Please respond here with your responses to "Birth of A Nation"
This film can be shocking in its racism, but it is an unavoidable milestone in the history of film.
Write a two or three paragraph response here, recording your feelings/observations on the film and considering the time period of its release.
This is to be an informal and personal response. Due October 14th - 8pm.
We'll discuss in class.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
26 comments:
OLIVER YOUNG:
Well what can i say about the film " The Birth of a nation" well as far as the historical factor of the film it makes me sick to my stomach, the way that black people were treated as property, and how the south built there way of life around it. But as far as the film film making, well let me start off by saying that i think that it was brilliantly written, i mean even though you might disagree with the family the Camerons, and other southeners with what they were doing, the story was told in such a way that brought the viewers in close to their lives, whiich by that i couldn't help but be intrigued and interested by.
There was a quote in the film that i believe sums up this movie perfectly, and that is it was the dark side of the wrong, and i belive that the film definitely got that message accross.
The choreography I thought was excellent and at times i had to remind myself that it wasn't real, and I beleive this to be a huge accomplishment for its time.
Each main character in the film whether it be Margaret Cameron, or Bernie Cameron etc. was very well thought out and given a lot of human qualitites, and soem that weren't so good which helped show that they were in fact human.
good comments, Oliver.
Yes, it is a shocking piece, but the film-making is simply stunning for its day and I'm glad you appreciated that. Interesting too, how we get involved with the characters anyway.
I look forward to the discussion in class.
Watching Birth of a Nation was a new experience for me as a viewer. I have to admit I have never seen anything like it; the use of written dialogue due to the absence of sound for movies, (or the age prior to the “talkies”), the reinactment of major events in history that occurred in the mid to late 1800’s, and the blatent racism and inhumanity that plagued the nation during this time. All acted out in one of the first known feature length films by an army of actors who seemed uncertain of their own capabilities. I actually enjoyed watching the feature once I understood the personality and rhythm of the process of the stories that were being represented.
It was difficult to watch at first, mostly due to the jumpy cuts between scenes, and also the lack of audio for dialogue made it difficult to figure out what the actors were trying to say. The acting that we are used to today does not allow for that long long long time of action and reaction by the actors (of 1915) that seemed to resemble a theatrical play. The white people painted black was an interesting approach and when only the faces were painted and not the arms, well, it just looked silly. I would have loved to have talked to someone of that time watching the film and their reactions to the paint, acting and actions that they were viewing before them. I was moved to really try and put myself in the mind of someone living in 1860. Hard to do with what we know now, but after watching this, I think I have a pretty good idea.
I could appreciate the fact that someone was actually trying to recreate history as it may have occurred. The cutaways, dialogue and acting added a slight unintentional humor to the feature and also aided in coercing some audience-fed dialogue within the group that I was watching this with. It was painfully obvious how far we have come in all of these areas to present what is considered a “good” feature film today. It made me appreciate technology even more. What an eye opener and even a “not so suttle” reminder also of how we have grown as a human race.
AMBER GARCIA:
The Birth of a Nation is a very raw film, without the use of special effects coloring or vocals. It makes the film worth paying close attention to. Without the use of cutting to continuity you get every moment rather or not its a crucial component to the film or not, for instance a scene with a couple of cats although very nice composition not very vital.
Also the use had there been any of parallel editing would of made this film a whole lot shorter in retrospect.
This movie wasn't intended to be sugar coated in any sense I mean there concept was to show the dark side of wrong, that they may illuminate the bright side of virtue and that is exactly what they got across.
The lack of technology is what actually made this film. Today when you watch a movie thats dated in the back before our time its not what is once was it lacks that dramatic effect this film gives you because its recorded in sepia and because you must really watch the film to grasp what is going on.
I can only imagine what a breakthrough it was when this film was released.
AMBER GARCIA:
The Birth of a Nation is a very raw film, without the use of special effects coloring or vocals. It makes the film worth paying close attention to. Without the use of cutting to continuity you get every moment rather or not its a crucial component to the film or not, for instance a scene with a couple of cats although very nice composition not very vital.
Also the use had there been any of parallel editing would of made this film a whole lot shorter in retrospect.
