Presenting the earliest preserved movie made by an african american.
Title: Within Our Gates
Instructor: Oscar Micheaux
Year: 1920 (although the movie says in its intro that it was made in 1919)
Runtime (My version): 1 hr 15 mins
Seen: Spring / Summer 2009
How i got this: Torrent, no copyrights on this one as far as I know. No copyrights stated in the movie itself either.
Plot Outline: A black teacher from the south travels north, to raise money for the school educating black people she works for. We follow her quest to raise money for the school, as well as get a glimpse of her past.
First impression: None really, didn't know what to expect.
But on second thought: Ok, well, thats just one less movie to go...
General comments: Dealing with important issues and viewing a problem from the eyes of numerous stakeholders, this movie sets out to adress the problems with suppression of the black part of the population in early 1900 america.
The story and acting however is nothing that really strikes me as something amazing or well done, and to me, this movie stands out more as an achievement for a black movie-maker, and a step on the right way to racial equality, than it does as a movie that I enjoyed watching. That being said, some scenes effectively shows the problems and wrongs done by both the white population against the black, and even displays how the black population in some cases where held back by members of their own community.
The history with this movie being lost for 70+ years, then suddenly reappearing in Spain is interesting, but does not make the movie itself any better.
The whole case with black people and white people is still relevant today, and I even find myself thinking ef the term black people is okay for me to write. In that sense, the movie is still relevant, as is the history surrounding it. However, in the end, I judge the movies in this book a lot based on my gut feeling, and this movie overall didn't keep the pace it set out in some scenes.
Music: No sound.... Boooooring.....
Pictures: Nothing special.
Essentially this is: A historically important achievement rather than a movie for the ages.
Why you should see this: It might be of interest to you.
Why you shouldn't see this: This is hardly even a good movie if you ask me.
Honorable mention: The scene with the black priest really was one of the high-points in this movie for me.
Final rating: 57% Maybe I'll change my mind in the future if I ever watch it again, but for now....
BTW: This whole prejudice thing may seem over-discussed and over-used. But still, I myself can't help being prejudice in some situations although I try to fight it. I wonder if there is ever any means to make it go away?
mandag den 29. marts 2010
1920 - (8) Way Down East
Onwards onwards! With even more D.W.
Title: Way Down East
Instructor: D.W. Griffith
Year: 1920
Runtime (My version): 2 hrs 25 mins
Seen: Spring / Summer 2009
How i got this: Torrent, no copyrights on this one as far as I know. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Plot Outline: Anna Moore (Lillian Gish) is a young and naive girl who is tricked into a false marriage. Her mother dies soon thereafter, and her baby is born weak, and soon dies. She is now an outcast, and with no home, or hope to make a future for herself in the place she grew up, she goes looking for a job in the country.
She finds a good job in a good family, falls in love, but her past is not going to let her off the hook just yet.
First impression: This looks so boring.
But on second thought: But almost made me cry.
General comments: This movie was a real sleeper to me, meaning that it looks so darn ordinary and dull, yet suddenly makes me feel all kinds of stuff. For a defenition of the term sleeper, check this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeper_%28car%29
Lillian Gish is so unbelievably good in this movie, not only as an actress, her character is all that is good and selfless in this world. To see her fall to pieces when she is betrayed by her first love, or when her future catches up with her is simply heartbreaking. You actually want to interfere in this movie. This is one of the movies ever that has affected me the most, when i saw it. Her performance is what carries this movie, and she outshines the rest of the cast.
This is all nice and fantastic, but the movie tries to do multiple things at once. Amongst all the drama going on, there is a lot of seemingly pointless slapstick humour going on. I really don't see how this fits into the rest of this movie, but it's there, and thats just the way it is. Maybe it was to make sure that everybody who went to see this movie back in the day got something they liked, I dont know.
The ending really got my heart pumping. Filming it must have been unbelievably risky.
The movie actually made me want to be a better person. I really felt inspired to stop judging people too hard, and to always look on what is on the inside.
Music: Fits nicely into the movie.
Pictures: All good, the very last part of this move sports some almost unbelievable pictures.
Essentially this is: A story of love, and the worlds cruelty.
Why you should see this: Because it just might make you feel something.
Why you shouldn't see this: Weel, you might have to be a bit sentimental to really enjoy this one.
Honorable mention: Richard Barthelmess is quite excellent as the young David Barlett, who falls in love with Anna.
