12 Years A Slave

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
From the Wall Street Journal

Movie audiences have never been presented with anything quite like the intertwined beauty and savagery of "12 Years a Slave," so it's anyone's guess whether they'll extend the embrace that Steve McQueen's film deserves. Such is the power of this landmark event, though, that it seems certain to transcend the movie realm and become a new reference point in contemporary culture—a defining vision of what slavery looked like, and felt like, in the U.S. before the Civil War.

It's a sun-scorched vision of hell that puts Hieronymus Bosch in the shade. At the same time—and here's the genius of the production, and of John Ridley's script—it's a thrilling tale of survival, based on a celebrated 1853 memoir by Solomon Northup. A free black man living happily and prosperously with his wife and children in Saratoga, N.Y., Solomon (Chiwetel Ejiofor) is pulled into a nightmare world when he is abducted by bounty hunters in 1841, then shipped off to a plantation in Louisiana as a slave in shackles and chains.

At first the educated, sweet-spirited victim doesn't realize what's happening to him, but he's brought all too quickly to understand the ruthlessness of slave traders who treat the men, women and children they sell as talking livestock—"My sentimentality," says a pitiless trader played by Paul Giamatti, "extends the length of a coin"—and the inhumanity of plantation owners who buy them. "There is no sin," says one owner, Edwin Epps, a lust-addled, Scripture-quoting brute played by Michael Fassbender. "A man does how he pleases with his property."

Like its source material, "12 Years a Slave" is a polemic, and a furious one. How could it not be, given the physical horror and moral squalor of the society it explores? Solomon's agonies—the lashings, the capricious beatings—are barely endurable for him, and a test of our willingness to bear witness, even though it's hard to turn away from the astonishing range and impassioned conviction of Mr. Ejiofor's portrayal. A slave named Patsey (Lupita Nyong'o, in another of the film's brilliant performances) endures even more terrible punishment at the hands of Epps, whose tortured sexuality leads him to rape her ritually, and to have her whipped until the flesh falls from her back.


The polemic is also a work of art. Mr. McQueen was a visual artist before he became a filmmaker, and he and his cinematographer, Sean Bobbitt, give us a succession of images that seem discovered rather than devised. (In one extended, excruciating sequence that I'll describe obliquely, so as not to diminish its impact, Solomon touches his toes to a patch of mud like a dancer performing a life-or-death gavotte.) The artistry extends to the heightened, almost literary language spoken by the slaves among themselves, and occasionally to their masters; it's a choice that could have fallen into affectation but serves to honor inchoate feelings that might otherwise have gone unexpressed. Yet Mr. Ridley's exemplary script gives everyone his intricate due. The white men and women who inhabit the film aren't all undifferentiated monsters—one can imagine them being tender with their children and generous to their friends—and those of them who perpetrate the most flagrant evil are anything but banal.

Mr. Fassbender shines, however malignantly, as the worst villain of the bunch. Epps is the lethally serious counterpart of the jovial monster played by Christoph Waltz in "Django Unchained," and one more reminder that villainy in drama is its own reward. Benedict Cumberbatch is Ford, a plantation owner with a paternalistic bent; he recognizes Solomon's intellectual and musical gifts and treats him reasonably well, but still sees him as a valuable piece of property. Paul Dano's overseer, Tibeats, is terrifying for his invincible stupidity.

As an emblem of plantation society's contradictions, Alfre Woodard's Mistress Shaw is serenely, almost surreally charming; a black woman and former slave, she is married to a white plantation owner. Brad Pitt's Bass is the antithesis of evil, a Canadian abolitionist who may be the least convincing character in the film because he shows up out of nowhere and delivers the script's only lapse into didacticism. That's easy to forgive on three counts, though: Mr. Pitt is perfectly fine in the role; as one of the producers, he was instrumental in getting "12 Years a Slave" to the screen; and the abolitionist's message of equality is a worthy one. "Your story is amazing," Bass tells Solomon gravely, "and in no way good." The film is amazing, and in every way good.
 

still-one

VIP/Donor
Aug 6, 2012
1,633
150
1,220
Milford, Michigan
I saw "12 Years A Slave" today. A very good film but at times a bit difficult to watch. The acting is consistently good as if the cinematography.
 

