Rating: 
Summary: One of the first (and best) films ever made!
Review: Birth of a Nation is the quintessential masterpiece that puts D.W. Griffith in his place in American history as the true genius behind filmmaking as an art form. Birth of a Nation is an astonishing film which carries Griffith's heart-felt messages about trust, national pride, and racial tension, which hold up pretty well even 85 years after the fact. Nothing has so effectively symbolized a country torn apart by racism and hate so well as Birth of a Nation. Birth of a Nation always has received lots of negative press for its portrayal of the Ku Klux Klan. Many claim the film exists as merely racist propaganda against blacks. In fact, Griffith was not a racist and directed the whole film as a view of the Civil War from the Southern perspective. Griffith, not-so-ironically, followed this film up with the equally mesmerizing, yet critically panned epic Intolerance. Birth of a Nation deserves to be brought on DVD, as video tape just doesn't do justice to this scratchy silent classic.
Rating: 
Summary: An important moment in cinematic History... racist proganda
Review: I'm a little taken aback that so many reviewers have talked about what an impressive "historical" film this is. It is historical in the sense that it brought forth a new era of cinematic techniques, and as an example that racism permeated so many layers of American society unitl very recently. That a president in the 20th century, Wilson, held this film in such high regard, should be frightening. This film glorifies the Ku Klux Klan. Furthermore, it was produced at the height of lynchings in America. I would encourage viewers to read up both on the origins of the Klan, itself (a kind of historical accident), as well what caused attacks on black-americans to rise so suddenly in the 1890's and continue into the 1920's. When put into the contexts of both these subjects, Birth of a Nation attains an important place in American cinema. One man's patriot, and the film certainly depicts the Klan as true American patriots, really is another man's terrorist.
Rating:
Summary: As a black woman
Review: If I were a black woman living during the era of this film's glory I'd be appalled and very angry. Yes the film is racist. According to today's standards its kind of cheesy. I won't use any PC terminology concerning the portrayal of women. This movie is a hilight of America's not so glorious aspects. I'm upset that the original music played during the film's run is an old favorite of mine. Unforgivable! It's a good history tidbit if nothing else.
Rating:
Summary: The Birth of Seventh Art and history written in lightning
Review: Silent motion picture historical epic, about a Southern family's experiences during the American Civil War (1861-1865) and Reconstruction, based on two novels and a play by Thomas Dixon. The movie costed 110.000 $ and was a big box-office hit, (10.000.000 $ in its time, about 1 billion $ today !!) but it also inspired race riots , protests, boycotts and eventually a move toward film censorship laws. Released in 1915, this film was directed by D. W. Griffith and is notable for its radical technical innovations. The Birth of a Nation is considered among the most important and influential films ever made, for its success established not only the feature-length film but also the Hollywood star system ,Griffith as the leading motion-picture producer of the time and motion pictures as an art form for cultured spectators, stunning audiences with its dazzling spectacle of a still-recent event. Until Griffith's time, motion pictures had been short, rarely exceeding one reel; episodic rather than dramatic; and poorly produced, acted, and edited. Griffith's films were frequently several hours in length, contained powerful dramatic situations and vivid characters, and were produced with technical virtuosity. Besides that's why he is often called The Father of the Motion Picture. Unlike most of his predecessors, Griffith used in Birth a variety of camera angles and close-ups, for dramatic emphasis and moved the camera close to the action, using many separate shots with flashbacks, which for purposes of clarification of plot or characterization, introduce scenes antedating those already shown. He was one of the first to use a technique called crosscutting( parallel editing), which involves switching back and forth between different story lines to achieve suspense, and an other called fade-out, a transition from one scene to another by the gradual disappearance of the first scene from the screen. Griffith's extensively collaborator and legendary cameraman Billy Bitzer did a great work, so did Lillian Gish, Mae Marsh, Miriam Cooper, Henry B. Walthall and other great actors under Griffith's direction that emphasized an intimate, restrained style of acting suitable for camera close-ups.
The film is also notable for the enormous controversy it aroused because of its "racist" portrayal of African Americans, except the faithful servants, and its very pro southern view of Civil War and Reconstruction era. Griffith traces the disastrous effects of Civil War through the lives of two friendly associated families, Camerons from South and Stonemans from North, divided now by war's storm. When Ben Cameron (Henry B. Walthall) returns to the South after the Civil War, he feels that the region is being torn apart by carpetbaggers and black people in positions of power, like Silas Lynch the mullato lieut. Governor of S. Carolina, backed from Radicals (Congress's main political force) and their leader Austin Stoneman (a character merely inspired from radical Edwin Stanton), head of Stonemans's House, who promote complete equality between blacks and whites and the crash of South's white dominion.
After Abraham Lincoln's assasination (truthfully depicted), who stood against the severe treatment toward Southern States, Radicals can easily carry out their plans. Meanwhile a love affair flourishes between Ben and Elsie Stoneman(Lilian Gish), Stoneman's daughter. After a black man (Gus) attacks his little sister (Mae Marsh), Ben organizes the Ku Klux Klan, a name adapted from the Greek word kuklos ("circle"), and with his companions rise the ancient Scotland's "flaming cross", to restore law and order in the South, (...) protecting racial purity. A controversial cause in its own time and repugnant decades later in modern Hollywood. Lynch betrays Stoneman and uses his power to force his daugter Elsie to marry him and plans to turn the South in to a "Black Empire". Elsie resists, defending her "white woman's pride", in a scene where Gish gives a great performance. Finally after an epic ride of Ku Klux Klan's cavalry, and the disarmament of the black federal troops Ben saves his beloved Elsie from Lynch's hands and sets an and to anarchy and oppression. President Woodrow Wilson was so impressed with this version of the Reconstruction that he said it was "like history written in lightning.". IMHO Birth's portrayal of African Americans is no more racist or stereotypical than this of other national groups often harshly humiliated from the US Motion Picture Industry's products, such as the Germans, the Indians, the Japanese, the Russians, the Romans etc., yet none received so much criticism. Before condemning D. W. Griffith that offered a biased view of black people and glorified Ku Klux Klan, we should consider that he was the son of a ex-Confederate Colonel and he grew up attending stories about the Civil War, the South's humiliation during Reconstruction's era, and Klan's rebelion. Therefore, he saw these historical facts through a southern perspective and put all his ideological passion in his work. So, what? As an artist, he had any right to express his beliefs, controversial or not, and anybody can disagree with him using arguments . Intolerance (1916) was Griffith's statement of feeling persecuted for his beliefs.
Rating: 
Summary: Pathetic
Review: So what if it's the first "epic" on film? Its place in the history of cinema is far outweighed by the tragic history of the film itself. For heaven's sake, even the story is awful! "Birth of a Nation," indeed!
Worst of all, this film has blood on it. I do not know how Griffith or anyone else involved in its production were able to live with themselves afterward. It is also unlikely that anyone who just LOVES this film today is not in some way sympathetic to its racist theme, despite any vociferous claims to the contrary. It's like ignoring an elephant in your living room: "It's a beautiful living room; the elephant is not the designer's fault and doesn't matter anyway."
In the serious study of post-civil war history, this film is a joke. However, it WOULD be useful for anyone researching racism in the early twentieth century (unfortunately). Lest we forget, membership in the KKK reached its zenith in the 1920s--thanks in large part to this ridiculous movie.
Like sound in movies, the technical aspects of this film were probably quite impressive to audiences of the time. This does not make it a good film today.
Actually, the premise and caricatures in this film are hilarious and it would be a laugh riot if not for the vicious racism saturating the whole thing. "Why Racists are Idiots" (in reference to the producers and actors in this film--sorry, D.W.) is a much accurate title than "Birth of a Nation" --puh-leeze!!!
Rating:
Summary: A milestone
Review: D.W. Griffith was undoubtedly an artist, a master storyteller, and a visionary in the development of motion pictures. His "Birth of a Nation" is spellbinding as both epic history and intimate love story. The movie's scenes are brilliantly staged and photographed. The use of tints gives this movie a kind of aura. Griffith elicited realistic, natural performances from his talented cast. And the gifted and ethereally beautiful Lillian Gish illuminates the screen whenever she appears. Miss Gish exudes feistiness and strength while looking as delicate as porcelain. She has an angelic face which is quite unforgettable. She makes today's movie stars look ordinary and boring in comparison. The downside of this movie is that it portrays the Ku Klux Klan as noble heroes when in fact they were just a bunch of bigoted murderers. And the film uses racist and very negative stereotypes of black people. It's also disconcerting to see that many of the "black" actors in this movie were actually white people in black face. It looks ludicrous. But Griffith was the wizard who turned popcorn entertainment into artistic triumph and thus changed movies forever.
