Comment

Apr 24, 2017lukasevansherman rated this title 2.5 out of 5 stars
As many have noted, this film arrived amidst a lot of controversy around director/actor/co-writer/producer Nate Parker's alleged rape in college (The alleged victim later killed herself). While I think films should be judged on their own merits, it's hard not to be influenced by this and by the way he handled it. I don't think any other 2016 film went from hotly anticipated to D.O.A. as quickly as "The Birth of a Nation." It scored big at Sundance and was bought for the record setting sum of $17.5 million. By the time it opened, the rape allegation had overshadowed the film and most reviews were tepid. Initially an early Oscar contender, it did poorly at the box office and received no nominations. Sorry for the length preface. So how is the film? Not as bad as I expected, but also disappointing. Nat Turner was a Virginia born slave who was also a preacher and supposedly heard voices before leading an infamous slave revolt that killed 60 white people (including children) before it was violently put down. He was already the subject of William Styron's novel "The Confessions of Nat Turner" and it's compelling material that would seem to make for a strong, if controversial, movie. What stands out is how slow it is and how long it takes to get to the actual rebellion. Parker plays Turner and while he has presence, Turner as a character is a bit of a blank. One of the most difficult questions that they revolt raises (Should violence be met with violence?) is never really addressed. I would say its strength is in showing the awfulness of slavery and keeping the memory of our shameful history alive, but I wish it were a better, more interesting film. Another flawed film from last year that dealt with rebellion against injustice: "Free State of Jones."