Thursday, October 13, 2016

Why I still think 'The Birth of a Nation' deserves to be seen

After considerable hype and controversy, I finally got a chance to see Nate Parker's Nat Turner biopic The Birth of a Nation tonight.

I've written about the film and the debate over past rape allegations against Parker extensively, so it was hard for me to not view it with some baggage, but here are some of my initial thoughts.

While I respect the motivations for someone wanting to boycott this film, I personally don't agree with that position and I'm not sure what good it actually does. That said, important conversations about consent are being had because of the fallout, and that is an unassailably good thing.

I understand why people have problems with some of Parker's past statements and behavior, but I also happen to believe he's made a terrific film and a provocative piece of art that is worth consideration on its own terms.

That being said, in the wake of 12 Years a Slave and Django Unchained, two films that I thought were superior, I worry that audiences may have become numb, if not desensitized to cinematic portrayals of slavery. The violence, the cruelty, is something we're all familiar with and I am not sure that this film tells us something new about the dehumanizing and debilitating nature of America's greatest sin.

Still, Parker delivers a fantastic lead performance -- one which simmers to a boil -- and for a first-time filmmaker he shows an incredible facility with visual storytelling. Even though the film occasionally lapses into some heavy handedness, he can't be faulted for aiming for the epic when it comes to a story like Turner's.

The Birth of a Nation
The second half of the film succeeds better than the first, when the relatively passive Turner emerges as a more defiant hero. It's a bold choice to sidestep the more queasy aspects of the Turner story (his slaughter of women and children, specifically) to elevate his stature to that of a martyr.

There are allusions -- more emotional than literal -- to modern day fury over the victimization and abuse of black bodies. And most fascinatingly, there are some interesting explorations of the interpersonal relationships and self-images of slaves, as well as the impact the institution has on the whites who profit from it.

But the thrust of this film is more in broad strokes -- its depiction of the horrors of slavery is relatively tasteful but appropriately visceral and while the film takes license with history, it doesn't feel inauthentic at all.

I walked away from this movie curious to see Parker's next film -- if he indeed gets the opportunity. The movie's tepid box office performance, critical re-evaluation that has veered negative (I suspect in part because of the backlash against Parker) and the generally toxic atmosphere surrounding the film pretty much guarantee that it won't be a player come awards season.

My hope though, is that when the furor dies down about Parker -- and it will -- that this film, on an incredibly important and worthwhile subject matter, will be rediscovered on its own terms. It's not a perfect film. But a powerful one.

No comments:

Post a Comment