This movie wasn't intended to be sugar coated in any sense I mean there concept was to show the dark side of wrong, that they may illuminate the bright side of virtue and that is exactly what they got across.
The lack of technology is what actually made this film. Today when you watch a movie thats dated in the back before our time its not what is once was it lacks that dramatic effect this film gives you because its recorded in sepia and because you must really watch the film to grasp what is going on.
I can only imagine what a breakthrough it was when this film was released.
I thought the movie was quite long. Also Stoneman kind of looked like Gene Simmons. It was odd how most of the movie, the black people were really just white actors with their faces painted.
There was quite a story though. Since it was a silent film if you weren't watching you would miss something. Also some of the story cards weren't displayed very long which was kind of annoying. This was also put together with a very southern confederate sense. The northern "scalawags" and the "guerrilla raiders" and how it tried to portray some black people as being happy with where they were. Those are all examples in the film.
For its time the movie was impressive. I am not referring to the message or any of its content. Just that for 1915, almost a century ago, this ultra long film was created. There was at least some kind of preparation for most of the scenes. Some of the cast did appear to have dressed up for this. While the extras most likely wore their own clothing.
The rise of the KKK part of the movie was nearly comical. There was plenty of laughs when "Trial." began. Then it was like this drop of a hat scene and Gus was sentenced to death. Just the whole idea that they capture him then two seconds later his trial is over. Just the pure ludicrous transition in that was funny.
It has been very difficult for me to keep an interest while watching this film. I understand that this movie was made before talkies, but the lack of spoken dialogue in a film of this setup has made it difficult to comprehend. This is a poorly made silent film I that the storyline can’t be easily interpreted. Watching a short cartoon without sound such as the pixar shorts or even an old Charlie Chaplin work I can easily understand what is happening in the scene. However in this film I found myself unable to grasp what was going on.
One wonder that has come t my mind is how illiterate people even had a chance of understanding what was going on. Watching people talk, and not being able to read the written explanations of what’s happening must have been very frustrating to those poor who never got the opportunity to learn how to read.
With the sheer number of scenes I started to wonder about the cost. So I looked it up and found out that in its time Birth of a Nation cost $110,000 ($1,833,333 now) and made a gross of $3,000,000 ($50,000,000 now). It amazes me that Griffith not only raised that much money but that the film made such a substantial gross.
I know that this film is often considered racist, but isn’t it just an accurate depiction of how blacks were treated in that time? Isn’t it worse to sugarcoat slavery than it is to depict the harsh realities of their lives? If we always sugarcoat the truth then someday people might forget the real injustices of the past and that is more of a dishonor to their legacy.
I will respect Birth of a Nation as groundbreaking in its day but I do not consider it a film that can be fully grasped and appreciated by a modern audience.
Well what can I say? The film was actually entertaining for its film making qualities but the racism is unbeliavable. I would like to start this off by saying that this film is a lesson not on of the birth of our nation but how people were treated as "pets." One example of this is at the beginning of the film where the text pops up and says, "The mother, and the little pet sister." Then in the next scene it shows a little African girl pop out from behind a pillar and run out of the scene. Which brings me to my next subject on the film.
Even though the film was made in 1915, it still is very controversial. I watched the movie on Youtube (20 parts) and I read everyone's response. All there was, was racist comments coming from every religion and ethnic background. One in particular was from a man in Israel who said, "Thank you for posting this, now I can show my people that the white man is in-fact a creation of the devil." I was let down because I tried to explain that not everyone is the same and that you need to look to the future. But I recieved threats and curses from the man and I decided to leave it alone. There is no way to make an ignorant man change his mind. I have learned many things from this video not only about the history of filmmaking but how a film that was made almost a hundred years ago can still be so controversial.Oh, and good luck to the man who keeps looking to the past for reasons to hate someone instead of looking to the future for change.
Birth of a Nation had some weird and horrible acting. Also, it almost seemed to be 2 different movies. The first half , I thought, didn't really transition that well into the second "KKK" half. Maybe it was just hard to follow because of the lack of sound and crazy length. Plus, all the shots were static which made the movie a little boring to watch.
