The conventional wisdom about "The Birth of a Nation"

t. brainwashed pussy that can't understand anything unless it's PC

>>82350996
not an argument

>oy vey you can't point out the mass rape and crime committed by blacks after the war you dumb goy

Even Woodrow Wilson said it was accurate when it came out

>>82351065
literally who?

DW Griffith knew how to point a camera and compose a shot, and that's all he contributed to the medium. He's a shithead by any standard when it comes to narrative, editing, and character. See Intolerance.

>>82350847
Franchise when?

>>82350847
>op posts a well written critique of a highly influential and controversial film
>gets meme replies

This is why we need /film/.

>>82350847
Is this your wrong opinion, OP, or someone else's wrong opinion?

>>82351256
No, he invented the chase to the rescue, ie. suspense, and verisimiltude in screen acting, aka characterization as you know it.

The founder of the medium as we know it was a racist. There is no problem with this fact unless you believe silly things about art and history.

>>82350847
>The controversy that it generated may very well have helped it to remain better known than other films of the era that were equally innovative and/or lavish, or nearly so.

Don't be absurd, the film's note and the landmark it left on history was of it's unprecedented success in a time when a lot of films were short utter nonsense, there's a fair and easy reason why it would be considered of note when it held the title of highest grossing film until Gone with the Wind came about a full 20 years later, and this is in a time when grosses were often underreported by theater owners and the studios had little ways to track just how many were seeing it. For it's unexpected and lasting mass appeal putting the significance on mere controversy is not paying tribute to how Griffth could captivate audiences to coming back again and again with this rare feat, something he struggled to do with later films. The controversy just did not explain the sheer number who found themselves coming back, and the cultural impact it had. If it was controversy alone, then the remake wouldn't have utterly failed to even recoup a match of the unadjusted gross of the original.

The surprsingly good nature of this film helped move away from shorts with little story like the Great Train Robbery and into an age when more fleshed out and three dimensional stories could be told. For the time it was innovative, it was fresh, and most importantly it connected with a wider audience in a way that hadn't been done before and wouldn't until a full two decades in the future.

>>82351520
1. It's not well-written.

2. The film is not controversial, because nobody defends its message. It's just condemned. A tiny number of people pretend it isn't the first masterpiece of cinema because they want to pretend that only nice feelings can make great art, that doesn't equate to controversy.

>>82351520

the /pol/tards would just inundate that board with their shitposting as well. 4chan is honestly dead.

someone should start a chan where anyone that incorporates identity politics into every one of their posts gets permabanned.

>>82351647
>a because they want to pretend that only nice feelings can make great art

Rather they want 'controversial' great art to only mean "Progressive for MY ideals in their time", as in sharing beliefs that were rogue against the time. They want to consider only things that pushed their agenda before their agenda as 'controversial' to make them feel unique.

It's hard to wrap around the concept of a great and impact film, one which had a far more lasting impact than "the first ____ superhero" that utterly goes against every ideal they had.

>>82351599
You're forgetting The Singing Fool, which beat its record at the box office.

>The surprsingly good nature of this film helped move away from shorts with little story like the Great Train Robbery and into an age when more fleshed out and three dimensional stories could be told. For the time it was innovative, it was fresh, and most importantly it connected with a wider audience in a way that hadn't been done before and wouldn't until a full two decades in the future.

This is pure horseshit. The Great Train Robbery was made in 1903. A great deal of development happened between it and The Birth of a Nation. The Birth of a Nation's higher ticket prices were a major reason for its higher grosses - it was sold for its length and status as an "art" experience. Support the orthodox, correct view of the film's importance, but for fuck's sake know what you're talking about.

>>82351768
You didn't even understand what I wrote. I said the film is not controversial. You seem to be arguing from the opposite point-of-view while thinking you're agreeing with me.

>>82351647
I'll agree that I was wrong to call it controversial, but you have to admit that op's post was written better than 90% of the shit that permeates this board.

I'd rather see someone put time and effort into a wrong opinion than shitposting, desu

>>82351686
This wouldn't work anyways. See: cunnyposter

>>82351795
>You're forgetting The Singing Fool, which beat its record at the box office.
Did it? I can't find any source that confirms this. The only information I've found says it remained on top until GWTH

>The Great Train Robbery was made in 1903.

Just an example that stuck out, which would you prefer to showcase the formation of cinematic length stories being told if not BoaN?

>The Birth of a Nation's higher ticket prices were a major reason for its higher grosses - it was sold for its length and status as an "art" experience.

Now that is horseshit, it managed to beat out films the came out far later than it in a time when ticket prices were growing more than ever, including a much larger bump when The Jazz Singer came out boasting it's technological innovation. This was no more an "Art" experience than anymore than a massive number of productions, including Griffith's very own followup with Intolerance! You'd be an utter fool to think that after the runaway success of this film they'd sell tickets for cheaper prices.

I've seen a great many claims about this film before, but you're the very first to claim that it's success was only higher ticket prices and not popularity, this is new.

>>82352029
>Did it?

It did not, I have no idea where the fuck he pulled that shit out of.

>>82351686
>fuck sperging out about the death of 4chan
ok bye bye :)

>>82351065
Woodrow wilson wasn't the most tolerant president. He initiated jim crow laws in the army and workplaces. He was incredibly racist.

>defend your family, town and nation against savages is bizzare and disturbing
fuck you