Many American movies have attempted to capture the oppressive lives of slaves during a heinous time in our history. But, the harsh realities of these accounts are often concealed by less graphic, and more pleasant, experiences. In his review, “The Blood and Tears, Not the Magnolias,” Manohla Dargis claims that “12 Years a Slave,” a new movie directed by Steve McQueen, “may be the one that finally makes it impossible for American cinema to continue to sell the ugly lies it’s been hawking for more than a century.”
http://www.awardsdaily.com/blog/fox-searchlight-positions-12-years-a-slave-for-dec-27th-release/
This biographical film is based on the true story of Solomon Northup (played by Chiwetel Ejiofor), a freeman of African descent, who was seized in Washington and subsequently enslaved in the pre-Civil War era. Upon being captured, he becomes a victim of torture, abuse, and long hours of fieldwork. Failing to mention any generous masters or optimistic slaves, McQueen deliberately depicts Northup’s near-lynching and gruesome encounters with a drunk, violent master to emphasize human suffering, a brutal aspect of slavery that is frequently neglected by artists. According to Dargis, the movie “holds nothing back in the show of suffering.”
What sets Northup’s story apart from typical slave narratives is his eagerness to live and regain his freedom. Having once been a freeman in New York, with the liberty to walk in public with his wife and children, he does not fully accept the fact that he now holds the same value as property, even as he is bound and repeatedly sold to different masters. Rather than focusing on visual appeal in his movie, McQueen highlights Northup’s unwavering desire for independence.
I think McQueen’s authentic approach towards his film is a crucial and effective means of revealing the unglamorous truth. It is not uncommon for artists to mask the atrocious reality with more reassuring fiction since such tales are favored by moviegoers. However, I believe that it is important to convey the facts because it adds meaning and relevance to art. The blatant truth can be just as, if not more, inspiring and captivating than the charming lies that viewers generally like to hear.
In addition to that, many modern directors choose to direct more attention to the aesthetic appeal of their pieces in order to attract audiences, forgetting about the initial intention of their work. They don’t realize that the actual content can engage observers just as well. This applies not only to movie directors, but also to all artists.
Though I have not yet seen the movie, I think “12 Years a Slave” is a must-see, judging by its great reviews. Many people prefer to watch alluring lies and films with happy, fairytale endings. But watching depictions of the truth can give us a better understanding of past conditions and reality.
Link to Article:
Sources:
Dargis, Manohla. “The Blood and Tears, Not the Magnolias – ’12 Years a Slave’ Holds Nothing Back in Show of Suffering.” Rev. of 12 Years a Slave. The New York Times 18 Oct. 2013: n. pag. Print.
“12 Years a Slave.” IMDb. IMDb.com, n.d. Web. 17 Oct. 2013. <http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2024544/>.
It’s true that the movies with the loudest sounds and the most stunning of visuals get the most attention these days, even if they are lacking in plot and depth. It seems like the only time when we become aware of meaningful films is when the actors and directors of those films win the Academy Awards…(just a thought).
Anyways, the premise of “12 Years a Slave” actually reminds me of the film, “Amistad,” because it also portrays a more gruesome side to slavery. There are several graphic scenes in which slaves are brutally killed and tortured. Furthermore, it is an emotional film because it appeals to our personal ethos, which in turn, also causes us to emote our pathos. I personally thought it was a visually stunning film that had some great cinematography. However, the film also had a lot more depth and meaning to it. It portrays how slaves are very much human beings and they should be as free as anyone else. Although it is a court-based drama that might not initially appeal to everyone’s tastes, the film still manages to make the audience “feel” something, whether it be moral obligation, empathy, etc.
This is what all art should do: make us feel something rather than impress us with pretty pictures and graphics. But I think as long as the Academy Awards exist, we shall continue to see more deep, meaningful films in the works.
I agree with your view and your article made me excited to go see this movie. Movies and books about slavery are common in American art culture but these works are often romanticized to appeal to our optimistic natures. We acknowledge the past and that slavery happened, but when we make movies about this period in our history I completely agree that we skate over some of the atrocities.
What came to mind when I read your review of the article was the Quentin Tarantino movie ‘Django Unchained.’ Now I loved this movie as a form of entertainment but as a movie about slavery I think we can all agree it was unrealistic. Slaves in America didn’t have these exciting, revolutionary lives. Some attempted to rebel but up until the Civil War these revolts were unglamorous and unsuccessful. I’m hoping that this new movie, ’12 Years a Slave,’ will give us the raw, devastating truth of what this institution was really like.
I agree with your view about how watching depictions of the truth leads to a better understanding of past conditions and reality. The sugarcoating that is often used in film by directors essentially hides the bare back and candidness of the truth, which is definitely important when trying to understand the actual meaning of something. The authentic approach doesn’t hide the harsh realities of things; this makes the movie truthful and without such added aesthetic appeal.
I like how you chose to write about the movie “12 Years a Slave,” because I have wanted to watch it and reading your blog post gives me an overview of what to expect. It is nice to know that the movie portrays the reality of slavery without sugarcoating it like other movies. I believe it’s important for the arts to depict the reality as it is, as people in society have the rights to know what is going on in the world, regardless of whether it is the past or the present. This reminds me of the Pulitzer Prize winning photo, with the vulture and African child. The photo shocked the world, and many detested the photographer Kevin Carter for taking the picture instead of helping the child. However, I think it was absolutely necessary for Carter to have taken such a striking and devastating photo to let more realize the horrible situation in Africa. Indeed, a picture is worth a thousand words.
