The Birth of a Nation (Official Thread)

[Ziggiy]

You're full of shyt bro

No he's not

 

[GoldenGlove]

Just saw a complaint that he showed slaves being lynched but didn't actually show any white people being killed. Is this true?

The complaint is somewhat valid. They show white people get killed on screen but it's tame compared to how you see black people manipulated, tortured and killed on screen.

I posted this a few pages back, but that 'complaint' that you heard is what disappointed me the most about this film.

I'll spoiler it in case you haven't seen it. The dudes who are raving about this are ignoring the disparity in the level of DETAIL in the imagery given to us for how whites were killed vs how blacks were. They instead just bolster up the narrative of the movie being sabotaged and how it's the perfect film. Fact of the matter is, this film could have literally been a black screen for 2 hours and they would have still found a way to dikkride it to death.

Spoiler

My gripe with the movie is that it didn't depict the rebellion well. It didn't have to be on bullshyt like Django... but guess what??? It was based off of a TRUE STORY where white people died, and we hardly see any of that in detail in this film. Just face it, Nate Parker held BACK. 60 white slave holding people whether they were family members or slave owners were killed during this rebellion and there was only 1 brutal death shown in this movie during that period. (the beheading)

In the same light, the movie shows nikkas teeth getting knocked out and fed through a funnel, we see a women get that pumpkin head treatment, we see nikkas with their heads blown off, we see nikkas literally set on fire, we see kids and women hanging from trees... what kind of harsh imagery do we have in this film depicted from the other side? A beheading scene that we barely see. My gripe is that we were sold on this being a different kind of slave movie. Showing Nat Turner's plight and struggle, and how he was a hero for doing what he did. But the images that I'm left with from this film aren't from what Nat did or his revenge/rebellion... it's the same images that I've already seen on film time and time again.

This shyt was such a letdown. Dudes really just propping it up cause a black man made it, and that's fine. I'm not going to run on social media and shyt on this film. I'm just shocked people are just blindly putting this film on a pedestal. It was really like your typical slave movie to the core.

Another gripe I had (which I mentioned in a post earlier, but people ignored it) was how the movie didn't show us what Nat was doing to survive during the time after the rebellion til when he was captured. The time period was from Aug - Oct, and the movie just shows us what's probably a fake scenario where he's talking to his wife in the bushes in the field. That would have been more interesting and unique to his story than the same ol same ol that we got here.

The one thing that the story excelled at was showing how Christianity was used to control slaves during that time. I respected that aspect. But much of everything else, just fell flat for me, or just felt rushed. Highly disappointed in this man, smh.

 

[GoldenGlove]

No he's not

The beheading scene was tame and we barely see it.
Nat killing his master was weak as fukk also. He hacks him with an axe, then he bleeds out in the hallway.
On top of that... he goes outside and vomits afterwards.

There's really NO comparison when we compare the brutality shown throughout the rebellion to what they showed prior to it. NONE.

I'll remember seeing a little white kid skipping around with a noose around a little black girl's neck far more than anything shown in the rebellion...
I'll remember seeing that dude's teeth being knocked out and fed with a funnel more than anything shown during the rebellion...
I'll remember seeing kids hung from the trees and men being set on fire more than anything shown during the rebellion...

Ask yourself this question? Why was it such a focal point for these scenes/images to be driven home for 95% of the movie, but when it's time to show the rebellion we don't see anything the other way around? So we can see little black kids and women lynched, but we can't see any white kids or women killed?

Why is that? Anybody looking at this movie with an unbiased point of view will call out that bullshyt for what it is. I wanted to love this shyt, but it's really nothing worth hyping up like some of you all are doing. I literally haven't went out and saw a movie in theaters since last December, and I was just let down by this film.

 

[mson]

The beheading scene was tame and we barely see it.
Nat killing his master was weak as fukk also. He hacks him with an axe, then he bleeds out in the hallway.
On top of that... he goes outside and vomits afterwards.

There's really NO comparison when we compare the brutality shown throughout the rebellion to what they showed prior to it. NONE.

I'll remember seeing a little white kid skipping around with a noose around a little black girl's neck far more than anything shown in the rebellion...
I'll remember seeing that dude's teeth being knocked out and fed with a funnel more than anything shown during the rebellion...
I'll remember seeing kids hung from the trees and men being set on fire more than anything shown during the rebellion...

Ask yourself this question? Why was it such a focal point for these scenes/images to be driven home for 95% of the movie, but when it's time to show the rebellion we don't see anything the other way around? So we can see little black kids and women lynched, but we can't see any white kids or women killed?

Why is that? Anybody looking at this movie with an unbiased point of view will call out that bullshyt for what it is. I wanted to love this shyt, but it's really nothing worth hyping up like some of you all are doing. I literally haven't went out and saw a movie in theaters since last December, and I was just let down by this film.

What would have made it a better film to you? Whites being killed on screen is what's missing?

 

[patscorpio]

dope movie..i liked it...although watching with 2 old white women as the only ones in the theater was not cool

 

[Birnin Zana]

You're full of shyt bro

Bullshyt. That beheading scene had by far the biggest reaction from the audience in my theater. If you think that shyt was tame, fine, but everyone was either gasping, groaning, saying "wtf, oh shyt" and so on. Some people even clapped, giving it a round of applause. And that dude definitely wasn't the only white person killed on screen.

If you have an issue with the body count as far as white people are concerned, that's on you. Breh was asking if white people get killed on screen. The answer to that question is a 100% yes. And some of those deaths were pretty gruesome, with one of them arguably being the most gruesome of the film.

 

[lightskin jermaine]

The complaint is somewhat valid. They show white people get killed on screen but it's tame compared to how you see black people manipulated, tortured and killed on screen.

