beings should be as sickening and repulsive as it gets and left to me this film would be mandatory viewing by all high school students in this country to help them understand the barbarism of slavery and how it's residue still affects and infects this country to this day. If you get a chance to rent or view this film a note of advice, be prepared for the truth!

I just saw this film on the big screen (the only surviving 35mm print in the world). I had never seen it on video, so seeing it in a crowded theater was my first experience with the film. As a bonus, the director, Richard Fleischer, the star, Perry King, and Brenda Sykes, who plays King's slave "wench" in the film, spoke before the screening.

The audience alternated between gasping and roaring with immediately regretted laughter throughout the screening. Nobody laughed for a moment at Susan George's supposedly over-the-top performance. And at the climax -- there were astounded gasps all over the theater. Afterwards, once the applause had died down, the audience filed out, stunned. Everyone looked shell-shocked. I wandered around for a while listening to people murmuring: "I told you guys..." "Best I've seen..." "Totally uncompromising..." "That's how it was..." "Didn't pull any punches..." "Amazing..." "Where did you hear about it?..."

We had one big advantage over most people who see the film. Most viewers go rent the tape because they read about it in, say, Edward Margulies' and Stephen Rebello's BAD MOVIES WE LOVE (which is how I knew about it). MANDINGO has a huge reputation as a camp classic, so people seek out the video where it can be found. Then they take it home and watch it alone, or with a friend or two, pre-primed to laugh.

The audience I was sitting with at the American Cinematheque theater had, first of all, read the sober, favorable description in the Cinematheque schedule. Then we'd listened to Fleischer himself talk about how he had refused ten times when Dino de Laurentiis had asked him to film the novel, only to finally accept when he realized how he could do it: "By being totally honest and straight with it." And he was, if you view it without a laugh ready. King and Sykes also spoke calmly and soberly about how hard the shoot was, and how the cast considered it an important film but still had trouble handling the emotions it stirred up.

Fleischer is hardly a symbolic director, although there's a lot of "found" symbolism in 10 RILLINGTON PLACE, for example. But MANDINGO was an obvious statement of the inhumanity of slave-OWNing, and it constantly used the setting and characters to emphasize the moral and physical disintegration of the Deep South under the self-imposed yoke of the slave culture. That sounds pretentious, but in MANDINGO it's totally straightforward. Moral disintegration leads to moral disintegration. The crime is its own punishment. MANDINGO is an antimatter GONE WITH THE WIND.

MANDINGO, as Fleischer pointed out, was a huge hit on its initial release. It was also viciously attacked by all but two critics in the United States. (Fleischer admitted that he saved all his reviews, and pointed out mildly that those two reviewers -- who were the only critics to go into the film in depth -- pronounced the film a masterpiece. "I don't know if it's that," he said, "but those two were certainly a breath of fresh air.")

Because of all the controversy, the film was never rereleased. Nobody at the screening could think of a single time it had been screened between 1975 and August 28, 1999. Perhaps it was screened once or twice, but my point is that essentially no one since 1975 has seen this film with an audience, to feel the reactions of those around the room, to see it on the big screen.

I think it's really unfortunate that MANDINGO has gotten locked into this "camp" label. The film contains so much depravity that I can certainly see why it was selected as a "camp classic". But that wasn't the intent at all. I've heard this film compared to SHOWGIRLS. But SHOWGIRLS was directed by the bizarre Paul Verhoeven (ROBOCOP, TOTAL RECALL, BASIC INSTINCT). Of course he was going for camp; he always does camp. But Richard Fleischer? He did 20,000 LEAGUES UNDER THE SEA, MR. MAJESTYK, 10 RILLINGTON PLACE (a real gem), THE BOSTON STRANGLER, FANTASTIC VOYAGE, SOYLENT GREEN. He is one of the most mild-mannered directors alive. He's done bad stuff -- CONAN THE DESTROYER and RED SONJA come to mind -- but in the seventies he was doing his best work. And that would have to include MANDINGO -- to my complete amazement.

