Korova's Full Review: Birth of a Nation, The - Full Uncut Director's Ver...
"The Birth of a Nation" presents us with one of the most interesting dilemmas. Do we love it for its brilliance as art, or do we hate it for its politics? And is it possible to do both?
Let's look at each part separately. I watched this movie when looking at how African Americans are portayed in American movies, and basically, not a lot has changed in eighty-five years. There's just less Klan in the foreground. Afro-Americans are generally still dumb, drunk, lazy, and just out to rape white women. Look at movies today. Afro-Americans are seen as a people who owe everything to white people. "Mississippi Burning" showed us that. "The Hurricane" showed us that. Even "Glory" showed us that.
What makes "Birth" different is that it deliberately shows us this, rather than it being buried in a filmmaker's psyche, possibly without him realising it. All apologies to those who say DW Griffith didn't know what he was making, or did not know what he was reading when he looked at "The Clansmen." I am prepared to listen to people telling me that he came from the South and grew up with racism, but even he must have realised during the Klan scenes that he was being a little strong.
What annoys me about "Birth" is that it claims to be an anti-war movie. Now, that is partly true. It is wise to use battle scenes sparingly (the best anti-war movies don't focus on battles), but its argument is that the war led to Afro-Americans getting rights, and that is the reason war is an abhorrence.
When I saw the film, I was more than a little shocked as to how strong it really was. The seeds of disharmony with the first slave arriving, and whenever Afro-Americans were onscreen they were fighting, looting, attempting to rape, dancing, clapping, or serving the good whites. When the "Klan to the rescue" sequence came on, I was glad I had begun watching it knowing this was going to come - it was horrible, but so well filmed that had I gone along to just watch a movie, I might well have been caught up in the action.
Which brings me to the fact that "Birth" is a work of art. It is a masterpiece. 190 minutes of tension, romance, fantastic battle scenes, emotion...all amazing, especially given that it is a silent movie of 1915. There is more emotion (let's ignore the hatred scenes for right now) than in some movies today, like Saving Private Ryan, which did not move me at all.
Also, filmmakers learn their craft from this movie. Isn't that worth preserving? The pioneering use of close-ups, cross-cutting, music (as I said, the "Klan to the rescue" sequence could be quite uplifting if you let it be, not least because of "Ride of the Valkyries") and the sheer scale movies could be made on - aren't these worth seeing?
Now, I could talk at great length as to racism and whether "Birth" contains any racism (the difference between racism and supremacism is small), but the fact is that it a terribly offensive movie. Watch it if you like, because you already know what you're going to see.
You can watch "Birth" as a piece of disgusting racism, as a historical piece of film, a film textbook, or just as a movie. That is what makes it great. What ruins it, is that it is the most overtly horrible movie I know.
Note: One thing I have to stress about this film is that to deny its existence is pointless. Telling people not to see this film or not letting them because of its racism is as wrong as the racism itself. That is simply an act of denying that racism exists, which helps no one. This film should be seen by more than film students learning how to make movies. People should see it as an example of how racist America was and still is. Racism is hidden in films today, but here it is right out in the open.
In this sense, `Birth of a Nation' is an invaluable film.
Epinions.com periodically updates pricing and product information from third-party sources, so some information may be slightly out-of-date. You should confirm all information before relying on it.