I posted this a few pages back, but that 'complaint' that you heard is what disappointed me the most about this film.

I'll spoiler it in case you haven't seen it. The dudes who are raving about this are ignoring the disparity in the level of DETAIL in the imagery given to us for how whites were killed vs how blacks were. They instead just bolster up the narrative of the movie being sabotaged and how it's the perfect film. Fact of the matter is, this film could have literally been a black screen for 2 hours and they would have still found a way to dikkride it to death.

this was my biggest gripe as well.

Spoiler

i think what breh is considering the worst death in the movie is that cac who got decapitated but even then we didn't see the head being sawed off

 

[GoldenGlove]

What would have made it a better film to you? Whites being killed on screen is what's missing?

Yes.

The rebellion and uprising should have been the focus. The brutality of that is what was missed. Most of the movie we see our people in the same light that every other slave movie offers... Slaves getting lynched, raped, beaten, tortured, mutilated etc, etc, etc... But when the uprising happens they show the lightest Rated R deaths I've seen in a film. Why couldn't it have been the opposite?

 

[GoldenGlove]

Bullshyt. That beheading scene had by far the biggest reaction from the audience in my theater. If you think that shyt was tame, fine, but everyone was either gasping, groaning, saying "wtf, oh shyt" and so on. Some people even clapped, giving it a round of applause. And that dude definitely wasn't the only white person killed on screen.

If you have an issue with the body count as far as white people are concerned, that's on you. Breh was asking if white people get killed on screen. The answer to that question is a 100% yes. And some of those deaths were pretty gruesome, with one of them arguably being the most gruesome of the film.

Ok breh


The scene was lite compared to damn near everything else you saw done to our people. Seeing lil kids swinging in the trees was more disturbing than that weak ass beheading... The dudes getting set on fire was more disturbing than that scene. I'm a let you cook tho. Keep up the good fight.

 

[gluvnast]

This film was overrated.... it was another stereotypical slave victimization film with MAYBE 7 minutes about the rebellion itself! Nat Turner was black people's first REAL revolutionary and how Nate depicted it didn't due him enough justice. Maybe the focus SHOULD of been more about the 48 hours of the massive slave revolt and the build up mainly on how he got it organized rather than the same ol' cliche slave horrors that we should be SICK & TIRED of seeing by now. This film was supposed to be different from the rest, and it dropped the ball, IMO.

It is a SHAME in this day and age, a FICTIONAL-based from called Django Unchained gave us the most truest and balanced analysis on slavery and variety of black people that was forced to coexist in slavery with the slave oppressors and owners getting theirs. Makes me respect that film even more.

Not to mention the fact how it ended is a COMPLETE rip-off from Braveheart if anyone haven't noticed. Very disappointed for this film. Nate only gets a pass because this was his very 1st film he directed as well as produced. But he focused on the wrong aspect.... he focused on the VERY THING we did not want to have focus on, time and time again.... it should of been more about the revolt itself with just small enough backstory to understand his motivations... and not a full 2hrs with just 7 minutes of the revolt.

 

[gluvnast]

Yes.

The rebellion and uprising should have been the focus. The brutality of that is what was missed. Most of the movie we see our people in the same light that every other slave movie offers... Slaves getting lynched, raped, beaten, tortured, mutilated etc, etc, etc... But when the uprising happens they show the lightest Rated R deaths I've seen in a film. Why couldn't it have been the opposite?

To be fair, the entire film was rather light in itself showing of brutality. I mean 12 YEARS A SLAVE did not hold back at all in depicting how grossly horrific a life as a slave was.

 

[SirBiatch]

This film was overrated.... it was another stereotypical slave victimization film with MAYBE 7 minutes about the rebellion itself! Nat Turner was black people's first REAL revolutionary and how Nate depicted it didn't due him enough justice. Maybe the focus SHOULD of been more about the 48 hours of the massive slave revolt and the build up mainly on how he got it organized rather than the same ol' cliche slave horrors that we should be SICK & TIRED of seeing by now. This film was supposed to be different from the rest, and it dropped the ball, IMO.

It is a SHAME in this day and age, a FICTIONAL-based from called Django Unchained gave us the most truest and balanced analysis on slavery and variety of black people that was forced to coexist in slavery with the slave oppressors and owners getting theirs. Makes me respect that film even more.

Not to mention the fact how it ended is a COMPLETE rip-off from Braveheart if anyone haven't noticed. Very disappointed for this film. Nate only gets a pass because this was his very 1st film he directed as well as produced. But he focused on the wrong aspect.... he focused on the VERY THING we did not want to have focus on, time and time again.... it should of been more about the revolt itself with just small enough backstory to understand his motivations... and not a full 2hrs with just 7 minutes of the revolt.

I hear you. but when you've got a budget of $7-10 mil, extensive battle scenes are impossible.

The battle scene thing is actually not part of Nat Turner's actual story. Scenes of them going from house to house slaying people might have been good. Then again, it's hard to say. It might get monotonous.

 

[Crayola Coyote]

Old tricks? The man raped a chick. It's literally right there in the case for all to see, his own damn words admitting that he fukked someone who was unconscious. You don't see why something that bad is causing people, specifically women, from staying away from seeing this movie?

There was a huge bidding war for this movie. It was supposed to be a BIG film. Not 12 Years A Slave big but still, it was going to do well.

What chick did he rape? Court said there was no evidence. So what chick did he rape?

 

[Crayola Coyote]

Tariq Nasheed: "White Women have a long history of lying on Black Men. It's a White Supremacy Tradition"

Rosewood was a dope
Movie. Dude was putting in work on the kkk.

 

[HHR]

Eh. This story deserved a less amateurish filmmaker. Intermittently powerful, but mostly a bit of a slog.