Jump to content

New Movie, Birth Of A Nation.


Recommended Posts

  1.  New Movie Birth Of A Nation. It's About Nat Turner  Slave ,Rebellion. Nat Turner  And Slaves Killed Many White In 1831. Then White People Killed Nat Turner And Many Slaves. What Is Interesting Is The Movie Poster. There Is A American Flag Made Into  A Noose Around Nat Turner's Neck. A American Flag ,Old  Glory ,Red, White And Blue Made Into A Noose, Around Nat Turner neck. With San Francisco Quarterback Kneeling When National Anthem Is Played, White People Being Upset. Last Year White Police In San Francisco Talked About Lynching Black People, Burning Crosses. There Are White Police  At KKK Rallies Online.. White Police Fired For Being KKK Members. Donald trump At A Black Church Again..
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

I just published Kam's review of this film

He says it is an Oscar contender, but apparently folks have been making a stick about Parker being a rapist in college.  I did bother to follow up on the hullabaloo.  I figured if he was a rapist someone would have locked him up or he would have been charged... Otherwise I guess they are unsubstantiated accusations.  Then again if Kam mentioned it in his review, there is probably more to it.

I usually ask about these issues in reviews is it relevant, but in this case if it has the potential to prevent an Academy Award nomination, then it is an issue. This will be the next film I watch in the theater.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It appears Sara's account, or perhaps Sara herself has been, hacked by an actual troll?  I have to block the account as I don't have the time to manage these exchanges...  :(

Kam interviewed Nate Parker and even asked him about the allegation of rape against him.  You won't find his response interesting on the point (I didn't).  

Nate also seems to be saying a lot to come across as a devout Christian.  I'm always nervous around people who have to tell you they are Christian; being a Christian or Christ-like is one of those things that should be self-evident, and I guess they have to tell you 'cause you wouldn't know based upon their behavior...

nate-parker-charging-birth-of-a-nation.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That didn't sound like a troll to me.  That was typical sara vitriol.  I have always been suspicious in regard to there being more than one person posting under the name sara. That's why I have accused her of having multiple personalities and of being bi-polar and at times having a childish playground mentality.  I don't think you should block her based on that one post.  it didn't bother me because it was a repetition of her usual blather.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Sara I'll unblock your account to give you the opportunity to remove your posts and delete your account (you created it, you delete it).  

While Cynique did not feel I should block you based upon that last post, I disagreed for a number of reasons.  But I'll give you one.  I have no interest in providing a platform for a Black woman to refer to another Black woman (an esteemed elder no less), in the language that you used.  I let a lot of stuff go, but even I have to draw the line somewhere.  There is no justification for it, and I won't tolerate it here.  If you want to trash another Black woman using that kind of language, go to Twitter, and have a blast.

If you decide not to delete your account and continue posting, that is up to you, just keep the above in mind.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remain mystified as to why sara was so determined to be a part of this forum.  She did, on any number of occasions, make reference to the "ignorance" that abounds here, yet she stuck around, attempting to use this arena for her own personal agenda, regularly making reference to being a published author, name-droppin in the mode of a true wanna-be, bragging about being degreed while repeatedly denying the academic credentials of others.  And she was  determined from the beginning to discredit, distort and lie about anything that had to do with my recollections and where I  come from. Yet she'd go into a frenzy if I returned the favor by dismissing her drivel   As important and impressive as she imagines herself to be, you'd think she'd have something better to do with her time.  Apparently not.  tsk-tsk

I don't care whether sara stays or goes. it ain't that serious to me.

BTW, sarat. your comment should read: "an azzhole, not "a azzhole".  You obviously didn't get your degree in English, or maybe you're par for the course at the college you attended.  LOL   

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't give Sara any grief on her English given the many typos I make (I just fixed 5 typoes in my last post).  Besides I have no expectation of error free typing unless the message is unclear because of it. 

Personally I found Sara impossible to communicate with.  I stopped engaging with her months ago, and I've long stopped trying to understand her motivation for participating on this forum.  I do know she had no interest in exchanging ideas, or learning anything.  But that would not make her any different than most people...

If she is actually a published author I think she missed a great opportunity here.  The fact that I have no clue who she is or what books she has written is a colossal waste, because at the very least I would have created a presence for her on the website at no cost and used any opportunity to promote her work where it made sense.

But I have to say I never did understand why you felt it necessary to exchange barbs with her.  I wished I started deleting those earlier on, but I actually thought you two were having a bit of immature fun.

The other problem is when people read these types of base exchanges they get intimidated, turned off, and are less likely to join the fray. Obviously, I have no problem with a heated debate, but the ongoing tit-for-tat, back and forth, that every conversation between you and Sara devolved into was a waste of everyone's time and it more difficult to read the more interesting parts of a conversation.