I can't believe how different my experience with this film was from its usual "cult" interpretation. Now I wonder if Otto Preminger's HURRY SUNDOWN is as bad as the Medveds said it was in 50 WORST FILMS OF ALL TIME. I'll have to try to see it for myself.

This film is not for the faint of heart, this film is for hardcore truth viewers who aren't squeamish, the film may be dated but the essence is truthful & too the point, this film should be "Mandatory" for students taking a U.S. or African American history course.

I was a very young 14 when this movie came out and I first watched it. The actions of the white slave owners - both husband and wife - was so appalling to me that it moulded how I treated others to this day. I'd already been colour-blind...was raised to recognise the soul within the person...so that didn't change. What changed was the way I viewed other white people - being a white-skinned person, myself. I spent my life observing the actions of people to one another and it's still heart-breaking to see b/c there has been a resurgence of overall hatred of one another rather than simply of one's colour. But that ending...it has been emblazoned on my memory for all time. That horror will never leave me. I hope people will learn that Love is the key and stop allowing hatred to rule their actions.

This unflinching, hard-hitting look at slavery is a severely underrated and misjudged film. That's probably because it sheds light onto a tough, painful subject that many people would prefer to ignore or forget; if you're expecting a "slaves-and-masters-are-all-a-big-happy-family" depiction of the life in the mid-19th-century Southern plantations, then this simply isn't your movie.

"Mandingo" was followed, one year later, by "Drum". They are both far better films than their reputations might make you believe, and they are also handsome, almost sumptuous productions with a far lower "sleaze" quotient than many reviews seem to indicate. They are both worth seeing - preferably as a double bill. (***)

"Mandingo" is a mainstream, big-budget exploitation film obsessed with black bodies. Almost everything is about this fetish, which through enslavement, is principally sadomasochistic. There's the sex scenes, which are always interracial, always focused on the black body, whether male or female, and always under the power dynamics of them being raped. There are the examinations of them during slave trading, their beatings, the belly of the boy being stepped on for the supposed curing properties, the mulatto offspring, and the prize-fighting, too. The marriage of the white masters and, indeed, almost all of the white characters' conversations are focused on black bodies--the control, jealousy, raping and selling of them. There's very little here that subjects the slaves to anything beyond objectification of their bodies. Meanwhile, those of the white masters tend to be perceived as crippled in some way--the rheumatism of the father, the bum knee of the son, the loss of virginal purity of the wife. Through this system of voyeurism and the cinematic gaze, the spectator is forced into the uncomfortable position of identification with the white masters.

It's no wonder so many people find it offensive. It's as though we're co-conspirators in the exploitation of slavery--crippled by the fetish. Perhaps, it's even disconcerting that so many continue to defend the picture, whether gleeful from the outrageous excess of it all, or ignoring the narrative's soap-opera histrionics to consider it realistic because slavery was brutal, after all, or somehow ignoring the narrow focus and positioning of the spectator within the sadomasochistic fetishizing to consider this the 1970s version of "12 Years a Slave" (2013)--it's not. There are only fleeting moments where Agamemnon, Ellen and Mede assert or begin to discover their subjectivity by defying the "peculiar institution," but for the most part they comply with their stereotypical, subjugated roles as toms and "wench." "Mandingo" is obscene, but it's interesting to consider why we feel the way we do about it, whether or not we enjoy it and what that may say about us.

This is an underrated, truly great film on the subject of slavery, sexual hypocrisy and the haunted, hothouse atmosphere of generations of white bad karma in the 19th century deep south. There are some who've commented here who get it, others who don't want to get it because it's just too truthful and disturbing. These folks undoubtedly would prefer a TV sanitized version of slavery as in ROOTS. It's a testament to Richard Fleischer's integrity that he was able to pull this off. All performances are excellent (well, that's not strictly true as Ken Norton stumbles his way through but Fleischer, through his direction and editing gets an adequate job from him), including superb James Mason (one of his most brutally fearless roles as opposed to the nadir of his career as one IMDB commentator puts it). One of the things that's most disturbing about the film is the depiction of the consequences of slavery, racism and hypocrisy on the white race, how it warps son, Perry King's natural tenderness towards Brenda Sykes into a horrifying insecure paranoia that evolves into aberrantly exaggerated jealousy and sexually motivated violence by the climax. And poor Susan George's character is driven totally mad by her husband King's neglect and jealousy and the semingly contradictory tender erotic ministrations of slave, Norton. Mason reaps what he sows at the end and King's upbringing (and inferiority complex) is ultimately too much for him in the end, taking him down the same road to hellish oblivion.

