The Birth of a Nation (1915)

Director:

D.W. Griffith

Writers:

Thomas F. Dixon Jr. (novel)
Thomas F. Dixon Jr. (play) ...

Release Date:

3 March 1915 (USA)

Genre:

Drama | History | Romance | War | Western

Tagline:

Mighty Spectacle

Plot:

The Civil War divides friends and destroys families, but that's nothing compared to the anarchy in the black-ruled South after the war.

Plot Keywords:

Civil War | Lincoln Assassination | Ku Klux Klan | Assassination | Cabin

Awards:

1 win

Cast

  (Cast overview, first billed only)

Lillian Gish	...	Elsie Stoneman
Mae Marsh	...	Flora Cameron
Henry B. Walthall	...	Col. Ben Cameron (as Henry Walthall)
Miriam Cooper	...	Margaret Cameron
Mary Alden	...	Lydia Brown
Ralph Lewis	...	Austin Stoneman
George Siegmann	...	Silas Lynch (as George Seigmann)
Walter Long	...	Gus
Robert Harron	...	Tod Stoneman
Wallace Reid	...	Jeff (blacksmith) (as Wallace Reed)
Joseph Henabery	...	Abraham Lincoln / 13 other bits (as Jos. Henabery)
Elmer Clifton	...	Phil Stoneman
Josephine Crowell	...	Mrs. Cameron
Spottiswoode Aitken	...	Dr. Cameron
George Beranger	...	Wade Cameron (as J.A. Beringer)

Also Known As:

In the Clutches of the Ku Klux Klan (USA) (cut version)
The Birth of the Nation; Or The Clansman (second copyright title)
The Clansman (USA) (Los Angeles première title)

Runtime:

190 min (16 fps) | USA:125 min (video version) | USA:187 min (DVD) | Argentina:165 min

Country:

USA

Color:

Black and White

Aspect Ratio:

1.33 : 1

Sound Mix:

Silent

Certification:

Canada:PG (Manitoba) | Argentina:Atp | South Korea:15 (2002) | Australia:PG | Finland:K-16 | Australia:M (2009) | UK:15 (video rating) | UK:U (original rating) | Sweden:15 | Canada:G (Quebec)

Filming Locations:

Big Bear Lake, California, USA

Company:

David W. Griffith Corp.

Trivia:

The name of the character played by William De Vaull is listed as "Nelse", while the character played by William Freeman is officially listed as "Jake." Many cast lists omit the character of "Nelse" and credit De Vaull instead as "Jake", while changing Freeman's character to that of "Sentry".

Goofs:

Continuity: The position of the window in the small cabin changes.

Quotes:

intertitle: Second Part - Reconstruction. The agony which the South endured that a nation might be born. The blight of war does not end when hostilities cease.

Movie Connections:

Featured in Rebirth of a Nation (2007)

Is the historical importance of this film greatly exaggerated?

I saw this film at a small "Art House" theatre when I was a graduate student. It was supported by program notes, and reviews of the film by respected critics, these stressed Griffith was a trend setting director who had made significant contributions to modern cinema. I remember three major developments were attributed directly to him, firstly his use of a mobile camera for tracking rather than bringing events to the camera; secondly pioneering the use of close-up photography in the cinema and thirdly the incorporation of pseudo-documentary sequences (e.g. the assassination of Lincoln) into a fictional story. I therefore watched this film with great anticipation; but as something of a young idealist I was more and more sickened by what I then felt was glorification of the KKK, and afterwards I was bitterly disappointed by my evening. I decided that if I ever watched TBOAN again it would only be when I was better informed both about American history of the period and about the work of other contemporary Hollywood film-makers. It is now 60 years later and I see "The Birth of A Nation" is scheduled to be screened on TCM next month, so probably the time has come to watch it again; and perhaps comments based on my original viewing so long ago may be appropriate at this time as the impressions I now have of this film will be those that have been with me for most of my life.

Films showing conflicts must present both sides as believing utterly in the righteousness of their cause; but historical films also have at least a moral responsibility to ensure the material shown has some reasonable approximation to historical accuracy, and whenever possible the convictions of both sides should be equally fairly presented. Most of the criticisms of TBOAN on this database derive not from its sympathetic presentation of the KKK but from the fact that this is presented as the only side which is relevant. We need to remember that slavery was introduced into human society back in prehistoric times - it was usually associated with a recognised obligation on the part of the slave-owner to provide a reasonable standard of living for his slaves, and alternative mediaeval societies from which slavery had been eliminated often did not do even this for their dispossessed citizens. Members of ruling classes everywhere lived a lifestyle which required the full time labours of many slaves or underprivileged workers to maintain, and only after the invention of the steam engine did it become possible to picture a world from which slavery might eventually be eliminated. Although this then probably became inevitable, its elimination has still not been completed; and in the United States it took place in an appallingly destructive way, part of which is pictured in TBOAN. Every nation has shameful episodes in its history which have and will cause distress for many generations before they are gradually outgrown. Recognising that the American Civil War did not result only from a dispute about slavery but much more from a whole range of economic and cultural issues, I appreciate that it would be grossly improper for me as a Canadian to seize on some of the controversial aspects of TBOAN as an excuse to condemn the film. I will re-watch it as a valid and important effort to document the concerns of the group of citizens it featured (although I will still reserve the right to feel Griffith should have made more effort to also document the concerns of those with opposing viewpoints.) My concerns here are directed more to assessing the importance of TBOAN in the development of the modern cinema, and I currently find myself siding with the relatively few users who have commented that its significance seems to be greatly overrated. When I first saw this film I had seen relatively few of the important early silent films, and it was easy to accept claims that Griffith's work was of overwhelming importance. Now I have seen other contemporary works; and have also come to appreciate that all surviving copies of about 90% of these works have totally disappeared (whilst probably half of the 10% of which copies still exist are not available for home viewing even from specialist libraries as the only copies are located in inaccessible archive collections). This is not brought out clearly by most of the 200 user comments on this film listed by IMDb, and it is so important that it has led me to pen these further comments. Film-makers in the silent era were extremely productive - Griffith himself is credited by IMDb with having directed over 500 films, most of them silent, and several other directors/producers have well over 100 films credited. Since so few survive, we must recognise how far our current assessment of early directors might change if we were able to see and compare more of their works. I believe that many innovations in film technology have been exclusively attributed to Griffith primarily because of the ready availability today of copies of 'TBOAN', 'Intolerance' and 'Orphans of the Storm'. I found this feeling very strongly reinforced when I had a rare chance to see a screening of Lois Weber's 'Hypocrites'. Weber was, for a time, the highest paid director in Hollywood and received a best director award in 1916 (ahead of Griffith, just one year after he released TBOAN). All I will say at this point is that, although I am admittedly relying on rather uncertain memories, I believe 'Hypocrites' was more stimulating for its innovative cinematographic techniques than 'Intolerance'. It would be interesting to know whether other database users have had similar thoughts about this or other early works.