Final rating: 80% I liked this one.
BTW: Lillian Gish suffered frost-related injuries in the right hand, lasting her entire life, from the shots on the icy river.
Title: Way Down East
Instructor: D.W. Griffith
Year: 1920
Runtime (My version): 2 hrs 25 mins
Seen: Spring / Summer 2009
How i got this: Torrent, no copyrights on this one as far as I know. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Plot Outline: Anna Moore (Lillian Gish) is a young and naive girl who is tricked into a false marriage. Her mother dies soon thereafter, and her baby is born weak, and soon dies. She is now an outcast, and with no home, or hope to make a future for herself in the place she grew up, she goes looking for a job in the country.
She finds a good job in a good family, falls in love, but her past is not going to let her off the hook just yet.
First impression: This looks so boring.
But on second thought: But almost made me cry.
General comments: This movie was a real sleeper to me, meaning that it looks so darn ordinary and dull, yet suddenly makes me feel all kinds of stuff. For a defenition of the term sleeper, check this link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sleeper_%28car%29
Lillian Gish is so unbelievably good in this movie, not only as an actress, her character is all that is good and selfless in this world. To see her fall to pieces when she is betrayed by her first love, or when her future catches up with her is simply heartbreaking. You actually want to interfere in this movie. This is one of the movies ever that has affected me the most, when i saw it. Her performance is what carries this movie, and she outshines the rest of the cast.
This is all nice and fantastic, but the movie tries to do multiple things at once. Amongst all the drama going on, there is a lot of seemingly pointless slapstick humour going on. I really don't see how this fits into the rest of this movie, but it's there, and thats just the way it is. Maybe it was to make sure that everybody who went to see this movie back in the day got something they liked, I dont know.
The ending really got my heart pumping. Filming it must have been unbelievably risky.
The movie actually made me want to be a better person. I really felt inspired to stop judging people too hard, and to always look on what is on the inside.
Music: Fits nicely into the movie.
Pictures: All good, the very last part of this move sports some almost unbelievable pictures.
Essentially this is: A story of love, and the worlds cruelty.
Why you should see this: Because it just might make you feel something.
Why you shouldn't see this: Weel, you might have to be a bit sentimental to really enjoy this one.
Honorable mention: Richard Barthelmess is quite excellent as the young David Barlett, who falls in love with Anna.
Final rating: 80% I liked this one.
BTW: Lillian Gish suffered frost-related injuries in the right hand, lasting her entire life, from the shots on the icy river.
1919 - (7) Broken Blossoms
And now for some social realism, D. W. Griffith is back
Title: Broken Blossoms
Instructor: D.W Griffith
Year: 1919
Runtime (My version): 1:28:49
Seen: Spring / Summer 2009
How i got this: Archive.org remains my friend it seems.
Plot Outline: A young man from China travels to London to spread the message of piece to the "sons of turmoil and strife" the British. Upon arriving in London he soon finds himself living from day to day and deteriorating in opium joints. However, this is to change when he meets Lucy, a young girl abused by her violent father, whom she lives with. The two people end up being lights in a dark and uncaring world to one another, but how can a fragile flower cope in the distorted world of man?
First impression: Yeah ok, I'll give it a shot.
But on second thought: This really touched me.
General comments: London is a bleak and heartless place in this movie, people care little of one another, and have distorted views, thinking themselves selfless and caring when they are abusive and selfish. The working class is, as it probably was back then, living lives with no prospects for the future, occupying small imprisoning apartments. The film oozes of hopelessness and anubility to change your fate.
While not as sharp and directly believable as the social realism of today, this movie deals with important issues, and carries direct messages to its viewer. The story and message is one that is as valid and important today as ever. The actors are delivering top performances, and even though you may not like them all of them, they have something very human and believable in them. Lillian Gish is amazing as the abused and selfless girl, who deserves none of what is coming her way. She really excels in this role. The other actors deliver pretty good performances in this movie, but nothing out of the ordinary.
The buildup towards the ending is effective, the climax is well done, and overall, this movie works quite well.
Music: Good, lots of organ.
Pictures: Well, some scenes are very beautiful, where others are nothing out of the ordinary.
Essentially this is: A film relevant today, and though many new movies handles the same subject, possible even better than this one, it deserves credit for being a first-mover.
Why you should see this: This is a beautiful drama.
Why you shouldn't see this: It has aged some, and I am not sure this is a true essential in its genre.
