MovieChat Forums > The Birth of a Nation (2016) Discussion > Silly plagiarism of the D.W. Griffith ti...

Silly plagiarism of the D.W. Griffith title

posted 8 years ago by hywellda
7 replies | jump to latest

The Turner rebellion was years before the civil war.
It hastened it when antebellum southerners, now fearful of slave uprisings, treated their slaves much more harshly and restrictive.
This encouraged a growth in Northern abolitionist sentiment and distrust of yankee motives on EVERY national issue, not just slavery
(not too unlike the political chasm we have today).

D.W. Griffith's "The Birth of a Nation"
addressed conditions AFTER the civil war and the complaint of southerners that former slaves with no education or experience and animus hearts were given positions of power over them.
It was THE propagandist "history" of the Klu Klux Klan, an organization 20 million or more strong at it's height and VERY politically strong.

I can't imagine what the producers of the current film are trying to say by usurping the title.
Perhaps they are ignorant of American History, cinematic AND actual?

[–] BigBadEd 8 years ago

No, its just a tactic used by the gay community and blacks. They appropriate terminology, titles and try to reassign them to dilute their power. Etc the N word and GAY.

[–] Bobby_Dupea 8 years ago

I can't imagine what the producers of the current film are trying to say by usurping the title.
Perhaps they are ignorant of American History, cinematic AND actual?

No, I suspect it was filmed by a bunch of SJWs who politically-corrected history to suit their own self-righteous millennial agendas.

Looks like another one to pass...

[–] Starman1968 8 years ago

Politically-corrected history? How? You don't think that slaves were treated brutally, raped, killed, and even after the Civil War, lynched by the hundreds? The FACTS stated at the end of the film tell us that while 60 slave-owners were killed almost 900 black me and women, both slaves and freemen, were murdered. And why degenerate moral code says that it is self righteous to condemn the evil of slavery? What kind of person are you?

[–] Bobby_Dupea 8 years ago

Politically-corrected history? How? You don't think that slaves were treated brutally, raped, killed, and even after the Civil War, lynched by the hundreds? The FACTS stated at the end of the film tell us that while 60 slave-owners were killed almost 900 black me and women, both slaves and freemen, were murdered.

And?

What am I supposed to do about it? Beg forgiveness? Feel bad about something that happened 150 years ago? Before my ancestors ever set foot in America?

That's your guilt trip agenda, not mine.

And why degenerate moral code says that it is self righteous to condemn the evil of slavery?

You mean only when white people do it, right?

What kind of person are you?

The kind of person who doesn't buy into what's REALLY being pushed here, and says so.

[–] mickeyenglish 8 years ago

Are you suggesting it's the slaves fault for their slave masters wrath? That's dumb.

[–] Starman1968 8 years ago

Well it would help if you used your imagination a bit. I think the appropriation of the title of one of the most notorious racist films of all time for this film was quite clever. I could easily see why Nate Parker decided to use the title. Why you cannot is beyond my understanding.

[–] Bobby_Dupea 8 years ago

I think the appropriation of the title of one of the most notorious racist films of all time for this film was quite clever.

You mean from a guy who got off a 1999 rape charge and a 2000 indecent exposure charge. A film that depicts it's own brutal rape that seems to be quite lost on Mr. Parker. How ironic. Yes, that was 'clever' of him.

I could easily see why Nate Parker decided to use the title

And it wouldn't surprise me if Parker was one of the ones who advocated a boycott of re-showings of that earlier film. A 1915 film that was so silently over-the-top in it's depictions that nobody should take it seriously 102 years later