I don't particularly care for this film, I like many people on this board think it's a vile, racist piece of propoganda. Having said that, this film gave birth (pun intended) to modern cinema! How can this film not be in the top 250 and something like the Kill Bill films are?
Last film I saw:
Shaun of the Dead 10/10
Depends really on your view on the film...
If you're an active and critical film critic and appreciate that this film is a milestone in the history of film then you'd love it.
If you watch this film and realise the subcontent of racial propaganda then you're going to hate it.
The fact that it got 7/10 is pretty astounding already, given the films that IMDB love.
If IMDB was purely inhabited by film buffs and historians then yes, this movie would be in the top 250 regardless of its content due to its impact on history.
IMDB is not inhabited by that crowd seeing how a vast majority of voters are just common moviegoers. A common moviegoer doesn't get a damn about the historical significance of a film. If the film supports a racist agenda they condemn it as being "one of the worst films ever!!!"
The Birth of a Nation of course has aged terribly due to its subject matter, but anyone truly interested in cinema cannot overlook its significance.
"There are times when I look at people and I see nothing worth liking."
All you have to do is look at the film's poster to figure out why.
shareI wouldn't put this movie in the top 250 either. It has aged horribly, mostly because of the racism, but also because the second half ruins everything in the movie. Apart from anything else, the film degenerates into a hysterical melodrama with no depth or subtlety whatsoever, and it grossly falsifies history in a way that insults intelligence as well as morals in order to promote its author's agenda. And, like a previous poster said, people watch movies for their content, not cinematography. The content in this film is so repulsive that for many, it negates - no, obliterates - whatever artistic worth it may have had otherwise.
'Because the second half ruins everything in the movie'
Exactly that. The blackface actors were bad enough, the over the top melodrama even more so. The suspension of disbelief threshold was repeatedly violated, and I ran out of my supply of WTFs before the end.
This was amateur level, which actually kinda makes sense when realizing that this was the first major attempt at a full length feature outside of the epic filmed stage plays that had been done. No pro standard had been set yet.
The RT User Rating is even lower at 58%. Most people don't give a damn that this movie place in film history. They just see a racist film. And Frankly if D.W. Griffith didn't invent these techniques than somebody else would have. I can't even say the movie is that good. Its no Schindler's List. The only people who care about this is Film Buffs that only care about "Film History". When normal Historians bring this movie up. Its mostly credited for helping boost the recruitment in the KKK. I wonder if D.W. Griffith made a Nazi Propaganda about the Jews. Would his stuff be praised as much.
shareGood points, bond_98!
I guess the OP is a film buff who looks at things more from the standpoint of a movie critic. You can't expect that kind of viewpoint from most movie viewers, though; at the end of the day, it's the content of a movie that matters the most, not its technique. The story is what hits home for viewers, and the story this movie tells is vile. It's also a very old and very long movie, and that has affected its rating as well. If somebody thinks that the posters on a website should all agree with critical consensus, then really IMDb is not the place for them.
[deleted]
The same way The Shawshank Redemption is so grossly overrated at #1.
With all due respect The Shawshank Redemption would not even make my short list for the desert island ... but neither would The Birth of a Nation.
CB
Good Times, Noodle Salad
Not only is it absolutely despicable, it also isn't a very good film to boot. It is very dated and overlong. The top 250 sucks anyways, as do all lists of "greatest films ever made". These are as propagandistic as this film.
shareI own the DVD. I've owned it for over a decade. I own it because I had to write extensively about Birth Of A Nation. If you have to had to watch it as many times as I did, you start learning fast that BofN doesn't hold up well.
What is obvious is the BofN REALLY represents Griffith's 19th century mindset. One of a stifled Victorian mindset. The racism IS a problem but the composition and the storyline REALLY starts to grate upon repeated viewing because it's so anachronistic.
If you want to see a far superior film from 1915, look up DeMille's (yes THAT DeMille) The Cheat. The Cheat holds up FAR better to past and present audiences.
_________________________________________
"If you really want something in life you have to work for it. Now quiet, they're about to announce the lottery numbers."
Homer Simpson
Had I lived during the 18th century,I would have exercised my power,physical strength,finances and influence to ensure that all Africans be safely escorted back to Liberia,where blacks themselves had made a "science"of slave trading among themselves for centuries.
The film is a 10!