Birth of a Nation and it's Legacy

 Dominic Mayhall

Birth of a Nation and it's Legacy

    In the early years of film, it was mostly experimentation to see what works. People got to see what worked and what didn't, but they were the pioneers of the whole film industry. In earlier films you can see some aspects of these films that have carried into today's modern cinematography. And in David Wark Griffth's epic "The Birth of a Nation" he uses angles and practical effects that could still be used today. But there are a lot of practical effects and acting that would be too ridiculous to use today.

    This film has it's good and it's bad when it comes to today's standards in both film and in politics. Most of its bad comes from the depiction and actions of some of the people during this time period. Actions and depictions of mostly African American people during this Civil War era were overly exaggerated to the extreme. Which politics wise, can be seen as a form of propaganda. And as the movie plays on towards the end, I had feelings of confusion and awkwardness of whatever was supposed to be happening.

    The more and more I got deeper into this movie, it had me lost more than once. For me, the plot was hard to follow through the majority of it all, but I did know what the main plot was about. It was like a classic family feud story between the Stonemans up North and the Camerons down South. As the movie is nearing its end, you think that this movie is cheering on the abolitionist Stonemans, but does a total 180 and at the remaining 30 or so minutes the bad guys, Ku Klux Klan, win against the army of all black soldiers.

    Other than the black face and depiction of African Americans at that time. I did like the shots and angles they had throughout the movie. Like when it panned over large crowds or did close ups on different people, so the audience knew what those people were exactly doing. I do think that sound would've enhanced the effect of this movie and makes me realize how much people take listening to audio through electronics for granted. Also 60 million dollars on its first run is mind boggling for that time period. It's astounding now and more so for that era.

    For a run time of 3 hours, you'd think they could've been able to cover more ground or put up word cards more often to show us what they were saying. I feel if they would've done those things I would have enjoyed it more. It says a lot to be a box office hit for 24 years before "Gone with the Wind" takes over, but I do wonder what those other movies before then were like. I'm also pretty concerned that it was so popular for that long of a span and goes to show how divided the country was in both the 1860s and 1910s.
    

    

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Beginning of Film History

Dominic Mayhall Beginning of Film History     There have been many important inventors and visionaries to come and work on videography or film as a whole. Some of which are more important than others. And a couple of these inventors contributed more to the development of film making than some. I'll be ranking who I believe is the most influential, from first to last.     For my number one most important film figure I have to go with Eadweard Muybridge and his invention of the zoopraxiscope. He really started it all with "motion picturing." All by putting those pictures on a clear disk, then using the zoopraxiscope to have it spin around giving the effect that it's moving. And from this he held the first public motion picture exhibition. Which later on Thomas Edison, who I'm not fond of, would take inspiration from to help create the first motion picture camera.      In my number two spot I'm going with the Lumiere brothers. Their invention of the Cinematograph
Read more

Gold Diggers and M

Dominic Mayhall Gold Diggers and M          This week we were shown a glimpse of the golden age of Hollywood and the overwhelming number of movies that were produced in just a couple of decades.  Movies seemed to grow at a rapid rate and in a short amount of time. In that short slide of all those movie titles passing by, it looked like more than a couple hundred movies were made in just one to three years. And I see a production difference in two movies that came out only two years a part.           Comparing these two films, Gold Diggers and M, is like water and oil. These movies are acted and written polar opposite to one another. One is German and the other is an American film. Both have different feels for their own genres, and you can see the differences that are portrayed in Germany and America. The movie M had pretty much no music in it, you could just hear the static or the wind in the backgrounds of every shot. The things you could hear where objects people were using. Like th
Read more