Somehow I missed this movie when it came out. I watched it recently and it was excellent. I searched to see if DL had a thread on it but the only threads are dominated by a rabid agenda troll and there is no discussion of the actual movie itself.
Anyone see this movie? What do you think of the movie itself and the true story it is based on? I am surprised I knew nothing about the true events that inspired.
Offsite Link| by Anonymous | reply 48 | March 2, 2021 5:55 AM |
Nat Turner's Rebellion (also known as the Southampton Insurrection) was a rebellion of enslaved Virginians that took place in Southampton County, Virginia, in August 1831,[3] led by Nat Turner. The rebels killed between 55 and 65 people, at least 51 of whom were white.[4] The rebellion was put down within a few days, but Turner survived in hiding for more than two months afterwards. The rebellion was effectively suppressed at Belmont Plantation on the morning of August 23, 1831.[5]
There was widespread fear in the aftermath, and militias organized in retaliation to the rebels. The state executed 56 enslaved people accused of being part of the rebellion, and many non-participant enslaved individuals were punished in the frenzy. Approximately 120 enslaved people and free blacks were killed by militias and mobs in the area.[1][2] State legislatures passed new laws prohibiting education of enslaved people and free black people,[6] restricting rights of assembly and other civil liberties for free black people, and requiring white ministers to be present at all worship services.
Offsite Link| by Anonymous | reply 1 | February 25, 2021 11:27 PM |
I actually was one of the few who didn’t like it, because of stupid petty things though that drove me nuts toward the end.
The movie was buried by the controversy over the star/Director supposedly raping a girl in college. That’s all anyone focused on. He was expected to win Oscars and everything for this film and once news broke about the rape from years prior, the film was tanked, his career ended and no award nominations etc.
But Casey Affleck was fine, of course.
| by Anonymous | reply 2 | February 25, 2021 11:32 PM |
Is it the title? Are bad things destined to be associated with it?
| by Anonymous | reply 3 | February 25, 2021 11:34 PM |
R1, thank you for at least partially discussing the film. Which is the purpose of this thread.
I don't want to read anymore posts about the director or associated controversy. At the link are over one thousand posts over two threads that do that already. That has be covered to exhaustion.
Looking forward to other thoughts about the actual film.
Offsite Link| by Anonymous | reply 4 | February 25, 2021 11:39 PM |
I loved it - as much as you can love a story based on such horror.
I hate that there are some people who look at Nat Turner - as well as John Brown- as suicidal idiots whose actions caused the deaths of many slaves. But it's commendable to not just wait for "glory in Heaven" and fight for your freedom.
I liked how it was unflenching because so many slave movies shirk away from the horror and inhumanity of slavery. The scene that stuck with me the most was when the rebellion was in motion and Turner goes to the plantation owner's bedroom and shoots the man and emerging from the bedcovers was a child. I wanted to jump through the screen and kill him again. That shit was reality. It boggles the mind that are people and at least one film that romanticizes Thomas Jefferson's relationship with Sally Hemmings. She was his property and she was a teenager. It's not a love story. It's rape.
| by Anonymous | reply 6 | February 25, 2021 11:46 PM |
I don't think the era of slavery is taught in classrooms like it was 50 years ago. There is so much more to uncover and reveal.
I also think that the fact that the main players in the south were given so much clemency that it set the stage for reconstruction going all soft.
The southern slave-owners were quickly turned into martyrs and given too much sympathy. It was a detestable system, and an unnecessary one.
From what I gather, it cost much more money and a loss of productivity than if they would have just paid them a modest sum and not tried so desperately to "own" them. You can't own another human, if it it is on paper. It doesn't work like that. And many learned the hard way.
| by Anonymous | reply 7 | February 25, 2021 11:53 PM |
It was filmed near where I grew up- Mamaroneck , New York.
| by Anonymous | reply 8 | February 25, 2021 11:59 PM |
This is a stealth Armie thread.
| by Anonymous | reply 9 | February 26, 2021 12:11 AM |
I thought you were talking about the original from 1916.
| by Anonymous | reply 10 | February 26, 2021 12:12 AM |
Yes, check out the B/W version. It was groundbreaking in film history.
| by Anonymous | reply 11 | February 26, 2021 12:38 AM |
I, too, thought this was about the D.W. Griffith original, and I thought OP was being funny when he said “somehow I missed this when it came out.” I was expecting some replies to that bit.
