D. W. Griffith's The Birth of a Nation is considered a landmark American film that ushered in many of the hallmarks of classic Hollywood cinema. It is preserved in the National Film Registry and is listed in the top 100 films of all time by AMC cable channel and the AFI (American Film Institute). Yet it is also a film which advocates white supremacy and lionizes the Klu Klux Klan. Can such a film truly be great? Why or why not? What about other films such the Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will a film that trumpets Nazi ideology and celebrates Adolph Hitler? Do political and moral statements matter in an artwork? Or is it enough to be technically and artistically brilliant? Can an artwork's message trump its style?
I do not believe that Birth of A Nation should be considered in any means great because of the political statement it creates, but I think it still should be taught in schools. The only viable piece of this movie that can be considered “great” is the camerawork and technological advancements in movie making. However, camerawork alone is not enough to make a movie “great.” An accomplishment should not be considered such if in order to accomplish it, they do it at the expense of groups of people. The entire plot of the movie should be considered propaganda for the KKK, as they were viewed as “heroes”. The political statement a movie makes and the message throughout is what they are presenting to the viewer. Grifith wanted people, after watching Birth of A Nation, to dehumanize people of color and buy into an anti-POC way of thinking. His purpose for people watching it was not for them to simply say “Wow! What a great reverse shot!” I believe this is very important because the message of a movie is what sits with people and stirs changes in thinking, not the camera work. However, I do not think that this means that this film should not be taught in schools. Since this movie set the framework for Hollywood’s creation, it does have important elements in filmmaking to notice. To completely avoid discussion or showing of any parts of this movie is to deny that it happened. In order to keep progressing as a society, we need to look back to the past and critically analyze things that were culturally acceptable at the time.
ReplyDeleteChloe Katz
DeleteAlthough cinema is a complexion of both the artist's message and the artwork itself, an artist's talents can never outweigh their immoral message. D.W. Griffith is known as one of the first filmmakers to utilize common filming techniques seen in Hollywood today: close-up, mid-shot, long shot, and cross-cutting. In The Birth of a Nation, Griffith relies on the technique of cross-cutting to help convey the intensity of a chase scene to his audience, something that had never been explored in cinema before. However, that chase scene, and the film in its entirety, also furthered the racial stigma between black males and white women; white women were seen as pure and untouchable, whereas black men were seen as the ones who would forcefully contaminate that pureness. In the film, a close-up shot of the white male in blackface emphasizes his lust for the white girl. Griffith portrays the black male as the villain, the white woman as the innocent victim, and the white male as the hero. The Birth of a Nation became a source of propaganda used heavily by the KKK, increasing their followers to the millions. In the 1920s, because of the film's depiction of all black men as sexual predators, there was a rise in the number of lynchings of black men. It is impossible to ignore the racial injustices fueled by D.W. Griffith's work while also trying to honor his contribution to the cinema industry today; the same applies to other works that advocate immoral political ideology. Many films use similar techniques as Griffith, but do not partake in racist ideas. D.W. Griffith did indeed utilize impressive film techniques, but they will never compensate for the racist messages he expressed.
ReplyDeleteIt is impossible to see Birth of a Nation’s high quality camera work without also seeing the atrociously obvious racism that is the central theme of the film. The film was definitely revolutionary in its techniques with the camera, but Griffith was simply the first filmmaker to utilize these techniques. In fact, there is nothing particularly ingenious about these techniques, as they are simply different ways of using a camera and framing. Without Griffith, it wouldn’t have been long at all until some other creative filmmaker without such racist beliefs stepped up and “invented” the same techniques. Regardless, this film is not worthy of respect simply because of the racist ideas within. I believe that any art form is a way of putting emotions or views into art, which makes the art dynamic and interesting not only on an outer level, but on a personal level to the consumer. I think that this is one of the most important parts of a work of art, which is why I think Birth of a Nation is so unworthy of any respect. The entire message of the film is that of racism, from the use of actors in blackface, depicting black men as sexual beasts who white women should fear, to the heroic portrayal of the KKK as a group who saves defenseless white people from POC. These messages are all very harmful, and greatly outweigh any of the good qualities that the film carries in its cinematography. However, it is still important to cover when learning about film, as it is the earliest example of cross cuts, close ups, mid shots, and long shots being used in such quick succession. Still, it should not be praised for these things, only acknowledged, as the views within are simply too harmful to carry any respect with them.