The idea that Harry's post on Nat Turner could so so quickly devolve into you being called a "ni--er bi-ch" is disturbing.  It seemed like a bad pattern was just getting worse.  That was something I wanted to prevent.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I understand, Troy.  I continually corrected sara's grammar to take her down a notch because she was so quick to remind us that she was educated, while in her blurred view,  I was a sack slinger at the post office. LOL  She constantly provided me with weapons to use against her. In fact, everything about her motivated my desire to keep her off balance because she was so self-important. 

I have thick skin and have never embraced the role of being a victim, never been put on the defense by sara's obsessive ageism because I think her vents revealed more about her than me. I found her to be an interesting case study, but obviously most people don't want to be dislodged from their comfort zone and prefer for everybody to "just get along". I, myself, am a case study for those who like to analyze people.  I have never claimed to be a sweet old lady who makes nice. Or a wimp. There are enough of those in the world. I am devilish and never met a know-it-all who I didn't want to challenge for the title. ;) But, still, I liked Shirley and Mel and everybody else on this site, so obviously sara and I were natural enemies who rubbed each other the wrong way. ( I even kind of liked that "Celestial" troll that showed up a while back because he was sooo over the top.)  

I also wondered why nobody ever came forth to take sara's side. Why didn't anybody step up and chastise me? And, actually, it wasn't a stretch when I needled her because she would leave herself open.  Nat Turner not an inspiration?  A ho-hum movie review about a film that had already been expertly critiqued? The south side not being the location of the majority of murders in Chicago? Tiger Woods being the first black pro golfer? The familiar plot of John Wayne movies about the Cavalry vs the Indians not applying to the black Seminoles vs the Army??? There are consequences to telling lies about me and minimizing my history...

Nevertheless, I do apologize to you, Troy, for making your job harder and I do appreciate your patience with my "keeping up shit".   If I have discouraged people from posting here, I am sorry that they do not have the courage of their convictions.  Cynique will try and do better in the future.     

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Cynique.  We all try to do better...that is about all we can do since no one is perfect.

I'm always wary of people who have to tell you how smart they are.  This should be self-evident.  

Simply saying you are "a published author" means nothing without seeing the actual product. Over the better part of the last two decades selling books I've seen a lot of garbage.  Besides being published does not make you a decent human being...

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In retrospect we can deduce certain things about the sara presence on this forum.  Obviously, the book she reproduced here about the black Seminoles was the one she wrote.  it also became apparent that dispensing information about black history topped her agenda because black studies were probably her field of "expertise". Consequently, in her avid eyes, she envisioned this forum as a classroom, and its posters and lurkers as ignorant pupils to whom she could impart her knowledge on black history, and every other aspect about black folks, something which motivated her to try and deconstruct my "black experience".

Also because she was from Chicago she resented any remarks or input from anybody who threatened her self-appointed role as the resident authority on the subject of this city.  Furthermore, by being from Chicago, she was in denial about anything that didn't put it in a good light, and that included herself whom she imagined to be infallible.

The problem immediately arose when the "pupils" didn't cooperate, and her mission to school them fell flat, mostly due to her superior attitude and an assumption that we didn't already know what she wanted to teach us.  This frustrated her because she was not used to being rebutted or ridiculed or disrespected.  And when she couldn't get over, in desperation, she finally responded in the only way she knew which was to revert to her ghetto roots, resorting  to lies and deviousness and profane vitriol, eventually at her wit's end because Cynique was unrelenting...  

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Unrelenting" LOL!

The other stuff seems pretty insightful, I don't know how accurate it is, but if it was right on the money, I would not be surprised at all.  If Sara did write a book on the seminole wars, it defies logic that she never posted information about it here.

It wasn't that Sara wanted to put a positive spin on all things Chicago, it had to be the positive spin her way.  This is what made it literally impossible for me to dialog with her.  Recall I wrote Chicago, not Harlem, should be considered the Black capital I sited things like Ebony, Third World Press, etc, and Sara disputed and shot down my reasoning by citing some inconsequential mural, as if I was unfamiliar with either city.

Still I learned some things as a result of Sara posting if not directly, indirectly; while I was familiar with the seminole wars, I was promoted to look into it more as a result of Sara's posts, and learned more about them as a result.  President Jackson was a busy and wicked little devil...

I think the Sara experience also helped me become a better moderator too ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/10/2016 at 8:13 AM, Troy said:

If Sara did write a book on the seminole wars, it defies logic that she never posted information about it here

This would've given some clues as to her identity, something which she definitely did not want known.  Her anonymity allowed her to get away with saying anything because nobody knew who she was.  She claimed her book was in libraries all over the country and that seemed to be her demograph as "teacher". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh OK.

