You could cut the
tension, buzz and anticipation on the release of this movie with a knife. The
film that is written, produced, stars, and is also the directorial debut for
Nate Parker. As a fan of Parker's work I was definitely looking forward to what
he would do with a film based on the story of Nat Turner, a slave who rebelled
against slave owners. As I write this review, I feel my blood boiling, but I
will do my best to remain focused on this movie...
I must say, not a bad
debut Mr. Parker, not bad at all. This movie had its flaws, but when it comes
to the story of Nat, I enjoyed it. The movie started out a bit weak. It was a
little all over the place and I wasn't the biggest fan of some of the
performances, especially by the kid who played young Nat. The movie got better
for me when Nate Parker (who is an exceptional actor) arrived on the scene.
Parker always exudes the best emotions in any character he plays. That is a
remarkable thing to do. I definitely enjoyed him in the role of Nat. However,
the film lacked the power I was expecting from the trailer. It was kind of
lukewarm throughout the film with jolts of fire. Definitely not like what 12
Years a Slave had you feeling, just in case some of you are looking for that.
Besides Parker, many of the other performances were nothing to really praise.
Armie Hammer was ok...but he's always just ok. Gabriel Union is in the cast,
but I seriously don't recall her having a speaking role...so weird. Aja, who
played Cherry, wasn't bad, and I look forward to her in more roles. I also
had a major problem with the makeup. Why did they have Aja Naomi King looking
like that in her first scene? Was that wig you had on her necessary, was the
black face supposed to be dirty? And don't get me started on the ash around
some of the slaves’ mouth. The poor make-up job took away from the movie more
than it needed too.
The movie seriously
focuses on Nat and religion, which I didn't have a problem with. As we all know
religion was used to keep slaves/people in line. As with Nat's story, it is the
motivating force (among others) for his actions, I believe Parker's directing
could use a little work, but not bad for a debut. I felt the story was a bit
rushed in some parts. Like I wish there was more time spent on the organizing
of the slaves for the rebellion. That should have been a bigger part of the
story.
In response to all the
controversy over the rape charges he was acquitted of in 1999 and the plot of
rape inaccurately portrayed in film, I will say this...Nate Parker has had a
12yr career and has been in at least 20 films since he was acquitted and I
never heard a peep about these charges until 2016. With word of Oscar
nominations for this film dredging up dirt on him seems convenient. I can't be
the judge and jury on the charges that were brought against him because he was
already trialed for those in 1999. I will however like to point the finger at
the media for pretending to care about the alleged victim by bringing up this
case just to push your own agenda...shame on you. His first movie role was in
2005, and there was no press for the alleged victim and her case? There is so
much focus on a man who was acquitted of charges 17yrs ago, and hardly any
press given to Brock Turner and his sexual assault victim. Why is that? As far
as the rape that was added in the plot is it really historically inaccurate. It
is historically known that slave women were repeatedly raped by their slave
owners, and that part of the story is portrayed in every slave film. Unless you
can say the rape of black slaves never happened, please do me the favor and
have several seats...I'm just going to leave that right there.
All in all I enjoyed
Parker's powerful performance. Parker's directing could use some work as the
story sometimes lost its way. I enjoyed the strong focus on Nat, but felt there
were some compelling parts of his story and the rebellion that were left out. I
applaud Parker for bringing Nat Turner's story (one that needs to be told) to
the big screen...B+
No comments:
Post a Comment