MylesBAstor

Well-Known Member
Apr 20, 2010
11,238
81
1,725
New York City
Saw it when it came out. Makes one see our forefathers (whom some want to worship and put on pedestals) in a very different light. Outside of Franklin and Hamilton, all the others were for the institution of slavery (not to mention women were 1/2 step above slaves). How could they write all men are created equal? Guess they meant just rich, white men were created equal.

I found the movie deeply disturbing and depressing. Usually even the most depressing of movies have one light moment or scene of hope. Not here. It just gets worse and worse and the last whipping scene is..... well best left unsaid. Also, how they used scriptures from the Bible to justify slavery every Sunday was disturbing and a real turn off to organized religion.
 

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
Saw it when it came out. Makes one see our forefathers (whom some want to worship and put on pedestals) in a very different light. Outside of Franklin and Hamilton, all the others were for the institution of slavery (not to mention women were 1/2 step above slaves). How could they write all men are created equal? Guess they meant just rich, white men were created equal.

I found the movie deeply disturbing and depressing. Usually even the most depressing of movies have one light moment or scene of hope. Not here. It just gets worse and worse and the last whipping scene is..... well best left unsaid. Also, how they used scriptures from the Bible to justify slavery every Sunday was disturbing and a real turn off to organized religion.

My wife has already told me that she won't see this movie. Last tube that happened was Scarface with Al Pacino
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
Saw it when it came out. Makes one see our forefathers (whom some want to worship and put on pedestals) in a very different light. Outside of Franklin and Hamilton, all the others were for the institution of slavery (not to mention women were 1/2 step above slaves). How could they write all men are created equal? Guess they meant just rich, white men were created equal.

I found the movie deeply disturbing and depressing. Usually even the most depressing of movies have one light moment or scene of hope. Not here. It just gets worse and worse and the last whipping scene is..... well best left unsaid. Also, how they used scriptures from the Bible to justify slavery every Sunday was disturbing and a real turn off to organized religion.



I don't know if anyone likes Bill Burr or not, but I find him hilarious and usually on point with regards to lots of issues. In one of his routines he addresses movies that are made to make white people feel guilty. From the comments here, it appears this movie never stops.

 

edorr

WBF Founding Member
May 10, 2010
3,139
14
36
Smyrna, GA
I don't know if anyone likes Bill Burr or not, but I find him hilarious and usually on point with regards to lots of issues. In one of his routines he addresses movies that are made to make white people feel guilty. From the comments here, it appears this movie never stops.

First, I seriously doubt the movie was made to make white people feel guilty, especially considering that the script was based on authentic events written in a biography. This is the same logic as suggesting Schindler's list was made to make German's feel guilty. I suspect there is a bit of projection going on here (I presume you're white).

Second, I watched this clip and based on 2.37 seconds of content, the guy cannot hold a candle to Carlos Mencia - in my mind the mother of all politically incorrect comedians.
 

mep

Member Sponsor & WBF Founding Member
Apr 20, 2010
9,481
17
0
First, I seriously doubt the movie was made to make white people feel guilty, especially considering that the script was based on authentic events written in a biography. This is the same logic as suggesting Schindler's list was made to make German's feel guilty. I suspect there is a bit of projection going on here (I presume you're white).

Second, I watched this clip and based on 2.37 seconds of content, the guy cannot hold a candle to Carlos Mencia - in my mind the mother of all politically incorrect comedians.

I too think Carlos Mencia is super-funny. I wasn't trying to say Bill is the best comedian out there, just that in light of this thread and how uncomfortable this movie made some people feel (and some won't even go to the movie and watch it because of that), I thought the skit I posted was right on target.

For the record, our white American ancestors have done all types of shameful things to other races and even ethnicities in the history of the U.S. It pretty much starts with the American Indians and goes on from there.
 

jazdoc

Member Sponsor
Aug 7, 2010
3,328
737
1,700
Bellevue
Saw it when it came out. Makes one see our forefathers (whom some want to worship and put on pedestals) in a very different light. Outside of Franklin and Hamilton, all the others were for the institution of slavery (not to mention women were 1/2 step above slaves). How could they write all men are created equal? Guess they meant just rich, white men were created equal.

The fascinating thing is why did the Founder's deliberately put themselves in this contradictory position? They did so knowing they did not live up to the high minded principles they aspired to; and yet believed that it was important to state their aspirations, even if as it exposed themselves and their Revolution to the charge of hypocrisy.