Honorable mention: The decorated text screens. Nice to see something new once in a while.
Final rating: 70% Despite the fact that this undoubtedly is a good movie, I would not call it a real masterpiece.
BTW: The boxing scenes kinda remind me of the Rocky movies...
Title: Broken Blossoms
Instructor: D.W Griffith
Year: 1919
Runtime (My version): 1:28:49
Seen: Spring / Summer 2009
How i got this: Archive.org remains my friend it seems.
Plot Outline: A young man from China travels to London to spread the message of piece to the "sons of turmoil and strife" the British. Upon arriving in London he soon finds himself living from day to day and deteriorating in opium joints. However, this is to change when he meets Lucy, a young girl abused by her violent father, whom she lives with. The two people end up being lights in a dark and uncaring world to one another, but how can a fragile flower cope in the distorted world of man?
First impression: Yeah ok, I'll give it a shot.
But on second thought: This really touched me.
General comments: London is a bleak and heartless place in this movie, people care little of one another, and have distorted views, thinking themselves selfless and caring when they are abusive and selfish. The working class is, as it probably was back then, living lives with no prospects for the future, occupying small imprisoning apartments. The film oozes of hopelessness and anubility to change your fate.
While not as sharp and directly believable as the social realism of today, this movie deals with important issues, and carries direct messages to its viewer. The story and message is one that is as valid and important today as ever. The actors are delivering top performances, and even though you may not like them all of them, they have something very human and believable in them. Lillian Gish is amazing as the abused and selfless girl, who deserves none of what is coming her way. She really excels in this role. The other actors deliver pretty good performances in this movie, but nothing out of the ordinary.
The buildup towards the ending is effective, the climax is well done, and overall, this movie works quite well.
Music: Good, lots of organ.
Pictures: Well, some scenes are very beautiful, where others are nothing out of the ordinary.
Essentially this is: A film relevant today, and though many new movies handles the same subject, possible even better than this one, it deserves credit for being a first-mover.
Why you should see this: This is a beautiful drama.
Why you shouldn't see this: It has aged some, and I am not sure this is a true essential in its genre.
Honorable mention: The decorated text screens. Nice to see something new once in a while.
Final rating: 70% Despite the fact that this undoubtedly is a good movie, I would not call it a real masterpiece.
BTW: The boxing scenes kinda remind me of the Rocky movies...
lørdag den 27. marts 2010
1919 - (6) Dr. Caligari
Next entry, a surrealistic and allegedly scary movie.
Title: Das kabinett des Dr. Caligari (Dr Caligaris cabinet.)
Instructor: Robert Wiene
Year: 1919
Runtime (My version): 1 hr. 11 minutes, finally a short movie.
Seen: Spring / Summer 2009
How i got this: This is on the internet archive i mentioned before.
Plot Outline: A man and his friend goes to a fair, where a somnambulist is exhibited by an iconic man called dr. Caligari, not only is the somnambulist a somnambulist, he is also able to foretell the future. The friend asks when he is going to die, and gets the answer "Tonight". Throw in a kidnapping, a mad doctor, and a mental asylum, and you got yourself a movie that made people scream in 1919.
First impression: This movie looks unique and special. I look forward to seeing it.
But on second thought: The style and plot of this movie is a bit tiresome.
General comments: The settings in this movie are all made in a surrealistic way, where both shapes and lighting gets distorted. This gives a unique feel to this movie. The plot, albeit not really catching me, is quite original, and credit must be given to the twist in the ending.
The camera is stationary, making this movie a bit like watching a play, only with faster changing of the background. But what a surreal atmosphere this play has. What the movie sets out to do, it does good, but I think its niche might be rather narrow, and to be frank, this was not a movie I enjoyed in particular.
That being said, the movie deserves its applause for its accomplishments , and the frame narrative works quite well, along with the surrealistic framework of the flashback, that constitutes most of this movie.
Music: Nice, sometimes eerie music, that really does help the movie.
Pictures: Interesting, an unlike anything I'd seen before, with nice special effects at points.
Essentially this is: One of those movies that only really appeals to some of us.
Why you should see this: As an early bold experiment with the movie medium, this deserves some attention.
Why you shouldn't see this: The movie just isn't that good.
Honorable mention: The decorators for this movie. In a time without LSD, this movie is quite the achievement.
Final rating: 58% It just doesn't talk to me, not really.
BTW: A somnambulist is a sleepwalker. Yep, fancy pantsy word.... Really artsy...