If one wants to see a truly lurid, exploitive treatment of the same subject (although very entertaining also with a great cast -- Warren Oates, Isela Vega, Yaphet Kotto, et.al.) one should look no further than MANDINGO's sequel, DRUM. However, MANDINGO is different. It does contain some lurid, super charged sexual images and shocking cruelty and violence -- but Fleischer's treatment is matter-of-fact, in-your-face and ultimately totally unpretentious. It walks a tightrope but courageous director Fleischer never stumbles. The gritty, extremely realistic location and production design add to the disturbing ambience. Unflinching, beautifully shot (I saw this in the theater when it was released and at a rare revival screening in 2000) and undeserving of it's pariah reputation.

I can't believe this is listed as romance. Romance implies consenting participants. This film is deplorable, offensive, & outright disturbing....yet based in so much truth.

A strong movie dealing with the sordid interracial sexual shenanigans at a Southern plantation. It's the mid-nineteenth century Louisiana. It explores the declining years of a slave-breeding family, whose slaves are treated not so much like animals as humanoids, their physical intimacy with the master-race is total. Falconhurst, a run down plantation, is owned by Warren Maxwell (James Mason), and largely run by his son, Hammond Maxwell (Perry King), who walks with a limp due to a childhood accident. Hammond is under pressure to get married and produce a male heir to continue the Maxwell legacy before Warren dies. With no experience courting a potential bride - his sexual experiences confined to slaves and prostitutes - Hammond ultimately chooses his cousin Blanche (Susan George) for his wife. In turn, Blanche agrees to the marriage largely to escape the realm of her sadistic brother, Charles (Ben Masters). The slave owner Hammond trains one of his slaves , Mede (Ken Norton), to be a bare-knuckle fighter. The hunk Mandingo becomes himself a dutiful, long-suffering servant faithful to his white master. Meantime, the nasty plantation owner Warren develops his old obsession for one (Brenda Sykes) of the female slaves. Expect The savage. The sensual. The shocking. The sad. The powerful. The shameful. Expect all that the motion picture screen has never dared to show before !. Expect the truth. Now you are ready for "Mandingo" !.

Overheated Southern-fried tale of slavery in the Deep South based on the novel by Kyle Onstoff. The tedious, emasculated stereotype of the Deep South circa 1840, with its stoic slaves and demure southern belles, is effectively exploted here. The film contains violence, lots of nudism, fierce fights and bad taste at at its best. Successfully captures the mood of the old pre-war South while emphasizing the horror and immorality of slavery. Cameraman Richard Kline's 's highty evocative pictorialisation of the Falconhurst domain adds a great deal.

Stars James Mason as the proud and villainous slave owner, Perry King as is the wastrel son, heavyweight boxer Ken Norton does his screen debut as as the slave who makes his master money with his boxing prowess and Susan George -recent her Straw Dogs- plays the ambitious and vengeful lady. All of them give usually overacting to show this exaggerated story that's basically a Victorian melodrama with more than an echo of the Brontes. The're accompanied by a fine support cast, such as: Richard Ward, Brenda Sykes, Lillian Hayman, Roy Poole, Paul Benedict, Ben Masters. And Sylvester Stallone appears as an extra, wearing a red hat, during a slave-execution scene. Filmmaker Quentin Tarantino has cited this Mandingo and Showgirls (1995) as the only two instances in the last decades in which a major studio made a full-on, gigantic, big-budget exploitation movie and influenced him in his Django unchained (2012). The motion picture was unevenly but compellingly directed by Richard Fleischer. This director utilises violence and the real sexuality behind slavery to mount a passable slice of American Gothic which analyses , in appropriately lurid terms, the twists and turns of a distorted society. Good to watch Fleischer returning to the kind of psycho-pathological thriller that he can handle so well.

