I admit that I don't actually have any African-American friends I could show it to - the area I live in has a largely white and latino population, so I don't think that test will work. (I DO have one good friend who's African American, but I've lost touch with her and don't have her E-mail address.) Anyway, while I agree that they're obviously supposed to be some variety of African tribesmen, to my mind they fit into a different sort of stereotype - that of the cannibal tribe. (There's nothing specifically saying they're cannibals, but the whole necklace-of-teeth and leaf loincloth look is unmistakable.) Basically, this is one of the hoariest cliches in all adventure fiction - if you've got a jungle or jungly area, it will be chock-full of angry natives waiting to eat you or sacrifice you to their god. (It even showed up in 'DuckTales' once, and that was in the late '80's.) These are the same guys that show up in old Tarzan movies - it doesn't matter where the hell in the world you go, these stories say, you're bound to run into them, whether it's Africa, South America, New Guinea - hell, even New Zealand, according to one movie I saw. Is it offensive? Sure - but it's SUCH a cliche that it honestly doesn't phase me much at this point. Yes, the 'less evolved' thing is a factor, I agree, and that's certainly offensive - but when you get right down to it, these are supposed to be two separate tribes of cavemen, evolution machine of no evolution machine. For me, what's far more offensive is seeing racist depictions of modern day people. I mean, it's one thing to say 'your ancestors were savages' - so were everybody's, if you go back far enough - it's another thing entirely to say 'your people are savages right NOW'. Both are offensive, but the latter is significantly more so, in my opinion. You're not likely to run into your aboriginal ancestors while walking down the street, after all.