It's crazy to think how far technology has come in not even 100 years. If someone in 1915 saw one the movies we have now, they would be flipping out.
The whole storyline is pretty racist. The dialogue of the black people in the film is just ricidulous and it's sort of shocking that that type of thing was accepted. Watching some of it, I was just like "wow..that's crazy". The white actors painted black were also ridiculous. They didnt even do a good job painting, it's like they didnt care if the audience knew they werent acutal black actors.
The Birth of a Nation was quite a racist film. I cant even imaging living during that time and seeing the white man treat the black man as they did in the movie. I found it rather difficult to follow the movie in the beginning because of the no dialogue and only music playing in the background. I did like that the music changed to the mood of the movie such as the scenes with the war, or the rape scene the music gets louder and more intense.
Other then the crazy racism that was in the movie, I really enjoyed seeing film of that time and how the actors and actresses played their parts. I found the part of the movie when the black raid set out in the town, and the two ladies were hiding odd because of the way the actress seemed to smile when in reality they should have had a frightened and scared look on their faces.
For the time, I am very impressed by the length and quality of the film. To look back and see what kind of movies were being created during that time, and compare them to the film today, technology has come an extremely long way. Overall I enjoyed the movie and even though it was very racy, capturing historical events in such a way as "The Birth of a Nation" did was very amusing.
I just left the room where Birth Of a Nation was being viewed, three was only about five minutes left but i couldn't take anymore. I must say I have much more appreciation of movies on todays market, (any genre) than before i watched that movie. This was obviously offensive to me as a woman and a person of color. I'm not sure what was more disturbing, the fake black people or the young girls being pawed on by the older men, or maybe it was the heroic clansmen that saved the day in the end. I would not allow my children to ever watch this film but maybe it would have historical value, to show how people viewed blacks back in the day. It was pretty obvious how blacks were villanized to seem untrustworthy and aggressive. I hope never to see this film again.
Birth of a nation was definately an interesting film. Highly racist, but interesting. the overall scale was impressive for the time that it was made. i mean they had full on battle scenes. i was also impressed with the number of extras they got. there was no special effects to add people-they actually went and got hundreds of people for the crowd scenes.
I found the film hard to watch as well. this was obviously due to the fact that there was no sound and frames where constantly jumping. But you could still get the message of the film.
Although the movie makes black people look horrible, the production itself was impressive
Brillaintly made...
but seriously folks.
Let's face it, "Birth of a Nation" is what it is, and of course at the time it was a massive breakthrough as far as movie making and such. You can't really expect anyone to lie it. Yeah it's boring, a little racist and it drags but you have to admire the work put into it because though to us it looked half assed and just really crappy, that was a huge accomplishment for the filmmaker.
Do I agree with the film's message?
No.
Did I think it was good?
God no.
Samantha B:
This film was astonishing in many ways, but these were not all "good" astonishing.
In terms of the film itself (meaning the footage, not the story) was really impressive for its time. Sure there were some color issues with different scenes, and the occasional missing frames were jarring for the viewer, but overall the film was a great achievement. The use of text being used when audio couldn't be recorded was a great way to help keep the story moving forward. And some of the shots they were able to achieve, especially that long ago and with film being brand new was very impressive. They definitely created something that was visually impressive for their time.
The issue I had a real problem with was the blatant racism. Not only were the black characters portrayed as either completely unintelligent or savagely brutal, but were also rarely played by actual black people. I think this film's message, while attempting to depict a historical event, was hardly more than a form of harsh and unrealistic propaganda.
It would appear that a victory of our great nation came at a much greater cost than anyone at the time could realize.
In one sense the movie resembles American movies currently, because the is a romance involved within the story line.
I think Griffith depicted Blacks in the stereotypes of the day. Black men were shown as brutes, unmoral and lustful for a white woman. The Clan was shown as chivalrous.
He made good use of limited resources and locations to shoot the film.