Followed by ¨Steve Carver's Drum¨ (1975) another steamy sequel , made to cash in on the already exploitive ¨Mandingo¨ (1975), but two wrongs don't make a right; stars Ken Norton, Warren Oates, Pam Grier, Yaphett Kotto, Isela Vega. In the sequel, ¨Drum¨ (1976), Ken Norton plays Drum, a different role than he portrayed in Mandingo (1975), where he performed Mede . Similarly, actress Brenda Sykes, plays Ellen in the first film and Calinda in the second. However, actress Lillian Hayman portrayed the same role, Lucrezia Borgia, in both films. This ¨Mandingo (1975)¨ is one of a large number of 1970s and 80s productions about slavery, made both cinema and TV, along with: ¨Roots¨ (1977) based on Alex Haley's novel; ¨Slavers¨ (1977) by Jurgen Goslar; ¨Ashanti¨ (1979) by Richrad Fleischer; ¨Drum¨ (1976) by Steve Carver, ¨Huckleberry Finn¨ (1974) by J. Lee Thompson; ¨Goodbye uncle Tom¨ (1971) by Gualtiero Jacopetti, Franco Prosperi; ¨Uncle Tom's Cabin¨ (1977) by Al Adamson that's really a retreaded of the film ¨Uncle Tom's Cabin¨ (1965) by Géza von Radványi; ¨Mandinga¨ by Mario Pinzauti; ¨A Woman Called Moses¨ (1978); ¨Raíces: the next generations¨ (1979); ¨The Fight against slavery¨ (1975) by Evan Jones; ¨Master of Dragonard Hill¨ (1987) and ¨Dragonard¨ (1988) by Gérard Kikoïne .

Maybe in 1975, we still needed to make movies about how terrible slavery was, but nowadays, we're pretty saturated with that genre. If you don't like those movies, don't even think about renting Mandingo, because it's very upsetting.

James Mason is the head of the plantation, but his son Perry King takes over the management when he's old enough. Perry seems to be nicer than his father, but as the movie continues, it's pretty clear he's even worse than James. Perry marries his cousin Susan George, who was abused in her childhood by her cruel brother Ben Masters. In the 1800s, it was extremely difficult, risky, and dangerous to confess something like that, but rather than have sympathy with his wife, Perry responds by buying a slave for the sole purpose of taking her for a mistress. You can call it a love triangle if you want to, between Perry, Susan, and Brenda Sykes, but it's not a very conventional one.

The second plot in the movie is after Perry purchases another slave, Ken Norton. He trains Ken to be a fighter and also breeds him with other slaves for more workers. This is not Gone with the Wind; this does not glorify the South. This movie shows rape, violence, emotional abuse, and pretty much every other horrible treatment you can imagine. Even Susan, who could have been written as a "long suffering wife" character, turns out to be an abusive slave owner. If you really want to watch this upsetting drama, just know what you're getting into.

Kiddy Warning: Obviously, you have control over your own children. However, due to violence, racial language, and sex scenes, I wouldn't let my kids watch it. Also, there may or may not be a rape scene.

A very sick, very disturbing movie about what the Old South was (purportedly) like. This movie took an actually OK book (which is nowhere as offensive as the movie) and played up all the sex and violence and pushes it as far as an R rating would allow. I realize some people view this as a masterpiece, but I find it hard to believe that anyone thought this was made as a serious movie.

**WARNING: SPOILERS AHEAD!**

It has constant utterances of the "n" word; a long, bloody and disgusting fight between two black men for the pleasure of the whites; a woman basically raping a black servant; many disturbing, bloody whippings; torture etc etc. The list goes on and on. Somehow, they got respectable actors to appear in this. James Mason (Why? He must have been desperate for work) is as good as he can be. He completely covers up his English accent with a believable Southern one. Perry King is also pretty good as his son who's in love with a black servant. Susan George plays his sex-starved wife--she's over the top, but that's the only way her part could have been played. She also deserves credit for maintaining her dignity when she rapes Norton. As for Ken Norton...he's handsome and muscular but the poor guy can't act. He's the only bad one in the cast though. Also there's a strong homoerotic bond between King and Norton--believe me, it's there.