Title: Das kabinett des Dr. Caligari (Dr Caligaris cabinet.)
Instructor: Robert Wiene
Year: 1919
Runtime (My version): 1 hr. 11 minutes, finally a short movie.
Seen: Spring / Summer 2009
How i got this: This is on the internet archive i mentioned before.
Plot Outline: A man and his friend goes to a fair, where a somnambulist is exhibited by an iconic man called dr. Caligari, not only is the somnambulist a somnambulist, he is also able to foretell the future. The friend asks when he is going to die, and gets the answer "Tonight". Throw in a kidnapping, a mad doctor, and a mental asylum, and you got yourself a movie that made people scream in 1919.
First impression: This movie looks unique and special. I look forward to seeing it.
But on second thought: The style and plot of this movie is a bit tiresome.
General comments: The settings in this movie are all made in a surrealistic way, where both shapes and lighting gets distorted. This gives a unique feel to this movie. The plot, albeit not really catching me, is quite original, and credit must be given to the twist in the ending.
The camera is stationary, making this movie a bit like watching a play, only with faster changing of the background. But what a surreal atmosphere this play has. What the movie sets out to do, it does good, but I think its niche might be rather narrow, and to be frank, this was not a movie I enjoyed in particular.
That being said, the movie deserves its applause for its accomplishments , and the frame narrative works quite well, along with the surrealistic framework of the flashback, that constitutes most of this movie.
Music: Nice, sometimes eerie music, that really does help the movie.
Pictures: Interesting, an unlike anything I'd seen before, with nice special effects at points.
Essentially this is: One of those movies that only really appeals to some of us.
Why you should see this: As an early bold experiment with the movie medium, this deserves some attention.
Why you shouldn't see this: The movie just isn't that good.
Honorable mention: The decorators for this movie. In a time without LSD, this movie is quite the achievement.
Final rating: 58% It just doesn't talk to me, not really.
BTW: A somnambulist is a sleepwalker. Yep, fancy pantsy word.... Really artsy...
1916 - (5) Intolerance
D. W. Griffiths' second entry on the list! Let's see if he's still doing a poor job of being politically correct...
Title: Intolerance
Instructor: D.W Griffith
Year: 1916
Runtime (My version): Just below 3 hrs.
Seen: Spring / Summer 2009
How i got this: I think this was a torrent? Maybe I got it from the same website as Les Vampires actually, but I can't remember.
Plot Outline: Using multiple parallel storylines, this movie tells us exactly how much misery and human tragedy intolerance in one form on the other can bring. With parallel storylines, this movie deals with genocide in France, the fall of Babylon, a family man framed for murder and even a bit with Jesus himself.
First impression: I liked the first Griffith one, but this might be boring...
But on second thought: I just got my mind blown by a movie that's more than 90 years old.
General comments: If you thought Birth of a Nation was epic, then prepare to get your mind blown by Intolerance. This impressive even by todays standards. Some scenes are so massive that literally over a thousand extras must be involved. Everything is insanely well done, and it shows that this was a movie that broke all records as far as budget and models goes. A city wall was built in hollywood, just to make this movie. A city wall so big people could walk on it, and lay siege to it. They just don't do this kind of stuff anymore.
The stories are quite involving, especially the story of the former criminal, who starts a family, just to see his past catch up on him. They supplement eachother, and serves the director well in making a suspenseful movie by cross-cutting between them. I feel that the french part is kinda lacking in some ways, but that might be mainly because the two main stories are so well told.
Also, this must have been the first movie to introduce a couple of things. Let's take for example the siege tower. I wonder how many movies have a siege tower that isn't made entirely on computer... This movie has a real one of course. Also, this movie shows people losing heads in swordfights, brutal! Finally this movie may just have been the first to do the "car chasing a train in order to overtake it and get to a crossing in front of it" scene.
This is not just a good story, it's also eye-candy, and should have been quite capable of blowing peoples minds back in the day.
This has to be seen to be believed.
Music: Nice music in my version, fits the story quite well.
Pictures: Cutting edge, one has to wonder just how expensive this was back then.
Essentially this is: An example of how a silent doesn't have to be primitive as far as pictures and props go.
Why you should see this: This brings a new meaning to the term epic.
Why you shouldn't see this: Well, even if you dislike silents, this should be given a try.
Honorable mention: All the extras! A lot of people were injured during the filming of the battle scenes, and the resulting scenes are just brilliant. Apparently being on camera made people do silly things even then.
