Birth of a Nation Reviews

  • Sep 18, 2015

    It's appalling to me that people can call this a good film. This film was instrumental in causing a massive resurgence of the KKK by romanticizing it, and vilifying African-Americans as criminal in every way, chiefly as rapists of white women. There is no quality level a film might achieve that could ever make up for these messages enough that, as a person of conscience, I could give it a good rating. We have successfully removed racist cartoons, excellently-made though many of them are, from circles of popular entertainment, and certainly no one gives them positive reviews these days. They can still be found for purposes of study, through curated means but are pulled out of the realm of popular entertainment. How is this different, and why shouldn't it get exactly that treatment? And I'm not saying the content is not of value. All such pieces of work are interesting on some, maybe many, levels, and are important historical documents. This is not the issue either. The idea of "liking" this movie, giving it a thumbs-up, or a healthy red, plump tomato, is rather like saying "I went to a lynching. It was certainly a moment of historical significance, it made its point extremely well, and it ran very smoothly. Thumbs up!" These things are not the right measure, clearly. Can we please focus on what something is saying rather than just how skillfully it's said?

    It's appalling to me that people can call this a good film. This film was instrumental in causing a massive resurgence of the KKK by romanticizing it, and vilifying African-Americans as criminal in every way, chiefly as rapists of white women. There is no quality level a film might achieve that could ever make up for these messages enough that, as a person of conscience, I could give it a good rating. We have successfully removed racist cartoons, excellently-made though many of them are, from circles of popular entertainment, and certainly no one gives them positive reviews these days. They can still be found for purposes of study, through curated means but are pulled out of the realm of popular entertainment. How is this different, and why shouldn't it get exactly that treatment? And I'm not saying the content is not of value. All such pieces of work are interesting on some, maybe many, levels, and are important historical documents. This is not the issue either. The idea of "liking" this movie, giving it a thumbs-up, or a healthy red, plump tomato, is rather like saying "I went to a lynching. It was certainly a moment of historical significance, it made its point extremely well, and it ran very smoothly. Thumbs up!" These things are not the right measure, clearly. Can we please focus on what something is saying rather than just how skillfully it's said?

  • Nov 03, 2013

    one can not refuse the historical impact this film had on america. Regardless of your personal feeling of ethical right or wrong, this film has to be shown the respect it deserves by the purely social ramifications it produced.

    one can not refuse the historical impact this film had on america. Regardless of your personal feeling of ethical right or wrong, this film has to be shown the respect it deserves by the purely social ramifications it produced.

  • Nov 14, 2007

    barely made me want to lynch anything

    barely made me want to lynch anything