The Birth of a Nation (2016)

[hendersonrocks]

I looked and didn't see a topic for this yet - which surprised me given all the buzz, controversy, and more surrounding The Birth of a Nation and Nate Parker, specifically. It opens Friday.

Here's a scorching review from the New Yorker, Roxane Gay's piece about why she won't see it, and one from Time about why you should see it. (I'm on Team Roxane, but still want to put some of the differing opinions out there!)

[Raja]

It is a Black peoples homework versus feminist  boycott fight coming. Last time President Obama beat Senator Clinton.

[hendersonrocks]

Quote

It is a Black peoples homework versus feminist  boycott fight coming. Last time President Obama beat Senator Clinton.

I think this is a highly simplistic view of a very complex situation. I know many black women who are leading voices in this and cannot/should not be categorized in this way (black people v. feminists) - I recommend seeking out some of their perspectives. (You can start with Roxane Gay, who I linked to above.)

[vibeology]

It'll be a cold day in Hell before I go see a movie with a fictional rape written by two rapists. And then one of the stars, who is herself a survivor of sexual violence, has to do press defending the rapist and the rape scene. 

There are other ways of supporting Black filmmakers. Ava Duvernay's The 13th comes out on Netflix this week. Fences comes out this Christmas and you know with Denzel and Viola that it should be good. Amma Asante's A United Kingdom is coming out soon in the UK and early next year in North America. Barry Jenkin's Moonlight is coming out later this month and it's been getting rave reviews. In addition, while not directed by Black directors, Queen of Katwe is out now and Loving is coming out before awards season. There are ways of supporting Black stories on film without supporting Nate Parker if you feel the way I do.

[Raja]

Not support a Black filmaker. Black people homework, the support is going to Nat Turner and stripping the name Birth Of The Nation from the KKK. As Black people homework, especially with push back from another special interest community try to stop or keep people away from it this will open bigger than a Tyler Perry Madea movie.

[Ohwell]

I plan on seeing this movie, as well as Queen of Katwe.  I'll see Queen of Katwe this weekend, then The Birth of a Nation next weekend.

[galax-arena]

Quote

 

It'll be a cold day in Hell before I go see a movie with a fictional rape written by two rapists. And then one of the stars, who is herself a survivor of sexual violence, has to do press defending the rapist and the rape scene.

God, I feel so bad for Gabrielle Union. She deserves better.

And yeah, the idea of watching a movie featuring a gratuitous ahistorical rape thrown in by two rapists turns my stomach. I wasn't going to watch the movie anyway after hearing about Parker, but this just cements that I won't even download it illegally. 

ETA: Also, as a preemptive strike - Nate and his defenders bring up the fact that he was "proven innocent" (no, he was acquitted) in a court of law and that that should be enough, so we shouldn't call him a rapist. Yeah, and George Zimmerman was "proven innocent" too. Don't say that the legal system is fucked up in one breath and then say that it should be taken as gospel in the next.  And in any case, what does that say about his friend and co-writer, who was convicted? (Even if it was later overturned.) If you read the transcripts, it's evident that they did have sex with an unconscious woman; "reasonable doubt" in this case amounted to Nate and the victim having had consensual sex the day before. Because, you know, if you consent once, it means you consent all the time. Well, I guess I can't expect much from a country where spousal rape only officially became a thing in all 50 states in 1993 (and even so, some states still require that there be aggravated force/violence or a weapon used in order to consider it rape). 

Edited October 7, 2016 by galax-arena

[hendersonrocks]

**insert flame emojis** The Birth of a Nation Is an Epic Fail **insert flame emojis**

Quote

 

I absolutely do not want to deny the painful reality of the rape and sexual violence perpetrated against black women during slavery. Enslaved black women endured an endless onslaught of sexual violence, and there is even evidence to suggest that (rather than slave patrollers) Samuel Turner, Cherry and Nat’s second master, raped Cherry. So, then, why does it bother me that Parker and Celestin invented a false scenario about a brutal gang rape?

Like the film’s other fabrications about black women, the rape story line is carefully constructed to redeem black masculinity at black women’s expense. According to The Birth of a Nation, all of the women in Turner’s life were passive victims in desperate need of black male protection. This fabrication flies in the face of historical fact. There is overwhelming evidence that Turner’s mother fought valiantly against slavery, even attempting to commit infanticide when Nat was born to prevent him from being enslaved. Yet Parker and Celestin depicted her as a meek, mild victim who resigned herself to slavery. Cherry and her daughter are also portrayed as helpless victims who suffer unspeakable horrors until Turner rides in on his horse and vows to seek vengeance on their behalf. The only other major black female character in the film, who is brilliantly played by actress Gabrielle Union, does not speak a single word during the entire movie. She literally has no voice, and like all of the other black women in the film, she has no agency. Instead, like Cherry, she is a victim of a horrifying rape, which must be avenged by the black male heroes in her life.

 

[Spartan Girl]

I really don't want to be *that person* but does this movie gloss over the fact that tons of innocent people -- including children -- were murdered in Nat Turner's rebellion? 

[galax-arena]

I know someone who went to a focus group screening for the movie a mere two months before its release. Her guess was that the studio was in "oh shit" damage control mode; they had some sort of specialist in tow. She went because she was interested in seeing the movie but didn't want to pay for it after everything, which I get. Anyway, according to my friend, the studio wanted to know how they could get butts in the theater and the focus group concluded that the best way to divert attention from the controversy was to have Nate just shut the hell up and let the movie speak for itself. 