ReplyDeleteAlthough Birth of a Nation's plot is very problematic, the film should still be studied. Many argue that it should not be taught because the main story is racist. Griffith's 1915 piece includes a story of a man in blackface who wants to sexually assault a 'defenseless' white woman. This in its self provides enough proof because it portrays the 'black' man as a evil, sexual predator who wants to take the white woman's virginity, which was seen as the worst thing that could possibly happen. The woman shows this by jumping off a cliff to avoid death because it will save her from rape. Then, a white, wealthy man chases away the 'black' man and tries to save the woman. The whole message that Griffith is trying to show is that black people were crazy, sex-driven; monsters and white men had to save white women from them. If this is all someone heard about this film, they would figure that the film should just be completely ignored and left behind. However, on the contrary, if someone had only heard that this was the first film to introduce many modern film techniques at once like mid-shots, long shots, extreme long shots, etc., they would think that everyone should explore and respect it. The right answer on what to do with this film lies somewhere in the middle. We have become knowledgeable enough to recognize the issues this movie creates and learn from them, so that we can also acknowledge how innovative the techniques used were. It is not a very intellectual decision to avoid learning history because it is racist, in fact, there are things we can learn from our troublesome past, while still studying technological advancements that changed our lives.
ReplyDeleteAlthough D.W. Griffith's Birth of a Nation is praised for its breakthrough film techniques and the fact that it paved the way for current day Hollywood cinema, I don't think it should be considered a great film because of its extremely racist ideals and depictions. While yes, it is an important milestone and influence in the film industry strictly for its filming techniques, we cannot let that reason outweigh the fact that it is one of the most racist movies ever created. Even within what is it praised for most, its different variations of shots, there are racist actions taking place. You can admire the close-ups, wide shots, cross-cutting, and more, but how can you truly appreciate them when what they are depicted is blatantly racist? For example, many different shooting techniques are used as the audience sees Flora, a young girl depicted as innocent and vulnerable, filling a bucket with water in the forest. She is followed and eventually approached by Gus, a black man (very clearly in black face). He proceeds to chase her throughout the woods, as there are many cross-cut scenes as well as close-ups, to display emotion and expression, and wide shots to show the surrounding trees. Although this is what the film was originally commended for, a main part where all of these shots are presented is while an "innocent and pure" white girl is being violently pursued by a "forceful" black man. To further this, at the end of the scene, she jumps off a cliff to avoid being pursued by this black man. She would rather kill herself than leave the man the opportunity to get to her. All while extreme close-ups and longshots are used. I truly do not think that a film can be seen as "great", even if it is praising something different than the story, when ideals such as these are still present. I think it is something that we should continue to teach so that we can understand how racially problematic this time was and how that is represented in the film. We can't generalize the film as great because of one thing, because the bad here will always outweigh the good.
