>movie is about the Civil War, the lingering post-war resentment over the conflict, the harmful actions that spring from resentment, and the evolution from North vs South to Black vs White, continuing the cycle of resentment and violence
>ends with the line "Dare we dream of a golden day when the bestial War shall rule no more. But instead--the gentle Prince in the Hall of Brotherly Love in the city of Peace."
This is supposed to be the most offensive movie ever? To who, pro-war Satanists?
Unironically one of my favorites movies, the cinematography here mogs almost everything that is produced nowadays.
where can I watch this?
it's the most seen film of all time and you can't find it?
its only watchable on pay services
>3 hour silent movie
Any decent version will come with a musical score. Most silent films aren't watched in actual silence, it just means the characters don't have recorded dialogue.
Silent movies acclimate very easily, on the simple fact that the acting is inherently more dramatic than talkies. With good direction, they can be riveting.
>Imagine not having the attention span to watch actual quality kinos
A silent film just means you can choose your own soundtrack. I once watched 1922 Nosferatu with Type O Negative playing. It was a surprisingly well fitting score.
Jesus fucking christ retard, this is one of the first films ever made and you can’t appreciate historical art.
iirc the score had been quite revolutionary and the premier at a sold out and swanky Los Angeles theatre had a full orchestra. since there were roadshow showings across the country also,where the director cast and crew arrive to the city where the movies showing and basically do a promotional trade convention attached to the film, i suspect those also had an orchestra with them
however, its unclear to me how that worked once the film got a wide-release: did every theatre have an orchestra to play along with the movie? of course not. so it must have had some sort of audio system
>Although The Birth of a Nation is commonly regarded as a landmark for its dramatic and visual innovations, its use of music was arguably no less revolutionary. Though film was still silent at the time, it was common practice to distribute musical cue sheets, or less commonly, full scores (usually for organ or piano accompaniment) along with each print of a film.
>For The Birth of a Nation, composer Joseph Carl Breil created a three-hour-long musical score that combined all three types of music in use at the time: adaptations of existing works by classical composers, new arrangements of well-known melodies, and original composed music. Though it had been specifically composed for the film, Breil's score was not used for the Los Angeles première of the film at Clune's Auditorium; rather, a score compiled by Carli Elinor was performed in its stead, and this score was used exclusively in West Coast showings. Breil's score was not used until the film debuted in New York at the Liberty Theatre but it was the score featured in all showings save those on the West Coast.
I've got the Kino Lorber release that uses the original sheet music, and it's one of my favorite movie soundtracks. I watched it earlier today, and it always hooks me in.
This is my favorite track. Feels so nostalgic:
There we go, I was trying to find something that included the music. It's such a good score.
I'm also annoyed by the fact that the Kino Lorber release is based off of a 2011 restoration, whereas there's a newer 2016 4K scan of the film that looks a lot better, but that version has a poorer mono soundtrack, not the 5.1 orchestra score that Kino used. In the current political climate, I doubt we'll see a great definitive release of Birth of a Nation any time soon, if ever, even though everyone agrees that it may be the single most important film in film history. That's part of why I wish people would be more open minded and try to understand the movie before bashing it.
Is the soundtrack on the Kino release properly mixed to 5.1? They usually just upmix the original stereo recordings with whatever they have at hand.
For what it's worth, I checked it on Youtube and it doesn't have Ride of the Valkyries during the scene you posted, while the BFI/Photoplay 2015 restoration does. I'd recommend the latter solely on those grounds.
I'd think so since it's a new recording for the release.
>For what it's worth, I checked it on Youtube and it doesn't have Ride of the Valkyries during the scene you posted, while the BFI/Photoplay 2015 restoration does. I'd recommend the latter solely on those grounds.
As much as I like Ride of the Valkyries, I'd rather listen to the original soundtrack than stock audio.
>Griffith worked with composer J.C. Breil to prepare a different score for the premiere in New York
>including [...] most famously, Wagner’s “The Ride of the Valkyries.”
It was part of the original score at one point in its ever changing history.
Still, it's not a unique composition, just a public domain piece. You might as well play any song you like at that point.
>look at the description
>"Disclaimer: I don't support racism"
>did every theatre have an orchestra to play along with the movie?
Yes, minimum would be a pianist but even today only the smallest towns lack an orchestra.
It’s public domain, dude. Just go to YouTube and you’ll find thousands of uploads of it.
I immediately found it for free on Internet Archive.
I bet they probably have it on Internet Archive.
>make thread to discuss a movie set in the past
>everyone just talks about the past instead
Should've expected it but still disappointing
It's public domain, so you can find it on youtube or even Wikipedia
>PrepHole spouts over and over that "film is a visual medium"
>they'll avoid watching silent movies, which rely fundamentally on visuals alone
It's not about your post, just the state of this board.