I just did a search on this site for info on the Seminole Wars, and the only results point back to the conversations we had here.  I did a quick search on Amazon for books on the subject and they all a appear to be written by white men.

When I get a chance I'll research a good book on the subject and add it to the website.  It is too important an aspect of Black history not to have a book on the subject here on the site.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Saw the movie a few days ago.

It was pretty good, but it could have been better.

I don't like how this movie as well as other "slave movies" like DJango and 12 Years a Slave always INSINUATE slave masters raping and abusing Black women but never actually show it in it's brutality.

But it wasn't bad at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man some things are better left to the imagination.  

One of the complaints I heard about this film was that there is no record of Turner's wife being raped.

Author Roxane Gay says she is not seeing the film because of Nate's past as a rapist himself (I don't know the details of the accusations or charges).

At the rate, I probably will not get a chance to catch the film in the theater, but I do want to see it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read that It was a white girl who Nate and the co-writer of this film allegedly gang raped during their college days.  But they were never charged and the woman later committed suicide. I'm not sure whether it was Roxane Gay who said it, but also I read somewhere that a black female historian was very critical of the film saying it was riddled with inaccuracies and out right falsehoods  and appeared to have been given the "Hollywood" treatment to spice it up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Man that is terrible story. I wonder why they were never charged.  It could have been just a troubled young lady... but then again from the little I've heard. I've never heard Nate deny anything, even in the Interview, I just published with him all this was all he could manage to say in response to the question, What do you have to say about the incident?

“I’ll say this. I’m 36 years-old, and my life has been a series of obstacles, a series of educating moments. As I said before, I’m trying to come as close to my faith as possible, and I see this journey as just that, a journey. I set out to make this film because I felt like it was written in my heart. And any obstacle that has come before or will come after I will have to deal with accordingly, with my faith. My hope is that people will see this film for what it is, and I also hope they will be able to see a bit of my heart and of what I’m striving to do with this film.”—Nate Parker

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's funny Troy, he was an NCAA D-1 Wrestler at Penn State. The same university that hid Jerry Sandusky's rapes for over 30 years. It seems that his friend took the fall and he transferred. He has never outright denied the rape, which is troubling. Of course people are saying that he is being wronged because no one brought it up during his other films. the conspiracy theorists think that he is being targeted because of the film's story. I think it's like Biggie said, Mo Money, Mo Problems. When you take a 17 million dollar pay day you become food for the wolves and your life enters the real public domain where everything you do is scrutinized. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow... given what you wrote it is troubling and I believe he did it. Like I said before whenever someone goes over-the-top-religious I look at them with the side eye. I cosign Roxane Gay's boycott of the film.

I heard some speculation that he is being targeted, to prevent the film from being nominated for an academy award.  But from what I've also heard the film is really not that good anyway.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


I've heard the same things about some historical inaccuracies in the movie.
My take on it is.....who cares?

There were more lies and historical inaccuracies in Eminem's "8 Mile" movie, yet I don't recall one critic bringing it up.

I wonder did they do a fact check of Schindler's List to see how much of THAT was historically accurate, or maybe one of Mel Gibson's The Patriot?

This wasn't a science project, it's entertainment BASED on a true story and should be treated as such. Enjoy it for what it's worth and learn the overall historical lesson.


As far as Nate's rape allegation........

He was acquitted, so legally speaking he's an innocent man.
What reason do they have to keep calling this man a rapist or bringing it up except to smear his reputation and tarnish his and the movie's image?

I don't condone rape at all, nor do I know the full details of this particular case but.....

When you have these young women who get drunk and hang out with young men on college campuses doing all kinds of sexual acts with them and then regret it in the morning....is this really rape?

What responsibility do many of these young women have in putting themselves in these situations?

And never mind that if the girl in question was indeed White that there is a HISTORY of White women who voluntarily have sex with Black men only to cry rape later.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/17/2016 at 9:11 PM, Cynique said:

read somewhere that a black female historian was very critical of the film saying it was riddled with inaccuracies and out right falsehoods

This is the message bouncing around the black women "Enough is enough" social media echo chamber.  A faction of black women will not support the movie : because 1- rape charges (no conviction/allegedly no remorse for passing around a woman for sex) 2- black women have no agency in the film and are used as props to support the "black macho male" narrative.

https://www.thenation.com/article/the-birth-of-a-nation-is-an-epic-fail/   The latter isn't sitting well with Dr. Leslie M. Alexander who wrote the article I linked here.  Her bio reads: professor in the Department of African American and African Studies at The Ohio State University, where she specializes in 19th century Black culture and political consciousness. She teaches courses on slavery, resistance movements, and historical accuracy in film.