ReplyDeleteAlthough D.W. Griffith's Birth of a Nation is praised for its breakthrough film techniques and the fact that it paved the way for current day Hollywood cinema, I don't think it should be considered a great film because of its extremely racist ideals and depictions. While yes, it is an important milestone and influence in the film industry strictly for its filming techniques, we cannot let that reason outweigh the fact that it is one of the most racist movies ever created. Even within what is it praised for most, its different variations of shots, there are racist actions taking place. You can admire the close-ups, wide shots, cross-cutting, and more, but how can you truly appreciate them when what they are depicted is blatantly racist? For example, many different shooting techniques are used as the audience sees Flora, a young girl depicted as innocent and vulnerable, filling a bucket with water in the forest. She is followed and eventually approached by Gus, a black man (very clearly in black face). He proceeds to chase her throughout the woods, as there are many cross-cut scenes as well as close-ups, to display emotion and expression, and wide shots to show the surrounding trees. Although this is what the film was originally commended for, a main part where all of these shots are presented is while an "innocent and pure" white girl is being violently pursued by a "forceful" black man. To further this, at the end of the scene, she jumps off a cliff to avoid being pursued by this black man. She would rather kill herself than leave the man the opportunity to get to her. All while extreme close-ups and longshots are used. I truly do not think that a film can be seen as "great", even if it is praising something different than the story, when ideals such as these are still present. I think it is something that we should continue to teach so that we can understand how racially problematic this time was and how that is represented in the film. We can't generalize the film as great because of one thing, because the bad here will always outweigh the good.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIt is wrong to consider Birth of a Nation a great film because although the production techniques inspired future filmmaking, the plot is blatantly racist and promotes terrible ideology. For its time, the film has many advancements with camerawork and editing, using close-ups and POV shots, however, no one enjoys a movie solely because of the techniques used. The average person goes to see a movie because of its plot, and some may also end up appreciating the cinematography and editing. To consider this a great film, the plot needs to be outstanding which is far from the case. D.W. Griffith bases the plot on racist views and encourages violence, racism, and prejudice against black people. Griffith portrays the people of color in the film as rapists and threats, while the white males always end up saving the day, as seen in the chase scene in the woods. Furthermore, if Griffith did not invent these film techniques, another filmmaker eventually would have. Even considering Griffith artistically brilliant would be incorrect because of the way he depicts black people using blackface and encouraging negative stereotypes, such as being a threat to white people. Griffith is no better than Leni Riefenstahl, who had the same intent as Griffith to negatively depict a persecuted group of people. Griffith did not create this film to change the ways of filmmaking. He used new techniques of filmmaking to encourage enrollment in the KKK and create a spike in violence towards people of color. Even though this film includes many negative aspects, it is important to teach to others. An issue with education is when people leave out the negative aspects of history. The ideology behind Birth of a Nation deserves to be heavily condemned, however, it is a part of history and is something to learn from. The film was also a pioneer for the techniques of shooting and editing films, which is why it is important to acknowledge in film class. It is incorrect to consider Birth of a Nation a great film because of the horrible plot and intent, but it is important to learn about it because of the impact it had on filmmaking and America.
ReplyDeleteDevil’s Advocate:
ReplyDeleteBy no means should the message "Birth of a Nation" spreads be considered acceptable, however, because of its groundbreaking style, it should be considered a great film, nowadays more than ever. Any well-educated viewer will understand the gravity of the movie and not take the meaning to heart. “Birth of a Nation” cannot be watched as just an everyday modern film. The two aspects of the film (plot and editing style) need to be separated to appreciate its greatness. The plot, that includes a young white woman being chased by a man in black face and advocates for white supremacy and the Klu Klux Klan, is incredibly racist and potentially harmful to society. However, now with much higher racial awareness, in a safe environment this hateful message becomes a learning point for future generations. The fact that some of the first movies in this style were being used to spread racism shows what the time period was like. In the right context, “Birth of a Nation” can be used for good in our society. On the other hand, the editing techniques used in the film revolutionized the industry. D.W. Griffith used many styles that had never been seen before. Throughout the chase scene Griffith uses cross cuts along with extreme long shots of the forest to show distance between the woman, the ‘black man,’ and the woman’s brother. Additionally, he direction matches to show how the brother is tracking down his sister. These are just a few examples of the incredibly advanced techniques Griffith uses throughout the movie. Because of the stylistic choices he makes and how advanced it was for it’s time, “Birth of a Nation” is one of the great films.