It's a genuinely good movie that's hampered by the fact thr it makes liberals seethe so people are afraid to watch it least they get labeled as a bigot
This movie invented blockbuster cinema. Every time a marvel fan claps for a bucket of slop, they're really clapping for the KKK. Every time a hollywood garden gnome counts his gold, he's paying into the immortal legacy of David Wark Griffith.
>the South wuz gud boys
>they din do nuffin
Yes, but you are completely ignorant of US history, so there is no point trying to help you.
Neither side are portrayed as "good boys." The movie depicts a back and forth of people attacking each other even after the war ended, and each action causing more hatred and division, more violence and injustice. The assassination of Lincoln for example is not shown for you to cheer the South. They make John Wilkes Booth look like a scheming asshole.
>Booth actually succeeds
>south hates him
Typical crab bucket.
It's where the morons learned to behave, after all.
Lincoln was going to deport the the slaves back to Africa, dumbass. Booth fucked it up for everyone
That wasn't ever a certainty
He wanted to as an ideal but he realized quickly that, especially without their cooperation, it was practically impossible to do. They brought 375,000 or so slaves to the US over the course of a bit more than a century. They ended up with 4 million by the time slavery ended.
why are you denying the holocaust
The holocaust was transporting garden gnomes a few hundred miles by train on the same land mass with the purpose of killing them, and mostly without them knowing until it was too late. For the Black folks it would've been taking them on boats across the Atlantic ocean into west Africa with them being alive as a goal, not just on the ride there but when they arrive there as well.
Lincoln's second idea was to have the US buy land in Central America, which is closer and easier to transport and assist them if they need help. Ultimately the black community didn't want to make their own country though and after already going through the Civil War and setting them free, nobody wanted even more conflict and bloodshed over the issue so they just stayed as second-class citizens for the next 100 years.
>the black community didn't want to make their own country though
Isn't that literally Liberia though, just not on a scale to where it actually made much of a dent in American racial statistics
Liberia was founded before the Civil War, but it didn't catch on with many blacks, especially post-war
Lmao, were you homeschooled by your sister/mother perchance?
I went to public school in New York
Booth was cowardly piece of shit. If anyone was pulling crabs, it was him. The war was over.
Booth doing that harmed the south far more than it helped.
Because Booth assassinating Lincoln paved the way for Carpetbaggers and hampered Reconatruction since Republicans wanted to get even
>John Wilkes Booth
Early Mk ultra victim
The North were literally imperialists by forcing the South to stay. "United we stand" how are you united if that's done so by gunpoint? By no moral standards could we ever call the Civil War moral.
"But they ended slavery!"
1, slavery was already on the way out in the South and the civil war just accelerated it by a mere 5-10 years, and 2 the North wasn't even interested in doing that in the start of the war. They even offered the South permanent slavery enshrined in the constitution in order to keep them from leaving, which the South turned down. They decided to adopt the anti-slavery stance late into the war just as a way to keep euros from involving themselves and afterwards to whitewash their own actions and to permanently stain any secession attempts in the future.
The Civil War propaganda is just pure psy-op stuff.
Confederates: We started this war because we want to keep slavery
Some gay 200 years later: they dindu nuffin
That doesn't dispute anything I said. Also unrelated but this is such a fucking retarded argument that people act as if it's some achilles heel. What, you gonna say we went into the Middle East to find WMDs because "well that's what was said one time so that's that."
>imperialism is bad now
Imperialism is bad when the Imperialists are worse than the original culture, yes. Try and keep up.
>the south wanted to get rid of slavery
It was recognized as an institution that couldn't last forever, yes.
>But you dont get to take the land with you.
I hope in a few years the government seizes any property and land you own.
>They didnt last a presidential term.
Reminder that the Union captured Jefferson Davis early in the war, and could've easily brought him to court, but never did because they knew he would successfully argue that secession was completely legal. Even they knew back then they were in the wrong.
>This isn't Europe. You aren't a real culture
Reminder that the US South was always seen as the only region in the US with any culture close to a European country, part of the reason the North desperately wanted to burn it down. And even after doing so, they STILL don't have close to the culture the South does.
>The fate of america and thus the world was at stake.
Yeah, looking around it's really clear how much we all benefited from that.
>Reminder that the US South was always seen as the only region in the US with any culture close to a European country, part of the reason the North desperately wanted to burn it down. And even after doing so, they STILL don't have close to the culture the South does.
this is America, not Europe.
Should have stayed in Britain.
This is Murrica.
>muh phasing out
You dont own any land, you rent it.
>could've easily brought him to court, but never did
Yeah, the North should have kept burning. No disagreement there.
Laws are based on the guns.
North made it illegal.
Their decision as to what is right.
Davis was captured days before Appomattox. I'm going to assume everything else you are saying is equally as false. Idiot
>Reminder that the US South was always seen as the only region in the US with any culture close to a European country,
Was it? This is a genuine question, I don't know american history, but I've always thought all the cultural stuff was happening in New England.
