Showing The Birth of a Nation in 1938

With all the debate about whether of not a lot of old movies are racist, I think most people can agree on one movie. The Birth of a Nation (1915) is racist and in a way that is much more horrifying than anything you would see in any other movie. Don't get me wrong I believe that modern audiences should be able to see this movie because as horrifying as it is it is still part of our history and there is a lot you can learn about both movie history and the culture of the world at the time it was made. Also despite its horrifying depictions of black people and the glorification of the KKK, the filmmaking and storytelling our excellent. This is not a film that is just controversial today, but one that received a lot of controversy when released. The following article from a 1938 issue of The Motion Picture Herald discusses the reaction to this film receiving a theatrical release that year. 

"The pages of history were turned back this week in East Orange, N.J, in the vicinage of Thomas Edison's pioneerings in motion pictures, where the local courts are to rule on the complaints of a group of Negros against the racial implications of 'The Birth of a Nation,' old Griffith film which has been resurrected and restored by Stone Film Company and is to be reissued immediately in New York and New Jersey. The picture during its early expositions in 1915 and thereafter was the subjects of attacks by Negros, particularly in Chicago and Boston who charged that it stirred race hatred. The Negros would have the authorities censor the picture on the same grounds.

"Adolph J Retting manager of the Ormat Theatre in East Orange was summoned to appear before Police Recorder Albert L. Vreeland to answer to a charge that he violated a New Jersey statute by showing 'The Birth of a Nation.'

"Mr. Rettig was arrested and paroled in custody of his counsel Edward R McGlynn of Newark. Mr. Retting is a former big league baseball player.

"The  complaint was signed by two local Negro physicians, Dr. Theodore R Inge and Dr. Harry W. Mickey. The two alleged that Mr. Retting violated Chapter 151 of the laws of 1935 which makes it a misdemeanor to show 'any picture, photograph or representation which in any way incites, counsels, promotes, advocates or symbolizes hatred, violence or hostility against any persons or group by reason of race, color, religion or matter of worship.' 

"The exhibitor waived examination and the case was referred automatically to the Essex County grand jury. His counsel said he intends to ask D.W. Griffith to testify.

"Dr. Inge said the picture had been prohibited in California, Kansas, West Virginia and Ohio.

"The film was shown at the Ormont from May 8th through May 11th. On May 9th Negro leader submitted a protest bearing 609 signatures to the city counsel. The manager deleted those parts which he understood were considered particularly objectionable.

"East Orange authorities said that as far as they know, this case was the first in which the 1935 statute had been invoked. The act provides for a fine of $200 to $5000 and 90 days to three years imprisonment or both.

"'Birth of a Nation' also meet with opposition in Hartford, Conn., where two negro ministers, the Reverend C.A. Moody and the Reverend C.A. Jackson, succeeded in having exhibition halted at the local state theatre."

I am curious as to what the cut version looked like as the whole second half of this film can be considered objectionable easily.

-Michael J. Ruhland

Movie Review: The Last Full Measure

Michael's Movie Grade: A-

A touching and heartfelt tribute to a real life hero who gave his life to save others.

This is a story about heroism at its highest order and how much the selfless acts of one person can affect the lives of so many. This is a powerful message and it is told powerfully here. I love the way this story is told. Rather than taking place in the Vietnam War when the act of heroism took place, it takes place in 1999 when men who fought along side this great hero, trying to get him a posthumous medal of honor. It is incredible that men worked so hard over 30 years later to get this man the recognition he deserved and that immediately gets our attention and respect. The more we learn the more respect we have. Though this is technically a war movie, it is neither pro-war nor anti-war. The story instead delves into what would make a man who has so much be willing to put himself in harms way to save lives of people he never met. This is a question met with aa lot of heartfelt sincerity and respect. There is no doubt that writer and director Todd Robinson is completely in awe of the heroism of William H. Pitsenbarger and this respect can be felt throughout the whole movie and this is what truly makes this film special.