"Birth of a Nation" spreads an undeniable hateful message while showing the evolutions in technology for the film industry. While I believe that it is a revolutionary film and should be celebrated for the positives it made and the advancements it created its blatent racism and sexism can not just be ignored. When you watch it no matter how you look at it, it is not an average film. To get an accurate idea of what the movie is it needs to be split between the movie style itself and what it supports. Using crosscuts was a very advanced idea and executing it so well was insane for the time that it came out. On the other hand he made the girl require help from a man and the "black man" who was a white man in black face was portrayed to be evil and forceful as if he didn't have a heart. This is why I believe it should be recognized but not commended, it adds a lot to the cinema world but takes steps back in racism and sexism.
ReplyDeleteD. W. Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation, should still be taught in schools, but only when it’s being taught specifically to address and unpack the heinous racism and societal impact it had. It should no longer be celebrated as a “great film” in any way, because art is inseparable from the political and moral statements that it makes. The fact that this film, which was often used as a sort of ‘recruitment video’ for the KKK, is still included in any list of great American films, is indicative of the pervasive racism that permeates the media consumption in this country. It is impossible to pick and choose which parts of the movie to celebrate, and which to condemn, because they are all part of the same whole, created with terrible intentions. The aspect of Griffith’s work that is often considered “great” is his actual film techniques. He used editing and filming skills that had not been seen before, and revolutionized the filmmaking process. However, he used his newfound skills to create a deeply dehumanizing final product. It was created to affect the opinion of the general public and encourage them towards believing principles of white supremacy and extreme anti-blackness. No amount of panning shots can outweigh the negative implications this had on actual human lives, and society as a whole. It opened up a Pandora’s box of sorts, of inescapably racist media inspired by Griffith’s work. That is why I don’t believe that The Birth of a Nation should be celebrated for its innovation, even as we continue to learn about it’s existence and effect on the world.
ReplyDeleteThe Birth of a Nation can be considered a great film in terms of cinematic innovation, but for that only. I believe that as long as the cutting edge editing and filming strategies are separated from the racist message the movie communicates, the movie can be looked at in a positive, appreciative aspect. However, if the movie were to be considered as a whole (including both the cinematic skill and message the movie conveys), the negative message of the movie outweighs the positive film innovation; overall, The Birth of America would not be able to be considered a "great film". In today's time however, the movie is almost always analyzed with a knowledgeable background, thus the influence can be easily avoided. The inaccurate portrayals of African Americans by white actors with blackface can be pointed out easily, and thus the racism is acknowledged. With the right guidance, the racist message this film conveys can be seen and the influence avoided. For example, when the black man that is portrayed by a white man in blackface is seen to be a lustful, barbaric type of man, the right guidance and approach to analyzing the film will allow the viewer to see this racism and know that it is wrong. In fact, with the right teachings, this movie can be used to reverse the impact it had on Americans when it first came out. Not only racist, but also sexist implications the move has can be pointed, which can then develop the viewers ability to spot more of these such things in their daily lives. I believe the top 100 films of the century included this film because of its technical innovations in the film industry. It wouldn't make much sense for a film ranking list to choose films with a good message but bad execution. The message of the movie does not seem to be taken into account, or is taken lightly when ranking the movies.
ReplyDeleteThe blatant racism should override the revolutionizing film techniques that D.W Griffith displays in The Birth of a Nation. The film is considered monumental in the American film industry being that it was the “first” film to implement newer film shots that would change how movies were filmed forever. Griffith used techniques such as long shots, closeups, cross cuts, and others. These techniques can be looked at, but there are many other films that include the same film cuts and angles that aren’t nearly as racist. While viewing this film today, it is important to recognize and acknowledge the racism that is ongoing throughout the film. Just in the scene we viewed in class, we were able to see a white woman chased by a man in blackface. The first closeup shot we get in this scene is of the man in blackface while he is spying on the lady. In this shot, he is surrounded by twigs and bushes showing how he is trying to be sneaky and hide himself. These little details all add up to one whole racist film. The main goal of the scene and the movie isn’t to show film techniques; it is to portray the black man as sneaky, dangerous, and threatening to white women. This film being ranked high in the top 100 shows that critics downplay the racism However, it is crucial to recognize the significance and message that the film and Griffith are really trying to convey; it is one of racism.