Jefferson pondered his own position and that of America in the Notes on the State of Virginia when he wrote "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath? Indeed, I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that his justice cannot sleep for ever" If a hypocrite is a man who pretends to virtues he does not possess, the Founders were certainly not that.

I'm looking forward to this movie.
 
Last edited:

KeithR

VIP/Donor
May 7, 2010
5,174
2,864
1,898
Encino, CA
another film about slavery (how many have we had in the past five years- 10?) and in McQueens way, I'm not surprised it makes you want to slit your wrists. i saw Shame- it's just as disturbing and you couldn't pay me to watch it again. he's the next Aronovsky (sp?)- love him or hate him. entertainment is one of my personal criteria of a good movie- and these kind of movies just don't do that.

i would be shocked if it wins Best Picture. dark and depressing movies always seem to lose in the end.

ps. I would level the same criticism at Passions of the Christ- which of course hollywood hated and shows their hypocritical nature
 
Last edited:

jazdoc

Member Sponsor
Aug 7, 2010
3,328
737
1,700
Bellevue
Saw this today and believe this is an extremely important movie. Chiwetel Ejiofor should be a shoo-in for the best actor Oscar. Michael Fassbender is also terrific. It is imperfect, extremely difficult and profoundly affecting. Northrup's dignity is the glue that holds the movie together and speaks to the better angels of our nature.
 

Steve Williams

Site Founder, Site Owner, Administrator
another film about slavery (how many have we had in the past five years- 10?) and in McQueens way, I'm not surprised it makes you want to slit your wrists. i saw Shame- it's just as disturbing and you couldn't pay me to watch it again. he's the next Aronovsky (sp?)- love him or hate him. entertainment is one of my personal criteria of a good movie- and these kind of movies just don't do that.

i would be shocked if it wins Best Picture. dark and depressing movies always seem to lose in the end.

ps. I would level the same criticism at Passions of the Christ- which of course hollywood hated and shows their hypocritical nature

Saw this today and believe this is an extremely important movie. Chiwetel Ejiofor should be a shoo-in for the best actor Oscar. Michael Fassbender is also terrific. It is imperfect, extremely difficult and profoundly affecting. Northrup's dignity is the glue that holds the movie together and speaks to the better angels of our nature.

I saw the movie yesterday with my wife and although I agree with Jazdoc's assessment it just somehow didn't rise to the level (IMHO) of Best Picture this year. I do agree about Chiwetel Ejiofor being a shoo-in for the best actor Oscar. The film at times was difficult to watch. My wife did not like the movie at all and on leaving the theater and asked her if she liked the film , she said "what was there to like". I heard others making similar comments on the way out'

This is not a feel good movie. I must admit that the acting in the final scene of this movie by Elijiofor IMO rose to the same level of greatness as was Tom Hanks in the final unscripted scene of Captain Phillips.

I must agree in some part with Keith's evaluation of Oscar worthiness as Best Picture. Certainly last year with Zero Dark Thirty the initial buzz made this film Best Picture only to lose because of lobbying by members of the MPAAS against it for political reasons

Having said this IMO the film is definitely a MUST to see and yes Elijofor was magnificent. There is one more film starting in a week that IMO will give Elijofor a run at the Oscar for Best Actor and that is Bruce Dern starring in Nebraska. The trailers look amazing and Dern is an absolute chameleon of an actor in this role. The only thing noticeable about him is his voice.

FWIW Dern won Best Actor at the Cannes Film festival for this role

IMO the Best Actor category will be filled with great performances. Let's not overlook Forest Whitaker in Lee Daniels' The Butler
 

About us

  • What’s Best Forum is THE forum for high end audio, product reviews, advice and sharing experiences on the best of everything else. This is THE place where audiophiles and audio companies discuss vintage, contemporary and new audio products, music servers, music streamers, computer audio, digital-to-analog converters, turntables, phono stages, cartridges, reel-to-reel tape machines, speakers, headphones and tube and solid-state amplification. Founded in 2010 What’s Best Forum invites intelligent and courteous people of all interests and backgrounds to describe and discuss the best of everything. From beginners to life-long hobbyists to industry professionals, we enjoy learning about new things and meeting new people, and participating in spirited debates.

Quick Navigation

User Menu

Steve Williams
Site Founder | Site Owner | Administrator
Ron Resnick
Site Co-Owner | Administrator
Julian (The Fixer)
Website Build | Marketing Managersing