MOVIE OR DEATH #3: "The Birth of a Nation" (1915)

Part 3 of my 1000+ part series.
(For info on that, clickety-click-click)

Ohhhhh boy.

TL;DR:

More below The Cut >>>



TITLE: The Birth of a Nation
YEAR RELEASED: 1915
DIRECTOR: D.W. Griffith
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN: USA

Yes, it's on YouTube:

To be honest, I've been avoiding this movie for as long as possible. Not only was I overwhelmed by its ridiculous runtime of over three hours, I didn't even know where to begin in how to discuss it. I'm not a critical race theorist, a historian, or a film critic. Heck, I can't even remember where I parked my car most of the time when, you know, I still drove a car.

But, if I wanted to continue to make ANY progress whatsoever on this project, watch it I must. And watch it I did.

This is such a long movie that in lieu of summarizing the whole thing, I'm going to summarize my main takeaways/stand-out moments. Thanks for your understanding.

• Opening intertitle:
  "A Plea for the Art of the Motion Picture
  We do not fear censorship, for we have no wish to offend with improprieties or obscenities, but we do demand, as a right, the liberty to show the dark side of wrong, that we may illuminate the bright side of virtue–the same liberty that is conceded to the art of the written word–that art to which we owe the Bible and the works of Shakespeare."
• Wooooow this is fraught. So this is on the level of the Bible and Shakespeare? Also, great use of the words "dark" and "bright" to refer to "wrong" and "virtue," respectively.
• Main homeboy, Col. Ben Cameron, the Little Colonel, whatever he is called  - his name is now Edgar Allan Flynn because



Errol Flynn

+ 



Edgar Allan Poe

=



You can disagree with me on this...but you'd be wrong

• The names in general in this movie were either hard to remember (because the characters were such throwaways) or, on the other end of the spectrum, incredibly on-the-nose. I mean, Silas LYNCH is the "mulatto" villain??????? REALLY??!?!?!?!!? Also, who refers to their little sister as their "pet sister"? Am I the only freaked out by that?

• This movie is meant to highlight the "ravages of war" - you know, they just want peace and love, guys!
• All the bad stuff to come in this film? It's just highlighting why those other guys are awful. 
• Side note: the ending scene with the image of literal JESUS CHRIST superimposed onto a crowd of happy white people! is amazing because: one, wow, cool visual effect for those days; and two, because you cannot make up better comedic gold than that.

  

  This in my mind...

...is basically this

• There's a ton of juxtaposition in the film: the frankly ridiculous, seemingly impotent Northern Stoneman (...sigh. That name though. DON'T GET ME STARTED ON THAT WIG.) compared to the I guess nice-guy-Dr. Cameron (who has adorable puppies near him, until a kitten fucks it up definitelynotforeshadowing). The elegance and "old school" manners of the Southern white women versus the impudent and gracelessness of the newly freed blacks. Etc etc etc.
• Edgar Allan Flynn was definitely whacking it to Elsie's photo. Like, a lot. He was alone with that photo for over two years. Yep.
  

  

  Minus the sex part
• Intertitle: "The bringing of the African to America planted the first seed of disunion."
• Cut to a Northern slave market
• Cut to a scene of Northern Abolitionists
• Result?: Northerners caused all our problems with The African and are big ole hypocrites. Thanks a lot, Massachusetts. 
• Comparing this to the previous two movies, the video quality is amazingly better. The techniques used, from the camera pans to the moving action scenes, parallel timelines, flashbacks, iris focus, close-ups, and so on are a huge leap forward. 
• Lincoln? Basically Jesus.
  

  

  Fewer dinosaurs though, sadly

• Gen. Grant with his smirk and cigar looks like how I'd imagine DJ Khaled would if he were cast in a Civil War film.
  
• Movie disclaimer: We're not racist but, they were totally trying to "put the white South under the heel of the black South." That's why black people have it so good now while white people all over are suffering. Clearly.
• At some point, Edgar Allan Flynn and centerfold Elsie makeout with a dove. Cool.

  

  I guess that's what it sounds like when doves cry

• I learned in this movie that black people want nothing more than fried chicken, kicking their shoes off, and white women - not necessarily in that order. Thanks, Movie!
• Edgar Allan Flynn got inspiration for the KKK by watching a bunch of white children scaring off a bunch of black children by using a white sheet. Because nothing screams "TAKE ME SERIOUSLY!" like dressing like the cheapest cosplay of the Pacman ghosts-meets-narwhals ever.

• "Pet sister" (I still hate that) didn't notice Blackface McGee Gus coming because she was...staring at a squirrel. Our protagonist, ladies and gentlemen!
  She's like the white nationalist version of that one girl from The Breakfast Club.

• This quote from Edgar Allan Flynn: "Here I raise the ancient symbol of an unconquered race of men, the fiery cross of old Scotland's hills...I quench its flames in the sweetest blood that ever stained the sands of Time!" 

• "The former enemies of North and South are united again in common defence of their Aryan birthright." Well thank Dino Jesus for that.

There are so many of these pictures, and as Dino Jesus as my witness, I will try to use as many of them as possible. 

THOUGHTS:

Ohhhhh maaaaaan.

As Richard Brody wrote in The New Yorker, the worst thing about this film is how good it is.  Seriously. Yes, it's over three hours long, and by Dino Jesus if it doesn't feel like at least twice as long as that. But still, the acting is great, the shots compelling, the edits engaging. It's an early masterpiece.

But let's be clear: Appreciating the mastery behind something and appreciating the content or the context are ENTIRELY different matters. Just because I may jam out to "Ignition (Remix)" if it comes on doesn't mean I'm down for R. Kelly peeing on underage girls. It goes without saying that this is a troubling movie for what it represents and what it has perpetuated.

It's worth noting that this movie didn't come about in a vacuum. Griffith, when making this movie, didn't set out to make intense propaganda. On the contrary, he thought that by including the 'good black people' in the role of the 'faithful servants' of the Cameron household, as well as by making it clear that the violent blacks were being led by evil whites, that that would avoid any fingers being pointing at all black people. He thought he was making the Epic Recounting of history as he knew it, and as he made clear by the ridiculous footnotes about how blah blah blah was painstakingly recreated using xyz source. However, his understanding of history and the 'heroes' and 'villains,' to put it crudely, was deeply biased and deeply problematic, and the United States as a society is dealing with it to this day, over 100 years later.

WOULD RECOMMEND?

Um....? There's no "good" way to answer this question. I think approached from a film studies or a historical perspective, this film is invaluable. However, in literally every other way it is upsetting. So make your own call on this one. I'm peacing out.