Review of The Birth of a Nation (2016) by Joshua S — 23 Oct 2016

Oh boy. I'm going to get flamed on this one. The Birth of a Nation is a modern retelling of the Nat Turner rebellion in which a group of abused slaves in Southhampton County, Virginia turned on their masters and proceeded to kill roughly 60 white men, women, and children over the course of two days. Militias crushed the revolt and then slaughtered both the rebels and innocent black slaves with the butcher's bill reaching somewhere between 100 and 200. The title of the movie is a direct reference to the 1916 silent film, The Birth of a Nation by D.W. Griffith which is chiefly remembered as a film that glorified the KKK and justified southern disenfranchisement of African-Americans during the age of Jim Crow. This is designed as a mirror reflection so to speak and is tailor made for a new age of black militancy and anti-authoritarian sentiment. This is more or less confirmed by Nate Parker himself who wrote, produced, directed, and starred in this project as Nat Turner himself. The Birth of a Nation is a hagiographic take on Nat Turner. He is depicted as a righteous man who takes on the burning sword of crusade against the wicked. Angels bless him. God speaks to him. (Or at least it is implied.) Here he is a martyr, plain and simple. And I do not begrudge the filmmakers their opinion or their intent to deliver a message to an audience that probably does not include myself.

But I always felt that the Nat Turner rebellion was an exercise in moral ambiguity with negative results on both sides of the equation. It is perfectly understandable why abused and enslaved humans would want to murder the ever-living shit out of their overseers and masters and attempt to free themselves by any means necessary. But the fact of the matter is, Nat Turner and his group slaughtered women and children. With axes, shovels, knives, and their bare hands. A fact that is COMPLETELY avoided by this movie for some reason. Likewise the militias that defeated the rebellion were not gallant defenders of the white race as KKK propaganda would probably emphasize, but were murderers who bayoneted and lynched captured rebels and proceeded to murder innocent slaves who had no role in the revolt. It's hard for me to see any heroes to be honest, but then again I am a bit misanthropic and hate everyone.

Now for the movie part of the fucking movie review. Nation is a competently directed biopic with a solid and earnest performance in the lead role by Parker. There has been much attention to his personal life this awards season, but I leave my criticisms entirely with the film itself. The film succeeds in the first two acts, establishing the casual cruelty toward slaves and the indifference of cash crop slavery toward human rights. Armie Hammer fills in nicely as a somewhat sympathetic slave master who slowly turns more self-absorbed and tyrannical as the movie progresses. The rebellion itself is paraphrased and over in seven minutes of screentime. While brutal, it does disappoint even from a raw entertainment value and doesn't deliver the final punch necessary to push this movie from being a pretty okay movie toward becoming a truly great one. The Nat Turner movie in my head is an ambient nightmare crossed between Terrence Mallick and Paul Thomas Anderson and was notably better. The rebellion's end was waged field-to-field and involved three companies of artillery. There was so much missed opportunity with apocalyptic imagery and blood-stained cotton. But then again that's me. 12 Years a Slave was more complex and had more oomph while covering less. I have no idea if you would care for this movie. You know if you are going to view it. I give it a pass on its cinematic merits but nail it for its simplistic worldview and black and white morality.