New England was like an extension of England. The South is where the US developed its own flavor, although it was a combination of English, French, Spanish, Irish, and Scottish, developing in the environment of the western frontier
The North is more industrial and cold whereas the South is warmer and more agrarian. The South has a richer oral culture and that extends to things like music as well. New Orleans is the closest thing America has to continental Europe but that's more because they were originally French rather than originally Southern.
The Northeast had a strong culture, but it eventually entirely disappeared. I don't know why, but it DEFINITELY had nothing to do with all the Irish, Italian, Portugeese, French Canadian, Mexican, Brazilian, Cambodian, Ugandan, Indian, Nigerian, Dominican, Ecuadorian, Vietnamese, Puerto Rican, Filipina, El Salvadorian, and Chinese immigrants. When you point to music, you probably don't know about that the North had similar music to the South in the pre-globohomo era. You can look up New England fiddle, hornpipe, and contra music and you'll hear the similarity.
No. Saying the South had Euro culture is like American blacks trying to say they wuz kangs.
The South was a region known for not having any taverns or inns Antebellum because you could just walk up to any plantation, say you needed a place to stay, and be given one. It was also filled with colleges and universities which contributed to the culture of "culture" so to speak. It also was always more religious, even back then they complained about the godless yanks.
The Black is definitely not equal to the white man in any way form or sense, they've had centuries to prove that and look at where we are still.
Slavery however is not normal nor acceptable. They should never have been made slaves and Americans should have picked their own fucking cotton instead of being such fat lazy retards who fucked up the entire world just because they couldn't control their urges to inflict misery on others.
Genuinely curious, what were confederate soldiers fighting and dying for? 99% didn't have slaves themselves, so why were they fighting?
They fought for their home states. Believe it or not, back then there wasn't much of a unified American identity. People were loyal to the state they're from.
Their home was literally being invaded by another country. Of course they would defend themselves from foreign (yankee) agression
Lincoln's postmaster general, Montgomery Blair, observed it like this,
>It is not merely a question of constitutional law, or Slavery, with which we have to deal, in "securing permanent peace." The problem before us is, the radical one of dealing with the relations of masses of two different races in the same community. The calamities now upon us have been brought about, as I have already said, not by the grievances of the class claiming property in slaves, but by the jealousy of caste, awakened by the Secessionists in the non-slaveholders.
>In considering the means of securing the peace of the country hereafter, it is, therefore, this jealousy of race which is chiefly to be considered. Emancipation alone would not remove it. It was by proclaiming to the laboring whites, who fill the armies of rebellion, that the election of Mr. LINCOLN involved emancipation, equality of the Black folks with them, and consequently amalgamation, that their jealousy was stimulated to the fighting point. Nor is this jealousy the fruit of mere ignorance and bad passion, as some suppose, or confined to the white people of the South. On the contrary, it belongs to all races, and, like all popular instincts, proceeds from the highest wisdom, It is, in fact, the instinct of self-preservation which revolts at hybridism.
Confederate Conscription Acts of 1862–1864
Here's a better question, what were the Union soldiers fighting and dying for? They didn't care about black people that much, and they hated Southerners, so Southerners fucking off and no longer interfering with politics should've been welcomed, and was for many.
Being sent to prison for dodging conscription was worse. If you were rich enough you could pass your conscription to someone else. No one wanted to fight, same tale as always.
Thats the only rrason Im not thrilled about tearing down confederate statues. The boys in grey who had no choice should still be remembered in some way.
>because we want to keep slavery
This is the most small brained take in all of human existence.
How many Confederate soldiers owned slaves? How many Union soldiers even cared about black people let alone thought they were equals?
The idea that the Civil War was a great quest to free black people is a heroic myth made up by the victors. It was more about centralizing power and authority within the executive government (e.g. the presidency was supposed to be a glorified secretarial position).
>imperialism is bad now
>the south wanted to get rid of slavery
If they wanted to leave, they could leave.
But you dont get to take the land with you.
Or you can, if you can fight for it.
They didnt last a presidential term.
>Dey tooker slerves!
This isn't Europe. You aren't a real culture, and you're not leaving with a third of the country. The fate of america and thus the world was at stake.
Holy shit imagine being this fucking retarded
> slavery was on the way out!!!!
Yes that's why the South was rabid about enforcing the Missouri Compromise
> united by gunpoint!!!! NOT FAIR!!!
The Supreme Court, dominated by Southerns you know, had declared it unconstitutional. If they wanted to change it, they could have ousted for a constitutional convention. They never did.
> Lincoln didn't want to end slavery
Yes, he was 100% willing to shelve the slavery issue to avoid the most deadly war in American history.
> anti slavery to keep euros from getting involved
Is this a Joke? Literally the only European Power that even supported the Union, during the entire war, was fucking Russia. No other Euros gave a shit about slavery, all the South wanted was the Brits to break the blockage, which wasn't going to happen because England just switched to Egypt and India for cotton (and cotton was all the dirty South had to offer anyone because retarded Le Cash Crop Southerns
> