You are not logged in. Please register or login.
- Topics: Active | Unanswered
Pages: 1
Re: Birth Of A Nation
I have serious, serious reservations about this film. I've studied Nat Turner since my teens, and I think it was pretty clear that he was mentally unstable to the point that I believe he was a paranoid schizophrenic, unless we believe his visions of God telling him to murder whites is true. And it's pretty clear the film isn't going to show the uprising killing white children and infants by bashing their skulls in with hammers and swinging them by their ankles to smash their heads against walls, no mind the women, though some "scholars" say their murders were justified because they were slave holders, too. My main concern were the trailers during Monday Night Football where they were showing the recent protests of black men taking on the police and intermixing it with Turner's slave revolt, which in my mind was nightmarish as it seems to be advocating violence of young black men against police and whites, justifying blind violence in the name of equality, even when that means murdering white children and infants, as they're part of the white problem, of whiteness and white privalage. It's a dangerous message. And liberal media has always had a strange fascination with angry black men. If you called the looters and criminals destroying and robbing properties during the protests, not the protestors mind you, thugs, the media circled the wagons to call you a racist.
Why I posted this is because of the reviews for this film by the media. Critics call it flawed and overall underwhelming film, but are still giving it rave reviews because Nat Turner's story needs to be told and compare the relevance to today. I just find the whole thing a big ugly propagandist statement spurred on by a naïve media with a dangerous message, intended or not.
- Smoking Guns
- Rep: 330
Re: Birth Of A Nation
I have serious, serious reservations about this film. I've studied Nat Turner since my teens, and I think it was pretty clear that he was mentally unstable to the point that I believe he was a paranoid schizophrenic, unless we believe his visions of God telling him to murder whites is true. And it's pretty clear the film isn't going to show the uprising killing white children and infants by bashing their skulls in with hammers and swinging them by their ankles to smash their heads against walls, no mind the women, though some "scholars" say their murders were justified because they were slave holders, too. My main concern were the trailers during Monday Night Football where they were showing the recent protests of black men taking on the police and intermixing it with Turner's slave revolt, which in my mind was nightmarish as it seems to be advocating violence of young black men against police and whites, justifying blind violence in the name of equality, even when that means murdering white children and infants, as they're part of the white problem, of whiteness and white privalage. It's a dangerous message. And liberal media has always had a strange fascination with angry black men. If you called the looters and criminals destroying and robbing properties during the protests, not the protestors mind you, thugs, the media circled the wagons to call you a racist.
Why I posted this is because of the reviews for this film by the media. Critics call it flawed and overall underwhelming film, but are still giving it rave reviews because Nat Turner's story needs to be told and compare the relevance to today. I just find the whole thing a big ugly propagandist statement spurred on by a naïve media with a dangerous message, intended or not.
Great post and I agree. I did not like the trailer either.
Re: Birth Of A Nation
how the fuck do you know its a big propagandist statement if you havent seen the film?
besides, there's more legitimate reasons not to watch it. namely the director.
- raygmurphy
- Rep: 0
Pages: 1