Rating: 
Summary: TIME HAS BEEN UNKIND
Review: Film historians generally accept that Griffith's Birth of a Nation is a cinematic landmark, basing this opinion upon the fact that there are so many "firsts" in the film-- most specifically, the details of how the film is actually put together from start to finish. But the techniques which made Birth of a Nation so revolutionary in its own time have become commonplace in today's cinema, and in consequence the film has little offer any one than film historians, cinema students, and silent film buffs. One bright point in the film is Mae Marsh, an actress with whom Griffith frequently worked. Marsh's performances have generally given those of the more celebrated Lillian Gish a run for their money, but they have for some reason been overlooked in the passing of time. Her performance of the young girl who faces a fairly ludicrous "fate worse than death" is quite touching. The rest of the cast wavers between superior (Gish) to extremely unfortunate (white actors in black face portraying newly freed slaves.) The film itself is long and meandering, the story lines creak with age, and most of the portrayals of blacks are simply outrageous: at best condonscending, at worst wildly racist with a paranoia unequaled in any other film. The sight of the K.K.K. riding to the rescue much like the calvary did in later western films is so shocking that one doesn't know whether to be completely appalled or sink into hysterical laughter. Worth seeing if you are into studying the development of cinematic art, but hardly a film the casual viewer will find either enjoyable or entertaining. Griffith's epic Intolerance, equally remarkable from a technical standpoint, would be the better choice, for the film has retained both art and power through the passage of time.
Rating:
Summary: The best film ever made...
Review: This film is not "deeply disturbibg" or is it "only for film historians", people who wrote bad reviews on this dvd, obviously are not inteligent enough, and the film went over thier heads as it would if a 3 year old were watching it. This film is a classic, not just for it's AMAZING filmography, whcih was new at the time, and still is breathtaking today, but because of the "controverisal" subject matter, which wasn't so controversial at the time of it's release. This dvd must be watched, and is hard to review, but it is a classic, and when it's over, you'll find yourself pushing the play button again and warching it twice in a row! This film will do one of two things it will either move you and make you realzie this was along with Gone With The Wind, one of the best film of all time, or it will go right over your head, and you'll yell "racism", and just blow it off, and not even realize it's a classic. This film is more likely to appeal however to people who tend to gravitate towards listening to jazz and classical music, people more sophistocated and who liek fine wines and live a more luxurious or should I say cultured lifestyle.
Rating:
Summary: I wish this film weren't so forgotten by today's filmgoers!
Review: I am one of the rare people in my generation who loves silent movies. This ranks among my top three favorites. It is a classic story of the Civil War, told from the South's point of view (controversial at the time and still so today). "Birth of a Nation" tells the story of two families, one from the North and the other from the South, whose friendships and loves are tested by the war and its tragic aftermaths. One of the greatest actors of all time, Henry B. Walthall, portrays Ben Cameron (The Little Colonel) with both physical and romantic grace. His character is a soldier, a son, a brother, an avenger, and a lover. He plays each of these sub-roles with dignity and skill not seen much in Hollywood these days. A beautiful and delicate Lillian Gish plays Elsie Stoneman, the woman he loved without even meeting her at first. Mae Marsh is delightful and tragic as the ill-fated Flora, Ben's little sister. Other noteworthy performances given are Joseph Henabery as an uncanny and kindhearted Abraham Lincoln; Ralph Lewis as the stubborn and powerhungry Austin Stoneman; the classic beauty Miriam Cooper as Margaret Cameron; and George Siegmann as the mulatto villain Silas Lynch. This film has romance, action, drama, and even some bits of humor as well. If you're ever in the mood for a film which touches the heart as well as the mind and body, then please search out "Birth of a Nation". You'll be so glad you did.
Rating:
Summary: A monumental if deeply disturbing film
Review: I can only liken finally watching "Birth of a Nation" to the times when I have viewed Leni Riefenstahl's Nazi propaganda films -- I admire the filmmaking but I deplore the content. Terms such as "groundbreaking" and "landmark" are used pretty freely in film history, but BoaN deserves all the technical accolades one can muster. I had to keep reminding myself that this film was made in 1915, only three years after the Titanic sank. Griffith takes risks and blazes trails at such an early date. What is also important to consider is that this film was made when a good deal of the cast, as well as the audience watching it had lived through Reconstruction. It reminds us how deeply divided the nation was even 50 years after Appamatox. This presentation is hardly balanced -- the cartoonish portrayal of the non-sympathetic charaters is so brazen the film is rendered preachy and heavy-handed, if not laughable. It is important to note the roots of fear that this film highlights -- mulattos are the dregs of society and miscegenation is the greatest evil imaginable. It's amazing to see how deeply racist the world-view is here, again reminiscent of Nazi propaganda. The making of documentary is hardly enlightening. It does provide some look into the production itself, but very little comment is made on the social and ethical context here. Why are some of the black characters played by African-Americans while others are simply white actors in black face? One wishes that the DVD producers would have had more foresight or nerve to talk about the 10 ton elephant in the corner that I guess they wish we would ignore.
|