Final rating: 84% Mainly because of the grandness of Griffiths vision for this movie. Go see!
BTW: Oh, and theres Nudity, partial at least!
Title: Intolerance
Instructor: D.W Griffith
Year: 1916
Runtime (My version): Just below 3 hrs.
Seen: Spring / Summer 2009
How i got this: I think this was a torrent? Maybe I got it from the same website as Les Vampires actually, but I can't remember.
Plot Outline: Using multiple parallel storylines, this movie tells us exactly how much misery and human tragedy intolerance in one form on the other can bring. With parallel storylines, this movie deals with genocide in France, the fall of Babylon, a family man framed for murder and even a bit with Jesus himself.
First impression: I liked the first Griffith one, but this might be boring...
But on second thought: I just got my mind blown by a movie that's more than 90 years old.
General comments: If you thought Birth of a Nation was epic, then prepare to get your mind blown by Intolerance. This impressive even by todays standards. Some scenes are so massive that literally over a thousand extras must be involved. Everything is insanely well done, and it shows that this was a movie that broke all records as far as budget and models goes. A city wall was built in hollywood, just to make this movie. A city wall so big people could walk on it, and lay siege to it. They just don't do this kind of stuff anymore.
The stories are quite involving, especially the story of the former criminal, who starts a family, just to see his past catch up on him. They supplement eachother, and serves the director well in making a suspenseful movie by cross-cutting between them. I feel that the french part is kinda lacking in some ways, but that might be mainly because the two main stories are so well told.
Also, this must have been the first movie to introduce a couple of things. Let's take for example the siege tower. I wonder how many movies have a siege tower that isn't made entirely on computer... This movie has a real one of course. Also, this movie shows people losing heads in swordfights, brutal! Finally this movie may just have been the first to do the "car chasing a train in order to overtake it and get to a crossing in front of it" scene.
This is not just a good story, it's also eye-candy, and should have been quite capable of blowing peoples minds back in the day.
This has to be seen to be believed.
Music: Nice music in my version, fits the story quite well.
Pictures: Cutting edge, one has to wonder just how expensive this was back then.
Essentially this is: An example of how a silent doesn't have to be primitive as far as pictures and props go.
Why you should see this: This brings a new meaning to the term epic.
Why you shouldn't see this: Well, even if you dislike silents, this should be given a try.
Honorable mention: All the extras! A lot of people were injured during the filming of the battle scenes, and the resulting scenes are just brilliant. Apparently being on camera made people do silly things even then.
Final rating: 84% Mainly because of the grandness of Griffiths vision for this movie. Go see!
BTW: Oh, and theres Nudity, partial at least!
fredag den 26. marts 2010
1915 - Les Vampires (4)
Ooop, here comes a long one. Actually this a series of shorter films all contributing to making a big picture.
Title: Les Vampires
Instructor: Louis Feuillade
Year: 1915
Runtime (My version): 440 minutes (7+ hours!), according to the book, I think my version is actually like 5-10 minutes shorter.
Seen: Spring / Summer 2009
How i got this: I got this on a video site hosting abandoned movies, took me forever to find btw. Was thrilled to find it online, as the dvd was like almost a hundred bucks.
Plot Outline: Phillipe Guérande, a parisian reporter combats a sinister gang of criminals known as The Vampires.
First impression: This is so long, how on earth am I going to sit this through?
But on second thought: This is such a positive experience, albeit long, it kept me interested.
General comments: Okay, this must have been the first movie to do a lot of things. Like having people shoot a cannon out of an apartment, having people climb drain pipes and a lot of other cool stuff. It really continued to amaze me with its creativity. Lots of crazy plans in this one folks. This is guaranteed to make you laugh at points, just because it does everything with such a fresh attitude.
You never know what's coming and that made me like this series. The plot, albeit maybe a bit thin at points, is entertaining and fresh.
The settings are nice, and fits into the story. Strangely though, there almost doesn't seem to be anyone on the streets. This is probably meant to make the viewer feel that all of Paris is suffering and afraid of the crimes commited by the vampires.
As the series progresses, the episodes become better and better, so be prepared to give this an extra chance when watching.
The villains are brutal in Les Vampires, they kill without mercy, but are met with no mercy either, this actually is quite a heartless movie when dealing with villains/ the enemy. Maybe this fits nicely into the context of France being involved in WW1 at the time. I don't know if I'm right, but it seems plausible.
