If that title sounds familiar, it's because it was re-acquired by a black filmmaker by the name of Nate Parker who made this film about a slave rebellion and became the darling of Sundance winning Audience Award and Jury prize. Sundance blows goats. Not because of this movie (I haven't seen it I'm sure it's good). But because they have an agenda. There's so much guilt ridden garbage in that little town that almost trumps the rich Whitey population the rest of the year.
Sundance says it's for the filmmakers. But judging by who they allow in or not, it usually has to do with who you know and what agenda you have coming in. For the most part, the voting committee don't like people who comment on patriotism as a good thing. They want movies that tell you that America's in trouble (even though their people have the ear of the nation). It's still fucked. It doesn't matter. It's run by this mentality that you have to share their disgust for it.
Case in point, Adam Carolla submitted a documentary on Paul Newman. Yeah, THE Newman who is the yin to Robert Redford's yang in even the name "Sundance." It's inconceivable screenwriter William Goldman hasn't a throne there. It was denied. Most likely because they hate Adam Carolla that much. That Redford's lifelong friend was honored with a documentary about his passion of racing was rejected. That's hilarious. Had it been made by...oh...Nate Parker, it's a pretty sure thing. So if you want to make these festivals it's easy to find an agenda most will allow in. Transgender/gay/slavery/Holocaust/homeless/pro-refugee. It's not that hard. In fact, one of my friends just finished a project where it was women in the 1950's that questioned their sexuality, ala "Carol" but pre-"Carol" but not really, since "Carol" was first a book. But anyway, it hasn't entered a film festival yet that rejected them. And the best part, the lead actress KNOWS this. She even laughs about it. Because they purposely set out to make a kind of movie that can't be rejected by these people.
In regards to "Birth Of A Nation" and Nate's comment as to how this was a kick to white supremacy for the success of his movie. All I can say is...he was first helped by George Lucas. Last I checked, a white dude, about a White vs. Black slavery story (unoriginal pandering), voted for a jury prize by a predominant White panel. To White audiences. And he wants to say that this proves Black audiences will go to "Black movies." This guy is stupid beyond words, because he really doesn't see that he is in the vacuum of snobbery. He is catering EXACTLY to what White America can use to shut you up. You don't just make a story that doesn't contain a Black theme and allow the audiences to find it. You've pandered to Black ideology to suit your career. That's the biggest Uncle Tom move I've ever seen. Speaking of which, surprise in all that creativity, he couldn't pick a title that's already been used. He stole a White dude's movie title. I think it takes big brass ones to do so. Or stupidity. Or an overwhelming ego that he's turning on the plantation owner that robbed him first. Whatever it is, it's really hurting the "noble cause." Grow the fuck up. Make something original.
No comments:
Post a Comment