ReplyDeleteDespite the breakthroughing techniques D.W. Griffith incorporates in the film Birth of a Nation the racist propaganda and underlying outdated themes outweigh any praise or means for identifying the film as great. There is no denying D.W. Griffith’s talent and creativity when it comes to the technical and film focused areas of the movie. He incorporated many new technological innovations and storytelling techniques, including flashbacks, crosscutting, closeups, panoramic filming, and color tinting, all of which rose the dramatic and emotional effects for viewers. However, it is difficult to appreciate these innovations with the racist actions and themes it covers. For example, in one scene, Flora, the young and innocent protagonist, is being approached by Gus, a frightening and intrusive man obviously in black face. The scene opens with Flora dilly dallying around on a walk as she decides to go into the forest. It switches between POV shots with her and a random squirrel in a nearby tree. The cameras additionally cut to Flora’s hands filling up a bucket in a stream: calm, safe, and pure. After this, the scene cuts to Gus approaching Flora. One thing I found interesting was how they placed Gus in front of rigid and complex branches while looking at Flora. It seemed to symbolize that Gus’s brain was spirling with rigid thoughts and had something scary planned, unlike Flora, whose brain was like the stream, simple and unaware. The scene then moves into a thrilling chase scene after Flora was “threatened” by Gus’s proposal, although she perceives it as a threat to her purity and body. Towards the end of the chase both Gus and Flora come to the end of a cliff, keeping the audience at the edge of their seats. She ends up jumping off the cliff to her death, not giving it a second thought. Being “violated” by Gus to her was worse than any type of death. All in all, I would not call this film great because even if one were to judge solely the innovative film techniques, the overall theme and forward racist message plays through too powerfully. I think this film should still be watched by future and current generations to teach and continue to grow away from the norms of 1915. Birth of a Nation reminds us of how far we have come for technological advancements and the treatment of women and different races but also forces us to take a good look at our current reality to show that we still have a long way to go.
ReplyDeleteEven though D.W. Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation reached beyond the known capabilities of film making at the time, the message of the film is too great to recognize this film as a great film. I will admit, the ways in which scenes were set up, such as the use of wide, close, and disorienting frames and angles during the chase scene between the white women and the man in blackface, were quite remarkable. The fact how the shots were calculated in ways that make us recognize each landscape as the white women’s brother tries to find his sister. From the extreme wide shot of the forest and the cliff, to the close-ups of the women under the pine tree and the vignette shots from the point of view of the predator, this film had me on the edge of my seat as I watched the brother miss saving his sister by a heartbeat as she jumps off the cliff to save herself from getting her body polluted by the predator. Yet, the racist and problematic themes of this film are unforgivable. By presenting a sexually-charged man and black face attacking a white women, we see how D.W. Griffith’s film leads viewers to unconsciously villainize people of color and to view white women as vulnerable, pure, damsels in distress. Especially in the time of reconstruction and intense tension between white communities and communities of color, this film has perpetuated problematic ideas that still stain this nation as of today. Some examples include the clear blackface and bulging of the eyes on the man in blackface, the helpless, cannot-do-wrong women who can’t fetch a bucket of water without getting attacked (and killing herself out of fear of not having a “pure” body), and the heroic, white male brother. The messages and generalizations this film makes about certain groups outweigh any amount of artistry, craftiness, and innovation this film could have offered to us.
