Now Showing: The Birth of a Nation
Nate Parker directs and stars in the answer to the controversial film “The Birth of a Nation.”
Photo courtesy of Warner Brothers
Nate Parker and Aja Naomi King plat Nat and Cherry, two slaves who get married despite their initial differences.
October 12, 2016
As someone who tends to become emotional when watching movies, I had to prepare myself for the fact that a movie such as “The Birth of a Nation” cannot have a happy ending. Two hours later, I left the theater not only with tears in my eyes, but also an unsettling feeling that the story of Nat Turner had been done an injustice.
This movie is incredibly upsetting and hard to watch, as it depicts the gross realities of slavery in America. It begins with the haunting words “based on a true story.” The story in question is that of Nat Turner, an African American preacher turned insurgent and the revolt he led, which resulted in the deaths of around 50 slave owners and over 200 slaves.
Nat (played by the film’s director Nate Parker) is picked out by his masters as a child because they believed that God had blessed him with the ability to read. Elizabeth Turner (Penelope Ann Miller), the mother of the family he works for, gives him a Bible and works with him daily until he can read Bible verses in front of the congregation at church. However, young Nat is eventually sent back to work alongside the other slaves.
Years later, Nat still works in the fields under the son of the family, Samuel (Armie Hammer). When other slave owners find out that Nat preaches to the other slaves every Sunday, they offer to pay Samuel to have Nat calm down their own slaves using the scripture. However, as he goes from farm to farm telling slaves to submit, his eyes are opened, coming to the conclusion that God is guiding him to a different path: revolution.
First time film writer-director Parker is seemingly apathetic to historical accuracy. In the movie, the rape of Nat’s wife, Cherry, seems to be the catalyst that encourages Nat toward revolting. However, there is a lack of evidence that his wife was raped by slave patrollers, let alone that it was what made Nat want to revolt.
The basis of his revolt was that slavery was unjust, immoral and went against the word of God. Critics have also complained about the lack of accuracy in Parker’s portrayal of Nat’s relationship with his family, his daily life as a slave and even the actions he carried out during the rebellion.
What he lacks as a director, Parker makes up for as an actor. He is strong, heroic and most importantly, completely human. At no point, does he turn Nat into an over-glorified figure. It was inspiring watching the character finally transition from a submissive preacher and slave to a fearless leader.
Cinematically, the movie is beautiful. The artistic angles and peaceful shots of cotton fields almost makes the viewers forget that the movie they are watching is anything but that.
However, the plot hardly seemed to be present the first half of the movie and the suddenly accelerated story in the second half, starting with the actual rebellion, left me unable to feel anything other than confusion.
When things slowed down again at the end and I was finally given space to breathe and internalize all I had seen, an overwhelming heaviness fell over me. For a feel-good, patriotic movie, look elsewhere; “The Birth of a Nation” reminds us of our shameful past.