About the acting, well, it wouldn't work in a movie from today, but back then looking into the camera at certain intervals seemed ok. I don't know if it's for the good or worse, but it's there...
Oh, and there's a poisenous pen! Yeah I know, it's so fresh!
Music: Nice piano music.
Pictures: Many a cunning stunts in this one is what makes the pictures stand out, apart from the stunts, they are quite ordinary.
Essentially this is: A firstmover in many ways, I think, and a humourus, yet a cold and merciless series.
Why you should see this: This was so fresh!
Why you shouldn't see this: 95 years can be a real killer of freshness, maybe also in this case for some of you.
Honorable mention: Mazamette, he made me laugh and smile many times, maybe he's not for everyone, but I liked him.
Final rating: 70% Appealing and creative, but still not perfect.
Title: Les Vampires
Instructor: Louis Feuillade
Year: 1915
Runtime (My version): 440 minutes (7+ hours!), according to the book, I think my version is actually like 5-10 minutes shorter.
Seen: Spring / Summer 2009
How i got this: I got this on a video site hosting abandoned movies, took me forever to find btw. Was thrilled to find it online, as the dvd was like almost a hundred bucks.
Plot Outline: Phillipe Guérande, a parisian reporter combats a sinister gang of criminals known as The Vampires.
First impression: This is so long, how on earth am I going to sit this through?
But on second thought: This is such a positive experience, albeit long, it kept me interested.
General comments: Okay, this must have been the first movie to do a lot of things. Like having people shoot a cannon out of an apartment, having people climb drain pipes and a lot of other cool stuff. It really continued to amaze me with its creativity. Lots of crazy plans in this one folks. This is guaranteed to make you laugh at points, just because it does everything with such a fresh attitude.
You never know what's coming and that made me like this series. The plot, albeit maybe a bit thin at points, is entertaining and fresh.
The settings are nice, and fits into the story. Strangely though, there almost doesn't seem to be anyone on the streets. This is probably meant to make the viewer feel that all of Paris is suffering and afraid of the crimes commited by the vampires.
As the series progresses, the episodes become better and better, so be prepared to give this an extra chance when watching.
The villains are brutal in Les Vampires, they kill without mercy, but are met with no mercy either, this actually is quite a heartless movie when dealing with villains/ the enemy. Maybe this fits nicely into the context of France being involved in WW1 at the time. I don't know if I'm right, but it seems plausible.
About the acting, well, it wouldn't work in a movie from today, but back then looking into the camera at certain intervals seemed ok. I don't know if it's for the good or worse, but it's there...
Oh, and there's a poisenous pen! Yeah I know, it's so fresh!
Music: Nice piano music.
Pictures: Many a cunning stunts in this one is what makes the pictures stand out, apart from the stunts, they are quite ordinary.
Essentially this is: A firstmover in many ways, I think, and a humourus, yet a cold and merciless series.
Why you should see this: This was so fresh!
Why you shouldn't see this: 95 years can be a real killer of freshness, maybe also in this case for some of you.
Honorable mention: Mazamette, he made me laugh and smile many times, maybe he's not for everyone, but I liked him.
Final rating: 70% Appealing and creative, but still not perfect.
3 - The Birth of a Nation
Number 3 coming in hot!
Title: The Birth of a Nation
Instructor: D.W. Griffith
Year: 1915, big jump up from number 2 (1903)
Runtime (My version): Long, I am not sure, explains later. The movie should be around 3 hours though. And I think mine was too.
Seen: Spring 2009
How i got this: Was able to watch it on youtube along with some pretty entertaining comments. Got a version from a torrent too, thought it might be abandonedas well...
Plot Outline: Epic tale of how wars make friends kill each other, how the civil war in America influenced everyone and how negroes cant be given too much influence if society is to remain intact. Seriously, that's what it's about!
First impression: All this civil war and KKK must make a weird but entertaining movie. The screenshots in the book made it all look very interesting actually.
But on second thought: WTF? This effing movie just made me root for the KKK. What the effing F? Apart from that fact, nice movie!
General comments: When it comes to making a solid movie, D. W. Griffith must have been the man back then. Seriously, the battle scenes are huge! Secondly, the camera techniques are amazing. And even more when compared to the older entries in this book! This was the most expensive movie ever made at the time as far as I'm informed, and it shows. There are scenes with hundreds of people fighting. Really expensive impressive stuff.