ReplyDeleteI believe that D.W Griffith's, The Birth of a Nation, should be considered a great film because the film's quality should be judged on its phenomenal technical aspects and not personal opinion of the film. Even though the film is horribly racist for glorifying the Ku Klux Klan and its mistreatment of African Americans, this should not define the quality of the film. Some of the greatest films in history, like The Godfather, are sexist and racist but are still regarded as some of the greatest films of all time. It is wrong to judge the quality of a film with subjective measures. Whether someone agrees or disagrees with the messages in The Birth of a Nation doesn't change the fact that its technical qualities were groundbreaking. Personal opinion about the film differs greatly person to person and over different time period. For this reason, Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of Will could be a great film if it exhibits great objective features. If the film was innovative with its editing and style then it is possible for it to be highly regarded. Even though the message it sends about supporting Adolf Hitler and the NAZI regime is wrong, this cannot define the films value. NAZIs would have agreed with the meaning of the film but everyone else would disagree. While political and moral statements are critical in the film industry, they cannot determine the significance of a film because they are solely based on personal opinion. Whereas, if a film is artistically brilliant, this can be widely agreed upon regardless of political or moral standing. I believe that an artist's style will always trump their message because the quality of style can be agreed upon by everyone no matter how they feel about the films message. Overall, The Birth of a Nation should be considered a great film because of Griffith's remarkable film and editing techniques.
ReplyDeleteD.W. Griffith’s film, The Birth of a Nation should be considered a great film despite its overt racism because the quality of a film is determine not by its actual message, but rather by its ability to convey said themes. A movie, like any work of art is a tool of communication that attempts, through different means than language, to connect with an audience; as such, the value of said piece must be determined by its medium. To judge it by its message would be akin to judging the beauty of the English language based off how moral or intricate the ideas are that the average person conveys using it. As such, the film does a remarkable job at pioneering new techniques in cinema. The dizzying display of wide and close frames during the chase scene were fantastic at immersing the audience in the climax of the film. Furthermore, the display of twisted branches behind the man’s head in the first close up was perfectly timed to hint at coming danger and mingle man made terror with the natural horror of the outdoors. It simply cannot be doubted that these techniques were not only incredibly effective, but also influenced cinema for many decades to come. This is not to say however, that the racism does not take away anything from the film, because it is certainly true that by choosing such a simple and animalistic narrative the film limits its creative capacity. If D.W. Griffith, or any of the other racist artists listed that may or may not have created great films, had chosen to utilize the same techniques but instead explored the depths of philosophical thought, he would have likely created not just a great film, but a masterpiece that is remembered as such forever.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteD. W. Griffith's The Birth of a Nation, a film that is considered significant by many, should be condemned for its message. Although the film paved the way for many of the future, its statement is too abhorrent. The movie is linked to the KKK movement as they used it for recruiting at the time. Yes, the film had terrific camera work and was a pioneer in technology for cinema, but the message takes away those achievements. The film's purpose was not to be viewed as a historically excellent film but for dehumanizing African Americans and promoting the KKK as heroes.
When a film showcases such vulgar actions, the message takes the focus instead of the film's actual quality. Therefore The Birth of a Nation should not be praised, and it shouldn't be considered a great movie by any measure. Looking at other films in the past, such as Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will, which shows Nazi ideology, I believe that films' moral statements matter. If this film made was a different subject matter, it would be considered one of the greats, but its message takes the attention. The focus of the film is no longer how excellent the camera work is. It is centered on racism and horrible, false examples of the truth. Today's world, there are many examples of past films and pieces of art that are no longer considered to be great due to their racist backgrounds. In a world where racism is so apparent, many people's names are tarnished just because of a specific event in the past. Therefore a film in which promotes racism should not be considered excellent in any standard. It is very tough to make that moral decision as the film used so many great techniques that lead to many other movies and improved those other films' quality. In conclusion, it should not be considered one of the greats as the morally wrong and apparent racism tarnishes its technological breakthrough.
