A Technical Milestone and an Embarrassing Stain on American Cinema

Rating: Null/10 (14 April 2014)

BIRTH OF A NATION tells the story of two families during the American Civil War - the Northern Stonemans and the Southern Camerons - and how the war and its aftermath affect their lives. BIRTH OF A NATION is unquestionably a milestone in the history of movies, setting the template for modern narrative structure through remarkable advancements in cinematography and editing. It is also, just as unquestionably, a film scarred by vicious racism and revisionist history, distorted through the lens of a white supremacist viewpoint. For those reasons, I don't feel I can give it an appropriate star rating.
SCRIPT: The movie's biggest problem, by far. Even though there are hints of racism at the beginning, the first act of BIRTH OF A NATION has some touching moments that display the human cost of war and how it impacts families. It has moments of romance and humor as well. However, the movie takes a fatal tumble in the second act, descending into lurid, unsubtle, shrieking melodrama and blatant historical revisionism, tainted with a toxic bigotry. The movie asks viewers to applaud the KKK, an organization founded on terrorism and hatred, as well as political and social disenfranchisement of African-Americans (including voter suppression) and lynching. It asks us to condemn interracial marriage, disapprove of the black population's desire for equality, and view mixed-race characters as evil. The characterizations are quite literally in black and white – white equals good, black equals bad (except for the Camerons' servants, who are called "faithful souls" because they continue to subject themselves to their white masters). Additionally, Griffith subjects two of his heroines to threats of rape (one imagined, one real), all designed to increase audience hatred of the black characters and sympathy for his virtuous maidens. (This is a most disturbing and unfortunate trope that he would use in future films as well, minus the racial element.) The fanatical prejudice and third-rate histrionics sink the entire movie.
ACTING: The acting in this film is of variable quality. I'm aware that there was a tendency to broad performances in contemporary theater and films, but Griffith's cast was renowned for their naturalistic, restrained approach in the Biograph shorts, which makes the lapses here somewhat surprising. I feel that the best performance overall is given by the underrated Miriam Cooper as older sister Margaret Cameron, who plays her scenes with a quite modern sense of realism. Henry B Walthall also plays his character credibly, even though you can't root for him – his character does found the KKK, after all. Lillian Gish has some good moments but this isn't her best role, as even she falls prey to stagy histrionics at several points during the film – her performance looks quite artificial, even by contemporary standards. Mae Marsh is also hit and miss as the little sister Flora – charming at times, but excessively jumpy and rather theatrical. Some of the mugging and flailing results in unintentionally funny moments, and the "black" characters (played by whites in blackface) are nothing more than caricatures.
CINEMATOGRAPHY/PRODUCTION: The only really positive legacy of this film was its advancements in visual narrative. Griffith did not invent close-ups, cross cutting, or tinting, but he put these devices together in a cohesive way. This film is quite different from stagy earlier features like QUEEN ELIZABETH or CLEOPATRA, and shows a more advanced use of editing than the influential Italian epic CABIRIA. The battle scenes are quite detailed and realistic. Tinting is used expressively and there are some quite impressive moments in the framing of the shots. However, none of that is remotely enough to compensate for the film's other weaknesses – people don't generally watch movies for cinematography, they watch them for their stories.
SUMMARY: BIRTH OF A NATION remains controversial. Movie critics and scholars praise it as a masterpiece for its technical and narrative innovations, but most general movie viewers are rightly repelled by its poisonous racism. The film has some touching and humane moments, but they are negated by its adherence to white supremacist thought, its brazen historical revisionism, and its shamelessly manipulative melodramatics. It is a milestone in movie history, undeniably – but not entirely for good reasons. I can't give this film any stars or endorse it in any way because of that. In spite of its innovations, in its entirety as a work of art, BIRTH OF A NATION fails to stand the test of time. Of all the films that could have changed cinema forever, it's a shame that this movie had to be the one.