Both the good and bad deserve an equal amount of show time in the movies. Movies need to provide both perspectives to give movie goers a balance point of view similar to a historian’s view. The movie market isn’t run by historians, it is run by consumers and production companies. They decided that good movies will sell more than negative ones. I believe we as consumers play an important part in the selection of movies. If we want more movies portraying the cruel truth then we should watch more movies in those genres. Once companies notice our thirst for the truth then they will attempt to meet our needs.
Slavery is an important topic because of the major part it played in our history and culture. People need to be educated in the horrors of slavery and its consequences to prevent those from replicating a similar event. Americans can’t avoid the past, we have to come to terms with it and acknowledge its existence. Even something cruel and atrocious can have an important meaning to it.
I agree somewhat with your viewpoint of the brutal truth of slavery and how that is portrayed within the movie. I have not seen it myself, but reading your post, I assume that it is more plot based. However, I think that movies should also have an aesthetic side. This is a movie, not a documentary. Documentaries are for those who want to be informed. Movies are usually for entertainment, not always information. Each type of media has its own demographic. It’s quite interesting that they made a movie based on history (not that it hasn’t been done before) but a lot more people are geared towards comedy and horror movies. However, I can agree that this seems like a more entertaining way to learn. It could be used as a form of education but I would assume for a more mature crowd since it is the “brutal truth”. This probably would be good for high school and college students interested in history.
Janice Fong
I agree that many American movies do not accurately depict the lives of slaves. As always, people are biased towards their history and will always makes things appear look better than it actually was to decrease the level of atrocity. Although McQueen’s movie may be gruesome to watch and may present a harsh reality for Americans to accept, I think his depiction of slavery is much more realistic.
Also, I really like McQueen’s concept of portraying Northup as a headstrong character with a desire for freedom rather than a weak character who simply accepts his fate. This depicts that slaves are humans with the desire for freedom just like the rest of us and evokes empathy in the audience for Northup. McQueen’s aesthetically plain but realistic movie is certainly one of a kind because many directors nowadays are too willing to sacrifice content and meaning for aesthetic appeal. And it’s not the directors’ fault; it’s the audience’s fault for giving aesthetic movies too much attention. After reading your blog, I am actually tempted to see “12 Years a Slave” so I can get a realistic look on slavery. I myself often watch movies for their amazing aesthetics and effects so I think watching this movie will provide me with a new, enlightening experience. Judging by this review, the movie seems to be an exemplary piece of art with the ability to evoke feelings and portray reality rather than a bunch of graphics and special effects lumped up together.
As much as I hate being lied to by the media, I think its necessary to sometimes have movies sugarcoated. Yes, its refreshing to finally have a movie that depicts the entire truth in the story of slavery, but on the other hand, its not a documentary…Movies generally tend to have some “fluff” so that it doesn’t deter moviegoers and critics. Many people do not want to see the gruesomeness of our past (even though it is important to always remember it).
While I believe that this movie is too harsh for our society to face, I do always agree with you when you state “the blatant truth can be just as, if not more, inspiring and captivating than the charming lies that viewers generally like to hear.” I truly think this statement essentially ties up the directors motive.
The uncomfortable truth is often something people try to avoid, because it can disrupt the mood of your entire day. Like art, when a movie has depth, it can be a very satisfying to enjoy. This definitely looks like something that is worth watching. The first instance that comes to mind when the topic of slavery comes up along with the concept of the truth behind it is Uncle Tom’s Cabin. However personally I feel that an instance like this is better suited for a documentary rather than a movie because the movie may say that it is based on a true story, but the story will not be the truth but rather what may be controversial or what people want to watch.
I personally am of the opinion that movies are meant to be fiction so I do not mind the sugar-coating. Movies trying to be as real as possible do not do very well because movies are meant to show larger than life characters. The slaves in slave movies have to be these enduring, powerful people who persevere through heavy suffering with a smile on their face. While it may seem ridiculous it is what people want to see. Brutal honesty should be left to documentaries in my opinion. Although the documentaries do reach a more limited audience, movies should not have to be so honest because should be for entertainment.
I personally like it when art is provocative and uncensored, especially when trying to reveal truth or express points. The ugliness of American slavery isn’t something that is particularly new to me, though. I can only speak from my perspective but in learning about American history growing up, I’ve seen brutal depictions of slavery in films and documentaries. For people who haven’t watched such films in learning about slavery, though, this could be an eye opening awakening. I don’t think it’s particularly unethical for filmmakers to tone down their depictions of slavery in their movies; the reality of slavery is something that children should be exposed to as part of learning history in school.
As for the graphicness of “12 Years a Slave”, I think some kind of disclaimer should be included and I hope that people who wouldn’t be okay with it research the film before going to see it. While I think people should face reality and see what really happened, they should still be able to choose what they expose themselves to. That being said, I’m glad some filmmakers and artists choose to create art that is not necessarily pleasant to experience but provides opportunities to learn and change our ways of thinking.
The problem of sugarcoating facts in art is a prevalent problem around the world. People in the world today usually try to avoid coming into contact with the ugly issue of the past. What these people don’t realize is that turning away from past atrocities only adds to the chance of these events being repeated in the future. There is no wrong in breaking the truth to the common mass; they may feel uncomfortable for the duration, but they will benefit from knowing the right answers.