This was written by Stone Zashin
DeleteOne of my favorite songs is called Boyz-N -the Hood by Eazy-E. The first time I listened to it I felt like I was listening to someone telling a story about their usual day in the hood. His rap has profanity and offensive lyrics. In one line he says, “So I grabbed the stupid b**** by her nappy a** weave… Reached back like a pimp and slapped the hoe”. In the song he talks about beating women, punching people out, shooting up a courtroom, killing people who steal from him, beating up cops, being arrested, and many other illegal acts. Even though Eazy-E raps about all of the terrible things he does with pride it also represents how a song can be truly great with many crude and derogatory lyrics. “Birth of a Nation” has controversial ideologies that many people do not agree with. While watching the clip I was filled with anger and rage. I was ready to go on a rant about how appalling the film was. But as I was thinking back to the emotions I was feeling, I realized that even though I do not agree with the message of the film it could still be considered a “good” movie since it made me feel an emotion so passionately. I hate movies that are bland, and does not make you have any feelings about how good or bad it was, the movie just continued. “Birth of a Nation” is far from bland. D. W. Griffith’s film, while it has many racist and sexist tropes, is a great movie. People may disagree with me because of its negative political and moral statements which are demeaning but there are plenty of awful things today that are considered great but are just as racist or sexist.
ReplyDelete
ReplyDeleteWhile the famous film, Birth of A Nation, by D.W. Griffith is ahead of its time technologically with its camera work, it by no means should be ranked as a great film in history because of its blatant racist antics. To get the good aspects out of the way, the camera work was phenomenal given the time period it was filmed in. D.W. Griffith was one of the first directors to use a plethora of shots in a film, such as close-ups, long shots, and some POV shots. When analyzing a film the camera work is of course an aspect that goes into it, but how important is it actually? Camera work does add depth to films, but it can only take one so far. The racist tone Birth of A Nation takes makes it completely unacceptable in today’s day and age. The film also portrays African-Americans as an animalistic character, which is completely dehumanizing. Even the camera work helps depict the black face painted character to be scary. He will show up in spots you would not expect him to similar to horror films. Now more than ever, in a time where our country is at one of its most racially divided points in modern history, as a society we should recognize that this film is full of hatred and stereotypes. By preserving it and having it ranked in the top 100 films, it shows that there is room for hate here and that it can be tolerated, therefore it should not be. While I do believe some political statements in films can provide a much deeper thought provoking message, it can never be a message of hatred. Therefore, the camera work does not actually matter in the end as the movie is filled with discrimination and support of hate groups.
Any work of art that portrays discrimination towards others should not be glorified, regardless of its artistic aspect, as its message can be detrimental and dangerous to the lives of those who are targeted by the art. The Birth of a Nation is “nothing more than racist propaganda”, as “Griffith's epic reveals an important moment in film history, when cinematic storytelling developed as popular art in the service of racism."(85) The fact that filmmakers made racist films (which were propaganda) was and still is harmful towards black people. Films with messages like this inspired white supremacists to accept Jim Crow laws and racist ideologies, putting the lives of black people constantly in danger. Anyone can see that racism was portrayed in the name of art, especially when examining the technicalities of The Birth of a Nation today. The film used techniques such as low lighting to create a very ominous energy every time the white man in black face was in a scene. The look in the actor’s eyes screamed pedophile, as this was one of the negative ways black men were portrayed in this film. It is clear through the “artistic” aspect of the film that the only intentions behind it were malicious towards black people. Not only was the message of The Birth of a Nation horrific, but so was what was happening behind the scenes, as Griffith “went so far as to segregate the cast." (84) His actions made the black actors feel not welcomed and unworthy, hindering their potential in this new film making industry in a positive light instead. Just like the message of his film, Griffith wanted to make sure that everyone saw black people as inferior through his actions on set. Historical films like these “impacted the meaning of whiteness in the future."(94) White supremacy and racism still exists today, so glorifying racist films doesn’t fix the problem, as it ends up doing more harm, prolonging the pain of those who encounter racism on a daily basis.