...Obviously Nate did not heed anyone's advice.

(As a side note, the rep was also apparently shocked that everyone at the screening was aware of the victim's rape and subsequent suicide.)

[proserpina65]

1 hour ago, Spartan Girl said:

I really don't want to be *that person* but does this movie gloss over the fact that tons of innocent people -- including children -- were murdered in Nat Turner's rebellion? 

Both white (killed by Turner's group) and black (killed by white militias in retaliation).  Men, women, children, including babies.  Not sure it any of that is addressed in the film, although a review I read seemed to imply that none of it was.

[KatWay]

It's really messed up that two people accused of rape would insert two fictional rape cases into this story and have Nate Parker be the avenging hero of a girl's rape. Seriously, everything he says just buries him further. The fact that women exist only as silent props in this movie is just the last bit that makes me want to sit this out. I'll go watch all the other great movies mentioned above instead.

[FuriousStyles]

You know what I find to be really messed up?  The fact that someone...Im not sure who, if its the theaters themselves or the studio is sabatoging this film.  I had heard on instagram of cases where people would go to the movies to buy a ticket for Birth of a Nation and told it was sold out. They'd buy a ticket for another movie and "sneak in" only to find the theater completely empty. Sure enough this happened me last night.  A friend and I went to see Birth of a Nation at the Magic Johnson Theater in Harlem for a 7:15 showing. There was no ticket agent but the scroll at the top said the movie was sold out and so did the kiosk when we tried to purchase the tickets.  At first I figured, ok its Harlem, and the start of a long holiday weekend (plus the results of the election) but then I remembered having heard the stories about "sold out" showings so we bought tickets to Moonlight (at the very least my coins was going to go to a worthwhile movie regardless)...but we decided to sneak into Birth.  First of all the theater they had it in was wayyyyy in the back around 3 corners. It was clear they didnt want that movie to be easily accesible...and wouldnt you know it, we opened the door and the theater was completely empty. Not one soul was in there. I was shocked.

Now as for the movie itself.  It was ok. Nothing really to jump about. I thought it was interesting that Gabby's character didnt have any lines in the entire film. I thought she was going to play a bigger role.  I dont know how true to the real life of Nat Turner this movie was but I felt it could have been done better.  It seemed to be missing something. 

Now as for Nate's and his partner's past? I can not and will not condone what they've been accused of. Its horrific. But we've had plenty of artists who have done terrible things...Bill Cosby, Woody Allen, RKelly, etc.  My thing is, if the studio or whoever doesnt want people to see the movie why not just pull it?  Why continue to leave it out there?  In my opinion its a way to blackball Nate from the industry. Make it look like the film was a complete failure....and thats not right.  If he's going to fail then let him fail on his own accord.  Chances are with the negative publicity the movie might not have done well anyway, but whats going on here doesnt sit right with me.  Because it they can do this to Nate for a legit reason (his unsavory past) whats to stop them from doing it to another up and coming filmmaker for whatever reason they want to?

[galax-arena]

Quote

My thing is, if the studio or whoever doesnt want people to see the movie why not just pull it?  

The studio wants people to see it. They've invested way too much money to not want success. I think I mentioned this upthread, but I was talking to someone who was part of a last-minute focus group for this movie. This was after the Nate Parker allegations had blown up and the studio was scrambling to figure out a way to salvage the film. They brought in some sort of crisis/PR specialist, IIRC, and asked the focus group their opinions on how to best ensure the success of the movie. The consensus was to let the movie speak for itself and, for the love of god, make Nate Parker shut the fuck up. Probably goes without saying that Nate didn't listen.... 

So, yeah, I definitely don't think it was the studio trying to sabotage the movie. 

Edited November 11, 2016 by galax-arena

[KatWay]

The studio paid a lot for this and they tried hard to salvage it. They had an entire PR team working overtime, but Nate wouldn't shut up. I do think that's part of why the reception was so negative. Some people were coming around to Nate when it seemed like he was contrite and regretful, but then it turned out he still thinks he did nothing wrong. That was it for a lot of people, especially black women. He's scum for what he did and for not owning up to it. He's on freaking record saying stuff that is damning him and he still thinks if he just keeps denying he'll be fine because he got off on a technicality.

[raezen]

So I watched the film on Netflix last night. 

My thoughts; Nate Parker wants to be Mel Gibson very badly. I got Braveheart vibes from this. The film was probably as accurate about Nat Turner  as Braveheart was about William Wallace .

The acting was good. The use of Scripture to defend slavery was chilling and there was some beautiful imagery(along with some horrific imagery), but I just didn't feel I had watched something new or inventive in the genre. And even in regards to going down the beaten path of films the screenplay could have actually focused on the revolt more. By the time it actually happens I felt like the film was almost over.

BoaN  didn't make it to a theatre near but even if it had it is likely I wouldn't have seen it. Both because of Parker's tone deaf response to the media about his past and the lack lustre reviews. That's too bad because I'm kind of a history geek and was really excited when I first heard about the project. 

[DollEyes]

My verdict: yawn .  It didn't say anything that 12 Years A Slave didn't say before & much better .