The Birth of a Nation is both famous and infamous within film history. From critics to Woodrow Wilson, the film has garnered plenty of attention due to its sheer invention and innovation of cinematic language and its uncompromising racist overtones. In fact, the film glorifies the KKK as "heroic knights" during the film's long third act. It's uncomforting, to say the least, but not all films have to be "right" in order to be great. The Triumph of the Will, for example, is a very well-made film that happens to promote Nazi ideals and makes a god out of Adolph Hitler. It's despicable, but to completely dismiss the film is disrespectful to the technical achievements and landmarks of the film. The same applies to The Birth of a Nation. D.W. Griffith, the director of the film, may have displayed a shocking amount of racism (even in an age where racism was common), but he made up for it by virtually creating the cinematic techniques that filmmakers still use to this day. Fading out, fading in, split-screen, flashbacks, and wide-angle shots are only a handful of Griffith's very important contributions. Regardless of its racism, the film's still a great landmark in film history.
The film follows two families, the Northern Stonemans and the Southern Camerons, before, during, and after the American Civil War. Before the South's secession and the ensuing violence, the two families were quite close and the sons, especially Benjamin Cameron, found themselves attracted to the daughters of the other family. They often visited, wrote to, and shared long hours with each other during their carefree days. Once the war broke out, though, the families grew apart as their sons were sent out to kill one another. The rest of the film follows the eldest sons of the families as they go through the Civil War, the Reconstruction, and the birth of the Ku Klux Klan.
Before going any further, it's best to acknowledge the film's racism before anything else. From the start, the racism is quite blatant as all of the blacks are portrayed as simpletons, idiots, hooligans, thieves, dishonest workers, lazy men, and overall 'animal-like'. It's sad, really, that anyone could truly believe that their fellow man could actually behave like this. At the same time, however, it's a dark side of history that we need to face. The racism, though obvious, is only present in the background of the first half of the film. It wouldn't be too difficult to ignore the racism in the first half by completely focusing on the sentimental and human stories of the Stoneman and Cameron families. After the first half, however, the film takes a dramatic shift and brings its racist agenda to the forefront of the film. Portraying an equal rights Senator as misguided, and possibly "tricked" by his mulatto servant, the film states that blacks are trying to "take over" the South for their "Black Empire". It's ridiculous. Even if the film didn't have a racist agenda, the film's politically-charged second half seems nowhere near as powerful as the first half's emotional and heart-felt story. The characters are still focused on during the second half, but it seems more like propaganda than anything else. The sheer shock of the sights in the second half, such as an animal-like black man's attempted rape and Christ appearing before the world to "congratulate" the KKK, are both unsettling and depressing. Still, the film's still technically impressive during these moments and the editing and cinematography remains ground-breaking.
Moving on, though, the film's storytelling methods and characters are amazing and way ahead of their time. Griffith created a complex narrative in a cinematic world where the most complicated films beforehand were A Day in the Life of a Fireman and The Great Train Robbery. The characters and the setting feel like something out a richly-written and thoughtful novel, thanks to the well-developed characters and the fluid style of editing. This film marks the creation of the typical American epic that everyone's become so accustomed to. The editing and characters proved that films could go beyond simple and remedial shorts - that films could tell epic stories such as the ones found in popular or classic novels. The characters are interesting and very likable, allowing for complex characters that we can relate to and care about. Yet another innovative success on the film's part.
It's insane to think that a film crew in 1915 could create such visual accomplishments such as the renowned battle sequence during the film's second act. The fighting spanned for miles and the action felt just as dream-like as it did realistic. The flowing nature of the editing makes the film go by quickly despite the film's three-hour runtime. This editing allowed for the narrative to never seem stagnant or disjointed - it was meant to create a storyline that both enticed and thrilled audiences and to show the birth of a new "nation" of art. The cinematography's very impressive as well, as the camerawork was fantastic and the cinematic techniques felt fresh due to their recent creation within the film world.
It's sad, though, that the film promotes plenty of great messages while simultaneously promoting racism. The film speaks of the horrors of war, the nurturing of family, the importance of forgiveness, etc. and so forth. The Birth of a Nation paved the way for cinema as we know it, but its racist overtones are difficult to ignore. Other than those overtones and an iffy introduction, the film's a great landmark and is a "must-see" for anyone who's interested in film.
No comments:
Post a Comment