This movie also benefits from a fantastic cast. There are some veteran actors in the cast that prove they are still at the top of their game. These include William Hurt, Christopher Plummer, Diane Ladd, Samuel Jackson, Ed Harris and the late Peter Fonda. Each one is fantastic here giving heartfelt and moving performances. Sebastian Stan is also fantastic as the cynical man who at first believes that the men trying to get their friend this medal of honor have an agenda, but learns why this is so important to them over the course of this film.

This is a fantastic movie that truly tugs at your emotions and be thankful for men like William H. Pitsenbarger.

-Michael J. Ruhland      

Movie Review: Tanhaji: The Unsung Warrior

 Michael's Movie Grade: C+

This Bollywood film is a pure over the top action movie that is quite a bit of fun, but nothing to take seriously.

Subtle is never a word you could use to describe this film. This ends up being one of the movie's main pros as well as faults. When this movie focuses on the action it is extremely delightful. These action scenes are as over the top and fun as anyone could have every hoped for. They are also masterfully choregraphed and shot to make them work to their full effect. The climatic action sequence is espically a lot of fun and it truly does feel big. Despite the length of this climax it never loses its sense of fun and excitment. Saif Ali Kahn plays this movie's villain as over the top as possible, hamming it up like a villain on the 1960's Batman TV show. It can easily be argued that this performance keeps us from taking the film seriously and to be honest there is much truth to that. Still there is no denying that he is just so much fun to watch. The musical numbers (this is a Bollywood film after all) are also very well done and a lot of fun. However this movie's like of subtly shows its bad side whenever the film wants you to take it seriously. Like many Bollywood movies, this is a very patriotic film, however this movie doesn't convey that patriotism as well as many other Bollywood movies I have seen. The problem being that this patriotism is expressed in corny stilted and forced dialogue. Also this film's utter simplicity provides no reason for this patriotism other than it states one side as good and one side as bad, instead of examining and explaining why the filmmakers see it this way. Most of these patriotic Bollywood movies made me fully understand and appreciate the pride these characters have despite being an American myself. Even during the non-patriotic parts the dialogue heavy scenes still slow the movie down by being too dull and simplified.

This is not a great movie by any means, but it is quite a bit of fun.

-Michael J. Ruhland

Movie Review: 1917

Michael's Movie Grade: A

A fantastic war movie.

One of the first things a film buff will notice about this movie is that it is done nearly in one continuous shot. While this is nothing new (Alfred Hitchcock's Rope being the most famous example of this), it has rarely been done this well. It gives a feeling of realism and urgency that makes this movie truly something special. You feel like you are there with the characters in a way that you rarely feel in any other war movie. The result is an intense and highly emotional film unlike any other. This film does a great job at showing us the horrors of war, yet it is not as gory as it would have been under most modern filmmakers. There is some gore in this movie but the intensity of the battle sequences comes more from excellent filmmaking. Yet all this film's greatness does not only come from action scenes. There are some moments of rare beauty in this movie, that are absolutely incredible. This is also an incredible looking film with haunting images that will stay in one's mind long after the movie is over. The cast is perfect and play these roles to perfection. There is a very raw human quality to these performances, that is very powerful.

If you see this movie in a theatre, you need to see it in Dolby. While this would be an excellent movie seen in a different way, it is a one of a kind experience seen in Dolby.

This is a much watch movie for anyone who appreciates great filmmaking.

-Michael J. Ruhland  

Movie Review: Midway

Michael's Movie Grade: B

A very enjoyable if flawed war movie.

If you want a war film that offers something new or thought provoking, it is best to look somewhere else, but if you want one that is definitely an enjoyable watch this is a darn good choice. As should be excepted from a movie directed by Roland Emmerich the action scenes were fantastic. The visual effects work nearly perfectly and these scenes never lose their sense of pure excitement. The excellence of the action scenes did not take me by surprise, but the effectiveness of one of the main characters did. This character was that of Dick Best (Ed Sherkin). This character is a very engaging and human character that manages at the same time to be as cool as any character in a war movie could be. Equally great but given less time is his wife Anne (Mandy Moore), who provides both some of the film's funniest and most touching moments in her too brief screen time. It is unfortunate that the other characters couldn't be as fleshed out as these two are, but honestly the film has too many important characters to delve into all of them in its less than two and a half hour running time. However all the characters are likable enough for us to enjoy watching them and there is not a weak link in this film's excellent cast.

While the film is often given cliché moments and bits of dialogue, the film overcomes this with pure sincerity. You can tell that the filmmakers really appreciate the men who fought this battle and the whole film comes off as a very heartfelt tribute to them. This gives the film a power and a likability even its most cliché scenes. I don't see how someone could go home from watching this film and not feel a sense of awe and wonder at what these brave men faced. It is too rare these days to get a war film with this strong of a sense of sincerity and it was certainly greatly appreciated by me.

To be fair this film covers too much history to truly fit into its running time. Because of this many important parts of the true story don't get the true attention they deserve. Also because of this I will suggest that it is best to go into this film with somewhat of a knowledge of World War 2 so the weight of certain points of the story aren't lost on you with the fact that they are given not enough time.

Overall this is a very heartfelt and fun movie that I definitely recommend to war movie fans, even if it is not without its faults.

-Michael J. Ruhland  

Overlooked Classics: The Steel Helmet (1951)

There have been many movies over the years about World War 2, but very few about the Korean War. However The Steel Helmet stands as not only a great film about the Korean War, but a fantastic war movie on any level. 



Samuel Fuller (the movie’s director, writer and producer) was a veteran of World War 2 (he would later make a World War 2 film that was essentially autobiographical called The Big Red One). He felt previous war movies were often dishonest and naïve about what soldier’s went through, and that the full brutality of war had never yet been depicted on screen. Since this film was made on a rather small budget of $100,000, this brutality was not shown through excessive violence or massive battle sequences (in fact there were only 25 extras (all students from UCLA) and they played both American and Korean soldiers), but rather through the characters’ psyche. The characters were filled with thoughts of hopelessness and desperation. To show soldiers at war as this beaten mentally was something that had not been seen in almost all previous war movies.



The film was not only shot on a low budget but in only ten days of shooting. This may have helped create the real, gritty, and natural feeling of this film that is so different from any big budget Hollywood studio film from this era. This is not an action movie by any means, nor is it an inspiring story of how the U.S. army can defeat powers of pure evil leaving good victorious. Rather it is a film about the mental hardships that those who fight in wars face every day. This film leaves me with more respect for those soldiers fighting overseas for my country. What they have gone through is something I could never imagine, and the mental pain they push themselves through is incredible. I am not a veteran, so I cannot say how real this film represents that mental torture, but I can say to me it feels unbelievably real.



This movie was a center of great controversy when released. It was considered by many to be anti-American. This was because throughout this movie the characters were always unsure exactly what they were fighting for or even who their enemy was. The main cast included a black soldier (James Edwards) and a Japanese-American soldier (Richard Loo). A prisoner of war tests their allegiance by bringing up Jim Crow laws and Japanese internment camps. There was also an American soldier (Steve Brodie) who was a clear racist. This sat uneasy with some who felt Fuller was trying to make America look like a racist country. Fuller denied this saying he was just trying to be brutally honest about history and what happened in war. All the decisions that created this controversy help make the film even more powerful and shocking to audiences then and now. The movie has a feeling of brutal honesty that few movies can capture so well.

A review in Variety stated "Lippert Pictures has what would seem a sure money film in 'The Steel Helmet.'" (To read the whole review click here.) This turned out to be true as the film earned over $2 million at the box office and made big studios take notice of the film's director.

-Michael J. Ruhland