Should Only Be Experienced for Its Early Cinematic Processes.

Rating: Null/10 (10 October 2003)

Completely over-rated would-be-masterpiece that is easily the most racist and most degrading movie ever produced depicting African-Americans. "The Birth of a Nation". Is it a good film? Certainly because of the performances, the coherency and its focused tone. Is it landmark? Definitely, because of D.W. Griffith's impressive and innovative film-making techniques. Is it politically correct? No, not in 1915 and it becomes more politically incorrect as the years pass us by. The movie starts off very dramatically as the Civil War of the United States splits families and friends in every direction. Anarchy soon follows as President Abraham Lincoln is assassinated. Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation has (in the eyes of the film-makers) become a major mistake though as African-Americans have taken control of many governmental entities, including Congress and the Senate. Thus the way of life for white Americans is changing and becoming unsatisfactory in the process. Enter the Ku Klux Klan. In this movie the Ku Klux Klan is portrayed as a group of white knights, heroic men who are out to reclaim the way of life that is rightfully theirs. And of course all this leads to more turmoil for all inside the movie's vast landscape. First of all racism is the greatest social disease that anyone can experience in life. I do not like this film at all for its story, particularly in its second half. Early on the movie is very impressive in showing the way the Civil War tore apart the U.S. However, this production pales in comparison to movies with similar themes like "Gone With the Wind" and "Glory". In terms of cinematic history, "The Birth of a Nation" is very important. But its social retardation and its racist biases overshadow its landmark film-making techniques. 4 stars out of 5.