How does this one compare to the old one?
| by Anonymous | reply 12 | February 26, 2021 12:43 AM |
Oh is this the movie made by the rapist?
| by Anonymous | reply 13 | February 26, 2021 12:52 AM |
r13, . Go post in the other threads @ r4. There are several covering your off-top inquiry. you will find your answers.
This thread is for the discussion of the actual film.
| by Anonymous | reply 14 | February 26, 2021 1:33 AM |
r10, r11, r12, it clearly says 2016 in the thread title.
You really can't miss it. It is the headline. Not sure how you missed that. 2016 should be at least a clue, no?
| by Anonymous | reply 15 | February 26, 2021 1:35 AM |
It was my introduction to Lillian Gish and Mae Marsh, both of them favorite actresses of mine now.
| by Anonymous | reply 16 | February 26, 2021 1:39 AM |
Most DLers saw the first one during its initial commercial release.
| by Anonymous | reply 17 | February 26, 2021 1:41 AM |
Obviously it wasn’t BIG ENOUGH for us, R16.
Also, maybe we didn’t know there was a remake so we didn’t bother reading the year in the parentheses.
Also, maybe we need bifocals.
| by Anonymous | reply 18 | February 26, 2021 1:41 AM |
Sorry, that was for R15 not 16.
| by Anonymous | reply 19 | February 26, 2021 1:42 AM |
Please welcome to the stage: BERTHA VANATION
| by Anonymous | reply 20 | February 26, 2021 1:42 AM |
r 16, please get new bifocals along with the other seeing impaired posters.
| by Anonymous | reply 21 | February 26, 2021 1:43 AM |
Miss Vanation if you're nasty!
| by Anonymous | reply 22 | February 26, 2021 1:43 AM |
"Intolerance" is also incredible, if you're into D.W. Griffith, as I am.
| by Anonymous | reply 23 | February 26, 2021 1:49 AM |
The original 1915 "film" was purely produced and distributed for propaganda purposes. It was a big-budget gas-lighting effort to confuse the masses. It was an attempt to present "alternative facts" about the civil war and was one of the earliest examples of moving the propaganda off the pages and into new, experimental formats. A boon for the murderous dictators overseas that would rise to popularity in the following years.
It was quite successful at re-writing the history, especially given that by 1915, many of the survivors of the civil war were dead and gone. Many of their personal stories along with them.
| by Anonymous | reply 24 | February 26, 2021 1:53 AM |
Was slavery depicted as a good thing in the original? Or blacks just depicted in a negative light? I’ve never seen it, curious what the controversy is about.
| by Anonymous | reply 25 | February 26, 2021 2:02 AM |
I saw it when it came out and I found it riveting - very well made, well written and well acted.
Prior to the film, I knew somewhat about Nat Turner because I've seen his name referenced in articles and discussions about black history. In addition, Newark - I live in NJ - built a large city park in the Central Ward and named after him around 10 years ago.
| by Anonymous | reply 26 | February 26, 2021 2:05 AM |
[quote]From what I gather, it cost much more money and a loss of productivity than if they would have just paid them a modest sum and not tried so desperately to "own" them. You can't own another human,
Last month a Georgia police chief stepped down and a patrolman was fired after the two were caught on body cam having a racist conversation and one of the things the chief was bloviating about is how slaves the slaves were well fed, given clothes and food and all they had to do was work for it. Of course he ignores that they were property and had no freedom. I've heard many people over the years who hold onto that level of thinking.
