Surprised there isn't a thread on this. Now there is.

I don't go to movie theaters as often anymore, maybe 3-4 a year, but this was a must-see-opening-weekend film for me.

And the movie was just incredible. Sobering, contemplative, and unforgettable. I'll spare you my thoughts on its content and just say there should be more films like this. On a weekend where the latest comic book popcorn extravaganza was released and pulled in megamillions, 12 Years a Slave was the antithesis- a movie meant to educate, move, and stir plenty of emotions. A lot of movies try this approach and fail miserably, but 12 Years a Slave is not one of them. There just isn't a single bad thing I can say.

There's absolutely nothing wrong with films like Thor providing the escapism we often seek when watching a movie, but a major film like 12 Years a Slave that seriously challenges its viewers seems a rare occurence these days. If you feel similarly at all, support films like this and go see it in the theater. Maybe, just maybe, its popularity and acceptance will spur some change in what we can expect from wider releases.

/soapbox

From the Movies thread:

lazy posting habits ftw

I agree that 12YaS may evoke similar reactions elicited by Passion of the Christ. However, I disagree that 12YaS doesn't successfully balance the onscreen brutality with the character/story development. Considering the reviews I read noted how difficult 12YaS was to watch during these scenes, I was surprised 12YaS wasn't more graphic than it was- I was pretty much expecting Passion level graphic violence and 12YaS didn't quite go that far, instead focusing more on the character providing the violence than the woes of the victim. For a movie that used a lot of lingering, isolated shots to allow the viewer to process what was happening and drive a point home, the makers of 12YaS appear to have decided not to use this tactic when showing the violence and its results. That's not to say there wasn't graphic portrayal of the pain and damages, but I don't think the way it was shown was nearly as gratuitous and overdone as it was in Passion.

I think comparisons of 12YaS and Passion are natural given the content, but 12YaS does a much, much better job of making the harsher content appropriate to the story being told (both at the time, and overall) than Passion did.

.

I like that the movie showed the complexity of the relationships between slaves and their owners. But Ebbs (Fassbender) is still an enigma. HIs love for Patsey seems to stall near the end. Maybe because he disfigured her? And the only way he could suppress his love for her for good was through brutality?

There was a lot of irresolution with the slaves who were left behind. Solomon went back home to his family and appropriately broke down etc, but there seemed to be no sort of survivors guilt. You lived with these other slaves for a decade. I didn't feel the tragedy for those left behind.

But that's me being picky. Good movie.

ejiofor's performance is much less showy than mcconaughey's, but it's also the more interesting of the two

Dallas Buyers Club is primarily a vehicle for character (in the same way a film like The Wrestler is). so, if you value emotionally charged films whose lynchpin is character and character arc, then i think it makes a lot of sense to share rafa's opinion.

i don't find mcqueen's commitment to be making that kind of film. so, yeah, he has written something quite different than the Dallas Buyers Club (which, right, "duh"). and so eijiofor must make some different moves, and i think how he acts, given the internal constraints of the role, is more interesting (though not better)

i've thought mcqueen's attitude toward his audience to be quite ambivalent (he's not von trier or haneke, but he also isn't the guy who made Dallas Buyers Club)

3 posts and I'm not sure whether you liked it or not

He's very ambivalent.

on a scale of d glass to isaac turner, i rate it a clean heathen

group accounts are always bereft of intention, railroad

Maybe they didn't want to get that assumptive with the guy, since his post-slavery years are kind of a big fat question mark.

Or, more likely, imbuing the generally cathartic ending of this monumental tale with yet more reminders of how awful slavery was felt like it put the whole project in danger of being just a big fat downer, and killed the tone. Personally, I think it would have robbed the narrative of its sense of conclusion, without really adding anything to the character or the audience's understanding of what a shit thing slavery was.

Even if it left a little discoloration on what was an otherwise solid ending, at least it didn't try and wrap things up with him (having just been hacked up in public) yelling "Freedoooommmmmmmmm" extra loud, and then all the slave owners are like "Oh, shit, yeah, he's got a point. Mercy! Mercy!"

Also, I listened to Mcqueen on Charlie Rose explain how he saw Fassbender's character as completely rotton & unredeemable. Mcqueen was almost disgusted when the question was posed to him on whether Fassbender's character was anything other than so. And maybe it's just the christian in me, but I wanted to at least pity every character. I don't know. It seemed Mcqueen wanted to disguise Fassbender as the entity of oppression, rather than making him an actual human character. Maybe that's why I felt so lost with Ebbs.

I can see some of that overstating in the way they played the character, and I didn't think it was necessary for them to try as hard as they did in that regard. The guy was a piece of shit in real life, but even the worst people aren't caricatures.

I just spelled caricatures so wrong that spell check offered to change it to architects. I think it's time to go home.

7.1/10

Actually, nevermind, I remember the credits at the end explaining that he played a part in the abolitionist movement.

i was hoping stipelman had laid down the broader definitions of caricature, but, alas, he saves his musings for the thread about a filmic update of a norse god

the strife of brian