- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Birth of a Nation- Just watched for the first time
Posted on 2/20/23 at 8:36 pm
Posted on 2/20/23 at 8:36 pm
I thought it was an excellent movie, as far as 1915 silent films go.
11
Posted on 2/20/23 at 8:55 pm to deeprig9
As disgusting as it is, this film had a profound effect on the film industry. The many innovations that carried over into later films are why this film is preserved in the Library of Congress.
Posted on 2/20/23 at 8:57 pm to Locoguan0
The battle scenes were amazing.
Posted on 2/20/23 at 10:49 pm to deeprig9
Ebert summed it up best.
quote:
"The Birth of a Nation is not a bad film because it argues for evil. Like Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will, it is a great film that argues for evil. To understand how it does so is to learn a great deal about film, and even something about evil."
Posted on 2/21/23 at 9:30 am to skrayper
Only on TD does a thread about Birth of a Nation being an incredible, massively important movie with despicable content have multiple shadow downvoters 
Down voters surely splooged to the ending
Down voters surely splooged to the ending
Posted on 2/21/23 at 12:57 pm to deeprig9
It's quite an epic, as is Griffith's follow-up, "Intolerance." That said, I tend to prefer the more modest little feature films of the era, which immediately followed in its wake. Like the William S. Hart westerns ("The Toll Gate" is excellent), or the early DeMille films, like "Old Wives for New." And Mae Marsh, who had such a key role in "Birth," starred the following year (1916) in "Hoodoo Ann," which is a really nice little comedy-melodrama. Little films as these are often entertaining as well as being fascinating relics of americana. "The Flapper" with Olive Thomas, is also something I'd put in this mix.
Posted on 2/21/23 at 1:35 pm to Aeolian Vocalion
Sunrise: A Song of Two Humans by Murnau is great.
Too bad there we didn't live in a world where both silent and 'talkies' co-existed as continued equal artistic expressions.
Similar to, say, color and B&W photography do.
Too bad there we didn't live in a world where both silent and 'talkies' co-existed as continued equal artistic expressions.
Similar to, say, color and B&W photography do.
This post was edited on 2/21/23 at 1:36 pm
Posted on 2/21/23 at 1:44 pm to skrayper
quote:
Triumph of the Will
now this was a powerful film.
Posted on 2/21/23 at 1:47 pm to deeprig9
Technically, probably the finest film of its era and there is no comparable film to it on that basis (outside of niche areas, e.g. Hughes' Hell's Angels)(1930)) until Citizen Kane (1941).
Shorter and more direct: Birth of a Nation was the Citizen Kane of its era.
Shorter and more direct: Birth of a Nation was the Citizen Kane of its era.
Posted on 2/21/23 at 2:25 pm to deeprig9
I like to watch it backwards so it has a happy ending
Posted on 2/21/23 at 4:45 pm to truthbetold
quote:
Only on TD does a thread about Birth of a Nation being an incredible, massively important movie with despicable content have multiple shadow downvoters
That is because hard-core, cowardly racism is still very much a thing. Keyboard racists, who would never actually step forward to defend their disgusting beliefs, instead click and type from the shadows. They would never take up arms, or commit acts of violence, because they lack the guts to do so, not because of some moral reservations. They are no better than the collectivist race-warriors on the other side. They sit at opposite, yet equal, ends of the horseshoe.
Posted on 2/21/23 at 5:39 pm to Locoguan0
It’s funny, when people complain about “woke culture” there is rarely discussions of the cinematography of the movie.
But when people watch Birth if a Nation randomly… it’s purely as lovers of film craft.
But when people watch Birth if a Nation randomly… it’s purely as lovers of film craft.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 8:46 am to deeprig9
The last movie that was filmed before Hollywood went woke
Posted on 2/22/23 at 10:41 am to SammyTiger
quote:
It’s funny, when people complain about “woke culture” there is rarely discussions of the cinematography of the movie.
Kind of a laughably bad take, though. Hollywood has been "woke" since forever. Just take High Noon. The Bolsheviks didn't like getting called out on their Bolshevism so they made a movie calling out the "Red Scare" (which turns out to have not been a "scare", but dead-on balls accurate).
Setting all that aside, High Noon is a great fricking movie, however wrong-headed its politics/bias/agenda. Ditto for something like The China Syndrome (which poisoned Americans against nuclear power, quite wrong-headedly) - GREAT movie, despite that bitch being in it.
quote:
But when people watch Birth if a Nation randomly… it’s purely as lovers of film craft.
One of your heroes, Woodrow Wilson loved that movie, my guy. L-O-V-E-D it. And not just the cinematography, either.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 10:54 am to deeprig9
DW Griffith was a child that grew up right after the Civil War, had several family members that fought and died in the war, heard their stories, and had a front row seat for the "Reconstruction" of the South.
But he was clearly just wanting to make a racist film, right?
But he was clearly just wanting to make a racist film, right?
This post was edited on 2/22/23 at 10:56 am
Posted on 2/22/23 at 10:55 am to deeprig9
I've never seen Birth of a Nation nor have I had much desire to given it's content. My question, though, is what make it such a great film - particularly if you claim to not agree with its underlying message?
Posted on 2/22/23 at 10:59 am to deeprig9
Nate Parker on why he used the title for his 2016 film about Nat Turner's slave rebellion.
quote:
Griffith's film relied heavily on racist propaganda to evoke fear and desperation as a tool to solidify white supremacy as the lifeblood of American sustenance. Not only did this film motivate the massive resurgence of the terror group the Ku Klux Klan and the carnage exacted against people of African descent, it served as the foundation of the film industry we know today. I've reclaimed this title and re-purposed it as a tool to challenge racism and white supremacy in America, to inspire a riotous disposition toward any and all injustice in this country (and abroad) and to promote the kind of honest confrontation that will galvanize our society toward healing and sustained systemic change.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 11:02 am to DaleGribble
quote:
and had a front row seat for the "Reconstruction" of the South.
DW Griffith was born in 1875 and grew up in northern Kentucky and Louisville. He didn't have a front row seat for anything related to Reconstruction.
Posted on 2/22/23 at 11:06 am to GetCocky11
quote:
DW Griffith was born in 1875 and grew up in northern Kentucky and Louisville. He didn't have a front row seat for anything related to Reconstruction.
You might want to tell the people that made this documentary series. Or, at the very least, watch the segment on Griffith and Birth of a Nation.
Hollywood
Posted on 2/22/23 at 11:16 am to deeprig9
We watched Birth Of A Nation in a History class at LSU. That was the 1980’s and would not fly today.
Page 1 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News