It was very interesting watching the Birth of a Nation. I have never watched a silent movie before, just clips of Chaplin in some silent films. It was hard to watch at first because of all the jumpy cuts. I love how they have the onscreen intertitles to help explain the story. Its classic; I think it’s humorous. I think they did a good job on the story line and finding ways to get events across to the viewer. Showing the letter letting us know that the family in the Camerons were coming to visit the Stonemans and so forth...The two “chums” on opposite sides of the war, then dieing together in the battlefield. It was pretty racist, as I expected…the black characters were white people poorly painted brown… It was neat seeing how they did the battles; most of them were dark and far away from the action. I think they could have came up with some better music to set more of a mood. I did learn a lot though just watching these old films. It was fascinating seeing the classic camera shots, and the quality of the film and acting. I couldn’t figure out why the pet sister was laughing in the cellar while her house it getting raided. I am glad I got to see a movie that it part of a historical cornerstone for the film industry, I found it for $5, so it’s apart of my collection now.
DUSTIN HARMON
Birth of a Nation I have to say overall is a very good movie of its time. It’s a little slow cause the lack of sounds in a traditional now-a-day movie. I had a hard time keeping my interest while watching the movie. I think that the length of the movie and the lack of really eye pleasing video makes it hard to appreciate the movie. We are born into a time when this is now considered old and out of date. In some ways a agree, just cause I totally enjoy the large eye pleasing movies made today.
Something we have to remember that we wouldn’t have the movies that we have today if we didn’t have movies like this one. This age of movies is the starting line of the movies we have today, we had to start somewhere. The movie showing the scenes of war and racism is still showed in movies today, so nothing has really changed besides filming techniques and of course the ability to had beautiful HD graphics and sound.
I have the up most respect for this era of film, but I’m so glad that I was born in this time to enjoy the outcome of the film industry. I hope to someday make a film that will set the bar a little higher for the future generations to look at and then strive to set it at another and or higher level.
Birth of a Nation challenges the values of our present day society, but only because we have the luxury of living in a more enlightened age.
Difficult as it is, put the racism aside, and the film-making is amazing.
The film's story feels cliche and worn because it's underlying structure is used time and time again, sans the racism.
And as difficult as it to accept, by continuing to display this film today, we allow ourselves to view how truly absurd those societal "values" were.
Late but better than nothing :)Watching The Birth of a Nation was torture especially with no audio. If this video did have audio it will still suck because I didn't like watching it all. I notice that film has really came along way. Film today compared to the film of the video time is a hundred times better. One good thing I would say is the director of photography is either the best photographer ever or just lucky.
How the hell do you keep filming while people are shooting and through shit at each other? In the video I thought it was kind of creative how they transition scenes with text. Since watching this video i really truly do see how technology has better film and how it has advanced over this short period of time.
Major E Carter V
I know this is late, but what the hell, better late than never. Birth of a Nation is an epic period pice which set the standard for feature length film making. I have to admit due to the lack audio the story was hard to follow at first, but after about the first hour I had a pretty good idea who was who and what was going on. The film making style was as cutting edge as the social issue presented in the film. I did not find the racism to be over the top for the time period in which the film was made. I think people forget that this is the way it was in America for a long time, and that desegregation is a generally new idea (under a hundred years). You can't knock W.E.B Griffin for telling it how it was. I found my self drawn to the cinematography. They truly pushed the limit of film making for the time period for any time period. The way the battles were shot and the burning of Atlanta I found to be truly amazing.
I don't know how I made it through this movie without falling asleep. The acting was bad and the iris transitions were horendeously overused --- not to mention the lighting was mediocre at best. The only thing good that came out of this movie that I picked up was the cinematography. I want the 3 hours back that I lost watching this movie...please.
Lai F. Saelee:
For what it was back then, the film Birth of a Nation is that they made the film what they had for technology. but as far as story telling goes and how there were many cinematography shots that were a little confusing with weird jump cuts. The film was a bit racist on how they showed that the blacks as beast and savages and showed the the Klans men as like super heroes or the calavary. Luckily, I don't have to watch or sit through that again.
thanks for your comments - and for suffering through the insufferable bits of this most incendiary film. I'll look forward to discussion tomorrow.
night now, LH
actually is a good film, creative use of the studio technology at the time, a pulling story "whether you like it or not" and some diceit to googd effects, thats good film making.
Post a Comment