ReplyDeleteMarisa M
DeleteJudging the greatness of a film, or any other work of art for that matter, revolves around two central tenants: the actual quality of the film based on criteria such as cinematography, story, and characters, and the cultural significance of the film during its time period. Truly classic films must not only sustain a high marking in quality decades later, but they also must be representative of and impactful on the culture of the time. D.W. Griffith’s Birth of a Nation fits this description properly on both fronts, being a marvel of cinematic engineering of the time while also having an outsized and extremely negative impact on American society. Birth of a Nation contains a multitude of factors that clearly determine its quality, especially for its time. Its use of innovative techniques such as parallel cuts, matching movement, close shots, and extreme long shots represents a massive leap in cinematography that is still used in film today. Additionally, the film’s use of subtext and symbolism such as the spring representing innocence and the branches coming out of the assailant’s head in the close-up representing his dark thoughts brought a degree of depth into the film that continues in most cinema today. Its hard to argue that Birth of a Nation also did not have a profound cultural impact on America as well. From the rebirth of the Klu Klux clan to a resurgence in Confederate monuments, Birth of a Nation greatly shaped American society in a racist fashion. That legacy leaves a dark mark on the film as its innovative style and substance are diluted with its simplistic dog whistling. However, to claim that Birth of a Nation cannot be great because of its legacy would subject The Godfather and Taxi Driver to the same fate; both films contain scenes that are overtly racist and sexist. In the end, D.W. Griffith’s film Birth of Nation represents a significant step in cinema, too important to be disregarded for its more sinister elements. While the film’s subject matter should be part of the discussion when judging the film, the combination of excellent cinematography and profound symbolism make Birth of a Nation a film that should be remembered as a classic.
ReplyDeleteD. W Griffith’s The Birth of a Nation is a highly controversial movie and for good reason. It is extremely racist and highlights and advocates for white supremacy. It is for this reason I believe that it can not and should not be considered a “great film”. The movie was prefaced to the class as an extremely controversial and racist movie, and for good reason. The films plot is surrounded upon racist beliefs, leaving very little up to interpretation. It can not be arguably great when it spreads such a hateful message. As we advance further and further as a society, we have to continue to consider what content we are willing to give a platform to. Movies such as this do not deserve to be highlighted, despite how great the style of the film may be. It does not trump the message behind it. Providing this movie with a platform, even to discuss its film style, is still providing it with an opportunity to spread the meaning behind the movie. A movies plot is always intentionally written to send a message to the viewer. It is not possible to watch this film without also entertaining the message it is sending to the viewer. There are plenty of movies that can teach students about different film styles without also entertaining racist and discriminatory ideas. I do not find there to be any justification as to why this movie should be streamed in our day and age.
ReplyDeleteCara Kannensohn
Deletethis is cara kannensohn
ReplyDeleteI feel that “Birth of a Nation” can no longer be looked at as an overall “great film.” When the movie was released it was a great film for its intended audience. It was an advancement in film quality and it was the genre many people wanted to see in the past. Due to the advancements in racial ideas, it is hard to watch the film without feeling uncomfortable. There are many other early films with technological advancements that can be viewed for learning porpoises and be enjoyed at the same time. If a teacher wanted to show an early film with the sole porpoise of showing advancements in filming and editing, “Birth of a Nation would be a poor choice. It is impossible to view the film for its technology, without shedding attention on racist ideas. However, “Birth of a Nation,” should still be taught in school because there is a lot to learn from a film standpoint and a race standpoint. Studying this movie will help students answer the question of what were factors that lead people to racist ideologies. “Birth of a Nation,” and many other propaganda filled movies should be studies with the intent of learning about the effect these movies had on its viewers. These movies are a big part of our history, and they should be taught with warnings about the ideologies before watching the film. In conclusion, I wouldn’t call it an overall great movie in the present time because, for many, it’s only good enough for educational porpoises. Jack Spiegle
ReplyDeleteJack Spiegle
Delete