"We Are...The Dahomey!" The culture war is a strange and mysterious force, one which makes people act contrary to their own beliefs when presented with an opportunity to "gotcha!" their opponents. Most times, the talking points and vitriol of the war are foisted onto the peasants, the foot soldiers who take what their masters and commanders give them to heart. Occasionally the product makers must enter the trenches, to rile up their side after a gaffe and remind them who the real enemy is - the peasants in the next trench over.
This action is usually taken when the quality of the newest product is too lousy to incite the usual, wholehearted discourse, like when Sony released their Ghostbusters remake in 2016, or Marvel released Captain Marvel in 2019. Credit to the makers of The Woman King; the culture war has led them to create a film totally contrary to their beliefs, but they've made a solid effort of it, and have mostly refrained from energizing the troops.
There are two parts to this review. The first will discuss the film itself; the second will discuss the creators, the audience, and the cynicism behind making a film about the Dahomey. If you're terminally online, you may have already seen the debate raging in the background - if you haven't, I'll proudly introduce you to the historical context. First though, the film proper.
Part One.
The film follows the Dahomey tribe in 1823 Africa, who are faced with various moral and physical threats. The clear and present danger is the aggression of the Oyo tribe, who rule over Dahomey and demand sacrifices with greater frequency and brutality. On a more personal level, the film follows Nawi, a young Dahomey woman who joins the Agojie, a female sect of the Dahomey army. As Nawi bonds with her warrior sisters, she must prove her toughness and earn the respect of Nanisca, general of the Agojie.
The Woman King is a period piece filmed in Africa and sporting a plethora of expertly designed and crafted costumes and sets. The chief pleasure of the film is drinking in the many meticulous, immaculate details of the Dahomey palace where the Agojie live and train. Each piece of hair styling, jewelry, and clothing is ornately conceived and executed, creating a lavish atmosphere and presence of aesthetic novelty.
The performances are all ace too. Like many military films, the cast does an excellent job demonstrating the bond and love they have for their fellow warriors. The Agojie perform rituals, feats of strength, and even an obstacle course to prove themselves outside of real combat, demonstrating a fierce loyalty and commitment to their bond. They also sing and dance at points, showcasing an enriching, universal symbol of culture rarely seen in films about Africa and its people.
Viola Davis, Lashana Lynch, Sheila Atim, and Thuso Mbedu gracefully and organically convey a carefully maintained dynamic; they support each other and offer comfort and advice but respect the hierarchy of their roles in the army. Davis is a general, Lynch and Atim are senior warriors just under her, and Mbedu is a headstrong and nimble recruit, aching to prove herself. Mbedu's performance is particularly strong, as the film may be called The Woman King, but it's Mbedu's story; the lessons and experiences she gathers as young Nawi provide the audience with a relatable, personable anchor. John Boyega's King Ghezo is also steadfast, a contemplative and restrained monarch presiding over the turbulent kingdom.
Although The Woman King's sets and costuming feel grand, the film itself never feels particularly epic. Its scope is rather small and its filmmaking is disappointingly conventional, consisting mostly of bland medium shots and closeups. Director Gina Prince-Bythewood has an opulent world of lavish tapestries and colors to explore but opts to keep the visual dimensions square and safe. This is not a boring film but it's also not particularly engaging, never rising above a workmanlike presentation.
The story is also a bit scattered; there are several points of interest active at any given time (Nawi's integration into the Agojie, the Oyo's aggressive tribunal demands, Nansica's past demons and grudge against the Oyo general, and a pair of white slavers mixing in with it all) but many of these seem to freeze in time when not on screen. The film has blinders on, focusing intently on one threat at the expense of others, never managing to fully contextualize or balance its interconnecting threads.