Still, this is a slow, sick and very depressing film to watch. It's NOT camp--I found nothing in this film even remotely funny, even in a bad/good way. It's basically a major film studio doing an exploitation film. View at your own risk. It's followup "Drum" (which is NOT a sequel) was even worse.

I can see why this was controversial, and no doubt it would be if it were released now (2013). It's stunningly unlike Gone with the Wind. The style is extreme Southern Gothic, (not to be confused with camp). Some shades of Tennessee Williams but goes beyond where he dared. The dialogue is a bit difficult, and DVD has no English subtitles, but you'll be rewarded if you stick with it. (No need to understand every word). I agree that Tarantino was influenced by it but his approach to the subject matter is very different. Mandingo stands on its own as a major work of the 1970s and it's certainly a film that deserves to be better known. Striking photography and music throughout. This film panders to no one, nor does it simplistically tell the viewer what to think about anything. We have the feeling we're on our own with this. Maybe it's no accident that that feels liberating. Fasten your seat belts and see it.

Although it might seem illogical that I rate this movie a "1" _AND_ I claim it is a "keeper" ... I stand by my position.

This movie is not very good. In fact, it is bad ... very bad. The acting is way over the top. Historically, many of the events seem to be quite far-fetched and not based in reality. There are actors and actresses in the movie that you recognize and realize, after seeing the movie, why this movie was not mentioned on their resume. But that is why I have seen the movie more than once. It both repulses me and enchants me. And I seek it out any time I find a friend who has not seen it. It is a CAMP CLASSIC, in my humble opinion. I wonder aloud how this movie was ever made. In the end, I don't care how it was made. I am just glad it was made and that there is a recording of it for posterity.

In this film, the masterful James Mason plays the plantation patriarch, a Big Daddy you wouldn't want to be owned by. This is undoubtedly THE BEST Film made about the era of slavery in the USA. It puts the sanitised, romantic "Gone With the Wind" to shame. "Mandingo" will make you uncomfortable even in your most comfortable seat. "Mandingo" is a mirror. See your reflection; it will scare the living bejeezub out of you.

This is a film about power. Racism is about power. When some people have absolute power over other people, they become sadistic and sometimes, the objects of their sadism become masochistic. Absolute power is always justified with ideological rationalisations become dogma, in this case the the dogma that black skin makes a person less than human. Power corrupts the individual's sense of morality. With power over others, one becomes more or less immoral, hardened to a subordinate's suffering. Self-esteem is generated by putting down the one perceived to be inferior and slaves were considered less than human, a notch or two down on the food chain. Slaves were treated as objects of power, like the organic results of animal husbandry, like the commodities you purchase and eat: cattle, pigs or sheep. Thus, having sex with a slave for a 'white' male owner was like breeding new animals for sale with a view to profit. 'White' females, of course, were not allowed to engage in this sort of animal husbandry with slaves. The patriarchal whisper one hears in "Cat on a Hot Tin Roof" becomes a murderous roar in "Mandingo".

In "Mandingo" we see realities of absolute power's affect on the social psychology of a society. Even after more than a century of time, American society, especially the South is still scarred by the psychological damage which simmers under the surface of smiles, whiskey fueled tears and freshly mown lawns.

"Mandingo" is a must see. It's better than "Glory", although "Glory" would be an appropriate second on a double feature bill with "Mandingo". "Mandingo" is even better than "Burn" and much better than "Roots". The acting is superb. The screenplay is magnificent. The cinematography is choice. Yes, this movie is violent; but slavery was a daily violence on the lives of those who suffered it. Face it. Yes, there is sex in this movie: squirm in your seat as you feel a touch of titillation. Yes, there is abuse on all levels from pedophilia to outright murder. But the abusers aren't comic book level bad guys; they aren't Jokers on the set of "Batman". They are the ruling class of the Old South. Sometimes their humanity shows through. Sometimes bad guys are ever so well ensconced in the the rituals of polite society that they come across as the upholders of civilised behaviour. That they are also enmeshed in a daily life organised around the exploitation of those who produce their wealth speaks volumes about the quality of their humanity and our own social relations of power today.