Historians such as Professor Alexander mentioned black women, especially, Nat Turner's mom played a role in waging war against slavery to the point where she attempted to kill Nat to prevent enslavement.  Unfortunately women are silent in the film (literally in the portrayal of Nat Turner's wife).   Further some say  Nat Turner had a "spiritual awakening" so to speak and refused to participate in the system. A holy ghost moment when someone finally stands up to the moral injustice is a powerful motif.    

Aside, I think that would have been a better inciting moment anyway, especially with black people claiming "stay woke" status today.  


Who knows, maybe this whole film is Nate Parker and Jean Celestin's $10 million attempt at absolution and we're just along for the ride.  Still, I don't pay to watch slave movies so I can't claim to boycott. After the reviews, however, I have no desire to see it anyway. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...


No, I hadn't.
But now I have.

So let me get this straight...........

The author is angry because Black slave women were "inaccurately" being portrayed as having been raped by White men, and even angrier because Black men were shown coming to their rescue???

Excuse my language but what kind of BACKWARD fucked up bullshit "logic" is that?????

Man!
I've heard many women and even a few historians complain about the realities of sexual abuse NOT being portrayed or addressed but never have I heard someone come out and actually take issue with it BEING addressed and claim it didn't happen!


As far as I'm concerned, THIS statement says it all about the mindset of it's author:

"
This is the story that deserves to be told, not one that disseminates archaic and damaging myths that cast black men as courageous saviors and black women as helpless victims."


Apparently, she feels that Black men being courages and saving their own people has got to be a "myth".
It couldn't have really happened.
Black men?
Black men loving their women and children so much that they were willing to fight and die for them????
Naw.......
According to the author of THAT article, "that must have been a fabrication by some Black man trying to compensate for his own guilt or inferiority complex at the expense of Black women or something."

Half of the article features her contradicting herself by condemning the portrayal of Black men as warriors and saviors while just a few paragraphs down hoping for more movies that portray the resillience and fighting spirit of slaves.

Dr Alexander's irrational article STILL doesn't change my position that this movie shouldn't be evaluated for it's historical content. She has a doctorate in the field of history so ofcourse she's going to notice every single "historical" inaccuracy, but she shouldn't assume everyone is going to look at a movie from the view of a historian as herself.
Movies were made for entertainment and it's up to the audience to do their own research for their own educational benefit.

However I believe her criticisms of this film actually betray a more ulterior motive.....
That her real problem is LESS about the historical inaccuracies of the film itself, but MORE about her lack of confidence and respect for Black men and their historical accomplishments.


 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Feminists and misogynists represent the extreme opposites when it come to views on many subjects.  I suspect that the women dissing "The Birth of a Nation"  are women from the feminist community.  The film obviously has merit or it wouldn't have received critical praise, and it should not be totally dismissed because it offends certain females. Somewhere in the middle is probably the fairest assessment of this work. Nate Parker's acquittal of rape charges and his subsequent "repentance" count for something. Everybody makes mistakes. And women often cry "rape" to either to gain something from doing so or to feign innocence when caught in compromising positions.

Rape inspires such a knee jerk reaction, that it's hard to sort out.  In my personal estimation, there's a difference between a female being sexually assaulted by a stranger, and the molestation of a provocative, sloppy drunk girl, voluntarily in the  the company of horny young male acquaintances with no self-control. "No, doesn't mean "no" if you are too intoxicated to utter it.  I know, I know, I'm making light of a serious subject; always a hazard when you are seeking the truth. And of course, my cynical attitude is why many women don't come forward after being violated under such circumstances because they end up becoming even more stressed from being made to feel that they are partly to blame for what happened when boys were being dogs.  Non-consensual sex is invariable a "he did/she did" dilemma. 

Hollywood favorites, Roman Polanski and Woody Allen come to mind as 2 celebs  Hollywood perennially excused from accusations of their past "inappropriate behavior" with young girls. So Nate is not the first and will not be the last. Recently NBA star, Derrick Rose, beat the rape charges brought against him by a former girlfriend. High profile athletes seem to be particularly prone to such incidents.  And, along these lines, Rolling Stone magazine is currently involved in a law suit for running a story about an anonymous college coed claiming to have been gang raped at a University of Virginia frat house. Her story turned out to be concocted and the repercussions from this have tainted the reputations of Rolling Stone, who had to print a retraction of it, the journalist who wrote the story, and a U. of Va. Dean who was crucified on social media for her handling of the case, and who is also the person suing this magazine.  Dirty business.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I can't get bend out of shape about the historical inaccuracies of a movie that does not bill itself as a documentary.  The problem is that many people are educated by films designed to entertain rather than educate, and they end up being misinformed.

But I imagine some readers will pick up a book to learn more about the real Nat Turner.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...