Customer Reviews

Birth of a Nation Silent Film Plus Bo [Import]

5 star:		(43)
4 star:		(17)
3 star:		(10)
2 star:		(9)
1 star:		(9)

 

 

One general problem with most of the DVD reviews found on Amazon is that they focus too much on the plot and background of a movie, but do NOT go into the technical details of the quality of the overall viewing experience. In the case of "public domain" films, it is the quality of the print used to transfer the movie to DVD which too often makes or breaks the enjoyment of the viewing experience. I've learned this the hard way and now have complete confidence in some studios (Kino, Legend Films, and not as much to absolutely none in others.

I shall skip the plot summary of Birth of A Nation and the controversy surrounding the movie because I am sure most people reading this are VERY familiar with it all. Instead, I'll simply say that since the price was right, I recently purchased the Alpha Video version and was VERY pleasantly surprised. The picture was sharp and clear, and there didn't appear to be much damage on the print they had used to make the movie. Clearly, someone at the studio had put his foot down to ensure that a high-quality product was produced, or perhaps they simply lucked out and found a really well-preserved copy of the film. In any event, I liked what I saw a lot. I got a hold of a copy from Kino (a studio I purchase DVDs from without a second thought)to compare the quality, and thought that the Alpha Video version was much sharper and enjoyable to watch. It is just a pity that it doesn't have all the supplementary features that comes with the Kino version.

I show this movie, or at least the last 40 minutes of it, to students in my classes as part of our debate on artistic freedom and censorship -- because I know I can count on it to offend them. In fact, the reason I have bought a copy of the DVD is that the department's old video copy is worn out by now from the number of times it's been used in class. By every possible moral measure, this movie is incredibly offensive, with its crude racial stereotypes, its rewriting of American history to portray white Southerners as the "victims" of Blacks who claimed their political rights as voting citizens after the Civil War, and its glorification of the Ku Klux Klan. And it can't be dismissed as "just a movie," because its release had real consequences, leading to race riots, lynchings, and worst of all, the re-formation of the Klan, which had almost entirely died out before the movie was released.

And yet, as any historian of cinema can tell you, it was technically and artistically a landmark, the first movie epic, the first really ambitious effort at complex story-telling and spectacle in the new medium. Every movie epic that has been made since then owes something to this film. All of this makes for some very lively classroom discussions: should this movie still be shown to public audiences? If someone wanted to show it on this campus as part of a program on the history of cinema, would you support their right to show it, or would you protest the use of your tuition and fees for a purpose like that? Do we want to be accused of "political correctness?" Do we want to be accused of inciting to riot?

So, do I admire this movie or hate it? Well, both. That's why I split the difference between 5 stars for artistic merit and 0 stars for political irresponsibility, and averaged them out at three.

The film is a brilliant masterpiece. While most silent films that we see on TV are of the silly comedic type, this is probably the only silent film that I can watch and enjoy. I am moved by the battle scenes and the love stories--the music can move you to tears. This is probably my favorite war movie of all time, it is even better than "All Quiet on the Western Front" and "Das Boot".

As for the pablum-eating meally-mouthed PC types who criticize the second act for its virulent "racism"; I don't know how accurate is this film's portrayal of the post-war South. But it is quite possible that the radical Republicans of the North could have imposed stringent voting laws in South Carolina (which had a 45% black population at the time) that favored Blacks thus electing a Black majority in their legislature at the time. If you look at this film's portrayal of majority Black rule, it is not that far removed from today's Zimbabwe or post-apartheid South Africa. The only thing different today from back then is that Whites then were not continually brainwashed with self-hatred as they are by today's "media".

I am always amused whenever critics attempt to praise this film. They have to add a proviso that they cannot approve of Griffith's disgusting attitude toward blacks (whom he would have called "negroes" or worse), and his outrageous portrayal of the KKK as the saviors and preservers of the good and the pure. The film was supposed to have been titled "The Clansman," after the ludicrous book that inspired Griffith to make The Birth of a Nation. I wonder how many of this film's praises have been sung by African-Americans? I happen to be one of the whitest men in America, and yet I believe this film should be universally reviled - not banned but despised.

The Birth of a Nation was a film I didn't watch due to the controversy, but rather because of its age and my desire to view the roots of cinema. I was initially quite shocked by the level of racism, but eventually put my views aside in order to appreciate the camera, plot and style. I can honestly say that The Birth of a Nation has given birth to cinema as an artistic medium.

The style in which The Birth of a Nation is told may not appear to be anything special at first, but it was unheard of at its time. Griffith pioneered a style that has had a heavy influence on modern filmmaking from Mel Gibson's epics to Martin Scorsese's crime dramas.

Like Eisenstein and Chaplin, Griffith has earned his place as one of the founding fathers of cinema, and despite its racism I can respect The Birth of a Nation as an influential and important film.

9/10 for its influence and execution of plot.

Even though this is a silent movie, adding Descriptive Video Service for the blind should be an excellent idea because it will show exactly what happens in the movie. Even voice narration should be terrific. These should also add to Mel Brooks's Silent Movie.

This film truly demonstrates Griffith's genius as a director, producer and editor. He manages to tell an epic of a story with bold camera work, clever cuts and balanced pacing. He includes historical interpretation, adventure and romance. It's unfortunate that he possessed such a twisted morality. The first half, which concerns the civil war, is very watchable, but second part portrays blacks as either ignorant or evil (mostly played by whites in blackface) and features the Klu Klux Klan as righteous heroes.

Using the KKK as heroes is in astonishingly poor taste. Even then, in much lass enlightened times, Griffin was taken to the woodshed and taken to task. Griffin responded by partially redeeming himself with the overly ambitious Intolerance. That said, the movie itself is brilliantly made. The acting, cinematography, direction and story are perfect. Definately a must watch for anyone interested in film as art or craft.

This film was one of the assigned viewings for a History of Film class. The professor specified the 180 minute version and specifically described the ending as being important to a complete analysis of the work. My bad for not checking the specifics for this edition, but be forewarned: if you want the full version, this is NOT it. This version ends with Liberation. Several other key scenes appear to have been edited out.

This film is not "deeply disturbibg" or is it "only for film historians", people who wrote bad reviews on this dvd, obviously are not inteligent enough, and the film went over thier heads as it would if a 3 year old were watching it.

This film is a classic, not just for it's AMAZING filmography, whcih was new at the time, and still is breathtaking today, but because of the "controverisal" subject matter, which wasn't so controversial at the time of it's release.

This dvd must be watched, and is hard to review, but it is a classic, and when it's over, you'll find yourself pushing the play button again and warching it twice in a row!

This film will do one of two things it will either move you and make you realzie this was along with Gone With The Wind, one of the best film of all time, or it will go right over your head, and you'll yell "racism", and just blow it off, and not even realize it's a classic. This film is more likely to appeal however to people who tend to gravitate towards listening to jazz and classical music, people more sophistocated and who liek fine wines and live a more luxurious or should I say cultured lifestyle.