Lastly, the action of the film is uneven. The choreography seems kinetic and the performers capable, but there's rarely an action sequence not spliced to hell. There's little clarity to most of the fighting, and although a spec of brutality comes across during most battles, the film's PG-13 rating heavily sanitizes the bloodlust and savagery of the warring groups. Watching the fights on set, in real time, was probably quiet a spectacle, but little of that talent and skill translate to the finished product. Certainly not the worst action in recent memory, but frustratingly tame and obfuscated.
Overall, The Woman King is worth seeing. There is immense craft on display, primarily in the gorgeous costuming and elaborate Dahomey sets. The decision to film on location (or at least, in Africa) pays off handsomely, producing a sense of genuine place - a principle which contemporary cinema has largely abandoned. The Woman King displays a culture and people rarely seen in American cinema, whose social and political dynamics make for an interesting and invigorating history lesson. Or at least, they should have made for a history lesson. But we can't have everything, can we?
Part Two.
The Woman King is a controversial film. If you watched the trailer and listened to those who made it, you probably wouldn't know why. Throughout the advertising, and dominant in the film itself, is the idea of the Agojie fighting back against the notion of slavery and all who practice it. The Agojie exist to ensure their people remain free and Africa is never chained to the greed and vileness of the white man. During the trailer's climax, Nanisca proudly proclaims them "the blade of freedom!"
This is all incredibly noble, but it's also a gigantic lie. History Vs. Hollywood sums it up better than I could: "The Kingdom of Dahomey was a bloodthirsty society bent on conquest. They conquered neighboring African states and took their citizens as slaves, selling many in the Atlantic slave trade in exchange for items like rifles, tobacco, and alcohol. Many of the slaves they sold ended up in America."
Also, "There are accounts of Dahomey warriors conducting slave raids on villages where they cut the heads off of the elderly and rip the bottom jaw bones off others. During the raids, they'd burn the villages to the ground. Those who they let live, including the children, were taken captive, and sold as slaves."
One more for good measure: "Each year in Dahomey, roughly 500 slaves and criminals were mass executed in large-scale human sacrifices during the religious ceremonies of a festival known as the Annual customs of Dahomey. The 1727 Annual customs of the Dahomey ceremony reportedly saw as many as 4,000 people sacrificed."
This historical film is not only massively ahistorical but fabricated to reverse the historical truth. The filmmakers (most notably Viola Davis, who serves as producer and was instrumental in getting the film made) have taken a story of slavery, barbarism, and the stark nature of pre-modern life, and smeared modern sensibilities all over it, annihilating its complexity, moral preponderances, and its lack of convention.
Despite the overall craft and production of the film, the sweaty smudges of their fingerprints are difficult to see through. The filmmakers would've had to read about the Dahomey's vicious streak, they must have known their subjects before the cameras started rolling. They knew, and they were happy to ignore such history, narrowly focusing on girl power and licking their chops at a marketing campaign that would write itself.
Many of the film's defenders have pointed to the existence of Gods and Generals (a film which glorifies the Confederacy) as precedence of Hollywood's callousness. They fail to follow their own thread, missing the fact that Gods and Generals was lambasted by critics and audiences alike and bombed hard. While The Woman King isn't quite as disgustingly one-sided as that film, and certainly not as boring, it does represent as shrewd and calculated an attempt to violently twist history, making saviors of slavers, and villains of abolitionists.
The culture war claims another victory for transparent hypocrisy. Davis and company have made a film about a military unit with a uniquely significant percentage of women, which existed to enslave neighboring states and perpetuate the transatlantic slave trade. They have written themselves in circles, adding a myriad of fictional characters and beliefs to absolve their historical subjects of any moral responsibility. They have cooed and preached about the importance of being seen and urged moviegoers to support their own bankrupt integrity.
The only step now is to enter the trenches and rile up the troops if the film is in danger of box office failure; remind their side who the real enemy is (it certainly isn't the slavers!) and reprimand those who won't spend two and a half hours of their time being lied to. This hasn't happened yet as far as I know, though I've also been apprehensive to check. I'm recommending the film (it's well made and keeps the overt pandering to a minimum) but there's nothing wrong with skipping it. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise.