‘The Birth of a Nation’ tells a disturbing story that deserves to be told

D.W. Griffith’s 1915 “The Birth of a Nation” is considered one of the classics of American cinema, a groundbreaking but highly controversial film. Its technical prowess is beyond reproach but its glorification of the Ku Klux Klan continues to be criticized a full century later.

That’s what makes Nate Parker’s 2016 “The Birth of a Nation” such a provocation. First off, it dares to appropriate the title of a landmark film. More importantly, it turns its racist message on its head.

By applying Griffith’s title to the story of Nat Turner’s 1831 slave rebellion, Nate Parker makes clear it’s the birth of the anti-slavery movement, not the reconstructed South, that matters to him. It’s a potent and powerful rebuke.

As a young boy on a plantation, Nat Turner learned how to read the Bible. Once he grew into a man, his master learned how to capitalize on this unexpected skill. As Turner is trotted out from one plantation to another, he witnesses more and more of the horrors of slavery. His eventual revolt seems inevitable and doomed in equal measure.

“The Birth of a Nation” is a potent and powerful film, an emotional call to arms. Parker’s rage is palpable. But the movie is also something of an overwrought mish-mash.

The film takes on extremely difficult subject matter but it does so in sometimes disappointingly conventional ways. Whenever things get dramatic, heavy-handed orchestral flourishes make sure we notice. It’s as if the film doesn’t trust us to form our own conclusions. It’s so hell-bent on convincing us Nat Turner is a hero that it misses out on some of the complexities of life.

All in all, the visceral power of this movie more than makes up for its flaws. It’s telling a disturbing story that deserves to be told.