| by Anonymous | reply 27 | February 26, 2021 3:50 AM |
Most of us here saw the original in the theater.
| by Anonymous | reply 28 | February 26, 2021 4:25 AM |
The other controversy surrounding this derivative film is its historical inaccuracies. Based on a true story it is based on the novel The Confessions of Nat Turner by William Styron author of Sophie's Choice. It is also a blatant rip off of one of the most controversial films of all time Addio, Zio Tom (1971) released in the US in an edited version in 1972 as Goodbye, Uncle Tom or Farewell, Uncle Tom. The characters, events and even the visuals are culled from that film. Addio, Uncle Tom makes Birth of a Nation (2016) look like an episode of Blackish! It's available on YouTube.
| by Anonymous | reply 29 | February 26, 2021 4:29 AM |
No one cares about this movie made by two rapists.
NEXT
| by Anonymous | reply 30 | February 26, 2021 4:35 AM |
I don't know if it's fair to say we can't recognize that the guy is probably a rapist. The director. We say that about a lot of guys. It does effect the way you view the movie, the art, the history.
I don't think I saw it all the way through, but it was very gory.
| by Anonymous | reply 32 | February 26, 2021 5:20 AM |
R32 read the thread or at least the OP before you start whining like a brat.
Click on r4 If you need to say that for the 1,001th time.
There are plenty of other threads that discuss that. Go there. Stop being intentionally obtuse and disrespectful and trying to ruin threads on purpose.
| by Anonymous | reply 34 | February 26, 2021 5:28 AM |
The 2016 film is good film for college aged educational purposes. It should be shown to students who want to learn about history
| by Anonymous | reply 35 | February 26, 2021 5:30 AM |
I never heard that D.W. Griffith was a racist? Are you guys sure about that?
| by Anonymous | reply 36 | February 26, 2021 4:01 PM |
If he wasn't a rapist I could've seen him in an Marvel or DC movie. Shame that he's a rapist.
Offsite Link| by Anonymous | reply 37 | February 26, 2021 5:21 PM |
This movie was bad. It took a powerful true story and turned it into a Mel Gibson-style star vehicle, including torture porn.
| by Anonymous | reply 38 | February 27, 2021 9:55 PM |
[quote]including torture porn.
There's a point where, as true to life as it may be, including too much of that stuff in a movie works against itself, doesn't it?
| by Anonymous | reply 39 | February 27, 2021 10:23 PM |
r39, yes. Particularly loathsome coming from Parker, who was too fucking afraid to center the fact that Turner was a deeply religious man.
| by Anonymous | reply 40 | February 27, 2021 10:46 PM |
Agenda troll alert^
Has anyone seen the actual movie?
| by Anonymous | reply 41 | February 27, 2021 11:05 PM |
R36, it’s the second-most famous thing about him. (The first? He’s often said to have invented the close-up).
| by Anonymous | reply 42 | February 27, 2021 11:26 PM |
Any other movies similar to this that anyone would suggest? Watching this film got me wanting to learn more...
| by Anonymous | reply 43 | March 2, 2021 4:03 AM |
When the movie was screened and purchased at Sundance it was continuously written about as it was a movie of our time and how important it was. Soon as the story about Parker and his co-writer, the same people said this movie was amateur and junk.
| by Anonymous | reply 44 | March 2, 2021 4:21 AM |
R43 The Italian film Addio, Zio Tom (1971) aka Farewell or Goodbye Uncle Tom.
| by Anonymous | reply 45 | March 2, 2021 4:23 AM |
R35 see R29 regarding its educational value
| by Anonymous | reply 46 | March 2, 2021 4:25 AM |
D.W. Griffith's Birth Of a Nation was originally titled "The Klansman" as a clue, and was considered controversial even in 1916.
| by Anonymous | reply 47 | March 2, 2021 5:49 AM |
Excusé, "The Clansmen". ^
Subtle nuance there.
| by Anonymous | reply 48 | March 2, 2021 5:55 AM |