Get "Mandingo" however you can. Show it to your friends. Discuss it after you see it. Get ready for the movie experience of a lifetime. Forget about "Basterds"; forget the demented, ultra-violent comic fantasies of Quentin Tarintino. Forget about the sanitized films of the Antebellum Age. See "Mandingo". See the hard truth about chattel slavery and then do some reflection about how power over others functions to generate a generalised state of dominance and submission in the social relations of the here and now, wherever you live on this planet.

This film, despite some controversy about it's biracial sex scenes when it was initially released, seems to have faded from memory. Given the degree of sex, violence, and unadulterated exploitation of slavery in the antebellum South, that's a surprise, because I saw this flick nearly ten years ago and STILL can't forget it! Those whose image of the old South has forever been defined by GONE WITH THE WIND as romantic and chivalrous and pick up this movie in the video store(the cover art on the box resembles that famous pose with Gable and Leigh)thinking they're about to be trasported to Tara ought to run like Hell! James Mason and his lame son Perry King live on a plantation and own slaves body and soul. Well, at least the body part, as we see when Mason strings an errant slave upside down, strips him, and pattles his butt with a perforated paddle. Son King takes a more tender approach, as he sleeps with the female slaves, especially Brenda Sykes, whom he takes as his mistress. However, he marries Susan George to provide an heir, and presents her with a ruby choker. He also gives Sykes the matching earrings. When George learns of the relationship(Sykes wears the earrings while she serves dinner to George and King on their first night at the plantation), and Kings learns George has slept with her brother, the marriage hits the skids. George drowns her sorrows in lots of sherry and lots of Ken Norton, a slave Perry has purchased specifically for fighting other slaves for betting. George becomes pregnant, and when the baby comes, it hits the fan! It's hard to believe that anyone in 1975 could see this film as anything but exploitation of a very dark period in American history. Didn't anyone cringe at the sight of King going in to "take pleasure" from a female slave in a bed and the woman groans, "I too black for you", or Ken Norton standing stoically on the auction block of a slave sale while an old woman gropes around inside his loincloth? The video edition of this film I saw was from the early eighties, when movie studios did their transfers from the first worn-out prints the could grab, and may have had a muddy, faded look because of this, but it's hard to believe this thing came from a major studio. You'd certainly wouldn't know it from the production values, because the film looks as if the filmmakers didn't spend a penny more than they had to(we're treated to interior scenes inside a plantation house curiously devoid of furniture). With all these setbacks, it's hard to understand why this movie hasn't garnered even a semi-cult following. If you're in the mood to be offended on all levels and don't treasure some romanticized Hollywood image of the old South, grab MANDINGO.

When it was first released, Mandingo was promoted as the one movie willing to tell the truth about American slavery. It features graphic depictions of every horror that slavery inflicted upon African Americans, ranging from brutal punishments to rape. In many respects, it is an antidote to the benign depictions of slavery in films such as Gone with the Wind and Birth of a Nation.

It is also just as gross a distortion of slavery as they were.

First of all, missing from the film is the most fundamental aspect of the slave experience: labor. Slaves were first and foremost used as workers. Based on this film, one would get the impression that slaves served no other purpose than to be beaten by or have sex with their masters and mistresses.

More damning, despite the film's appeal to an African-American audience, Mandingo strips its black characters of all dignity. Yes, black slaves were subject to horrific abuses. However, they were also able to maintain their own religious practices, and formed families of their own. They were not simply the helpless victims Mandingo depicts them as.

Furthermore, the film fails on a basic cinematic level. Most of the acting is downright terrible, with Susan George giving a histrionic, career ending performance.

The only good things about this film are an opening theme by Muddy Waters and the atmospheric sets, which capture the dark, grim reality of a plantation house before the gaslight era.