The movie is long, yes, but it is bearable as the plot moves on in a tolerable pace most of the movie.
Settings are great, beautiful scenery. Especially funny are the "Historical Facsimiles" or what ever they were called. Short entries in the movie, stating that the following scene is an exact replica of what really happened back then. Talk about selective representation of reality man.
The plot is good, well told, and develops well, when you disregard the countless directly offensing portrayals of coloured people. The suspense in the end is really genuine, it had me going and this surprised me very much. Especially considering how old the first two movies of this book had looked.
The acting is generally good, but very dramatic. This may take some getting used to, but ends up working fine with me.
The movie does not look almost a hundred years old to me actually. Worth watching.
Music: Nice music, catchy and quite traditional, I thought I heard some old american traditional tunes in there as well...
Pictures: Really beautiful and impressive, approaching amazing.
Essentially this is: A fatastic movie with a wrong, wrong message. Especially considering that people might very well have been even more receptive of its message back in the day.
Why you should see this: An early truly epic movie, this is not to miss out on.
Why you shouldn't see this: If you are very easily manipulated, pass out on this one, you might just end up wearing sheets and pointy hats along with the local gang of heroes.
Honorable mention: In this movie, boys make out when they die in war. The dying scene with the two boys being way too close for comfort made me consider stop watching the movie in the train. Seriously. It was just so embarrasing. And I know that being gay is okay and all. It just freaked me out. Sorry.
And oh yeah, that silly guard, see the movie, you'll know what i mean. Silly silly man.
Final rating: 84/100% - This has undeniably shaped the movie industry, no matter how wrong the message of the movie may be.
Title: The Birth of a Nation
Instructor: D.W. Griffith
Year: 1915, big jump up from number 2 (1903)
Runtime (My version): Long, I am not sure, explains later. The movie should be around 3 hours though. And I think mine was too.
Seen: Spring 2009
How i got this: Was able to watch it on youtube along with some pretty entertaining comments. Got a version from a torrent too, thought it might be abandonedas well...
Plot Outline: Epic tale of how wars make friends kill each other, how the civil war in America influenced everyone and how negroes cant be given too much influence if society is to remain intact. Seriously, that's what it's about!
First impression: All this civil war and KKK must make a weird but entertaining movie. The screenshots in the book made it all look very interesting actually.
But on second thought: WTF? This effing movie just made me root for the KKK. What the effing F? Apart from that fact, nice movie!
General comments: When it comes to making a solid movie, D. W. Griffith must have been the man back then. Seriously, the battle scenes are huge! Secondly, the camera techniques are amazing. And even more when compared to the older entries in this book! This was the most expensive movie ever made at the time as far as I'm informed, and it shows. There are scenes with hundreds of people fighting. Really expensive impressive stuff.
The movie is long, yes, but it is bearable as the plot moves on in a tolerable pace most of the movie.
Settings are great, beautiful scenery. Especially funny are the "Historical Facsimiles" or what ever they were called. Short entries in the movie, stating that the following scene is an exact replica of what really happened back then. Talk about selective representation of reality man.
The plot is good, well told, and develops well, when you disregard the countless directly offensing portrayals of coloured people. The suspense in the end is really genuine, it had me going and this surprised me very much. Especially considering how old the first two movies of this book had looked.
The acting is generally good, but very dramatic. This may take some getting used to, but ends up working fine with me.
The movie does not look almost a hundred years old to me actually. Worth watching.
Music: Nice music, catchy and quite traditional, I thought I heard some old american traditional tunes in there as well...
Pictures: Really beautiful and impressive, approaching amazing.
Essentially this is: A fatastic movie with a wrong, wrong message. Especially considering that people might very well have been even more receptive of its message back in the day.
Why you should see this: An early truly epic movie, this is not to miss out on.
Why you shouldn't see this: If you are very easily manipulated, pass out on this one, you might just end up wearing sheets and pointy hats along with the local gang of heroes.
Honorable mention: In this movie, boys make out when they die in war. The dying scene with the two boys being way too close for comfort made me consider stop watching the movie in the train. Seriously. It was just so embarrasing. And I know that being gay is okay and all. It just freaked me out. Sorry.
And oh yeah, that silly guard, see the movie, you'll know what i mean. Silly silly man.
Final rating: 84/100% - This has undeniably shaped the movie industry, no matter how wrong the message of the movie may be.
Abonner på:
Opslag (Atom)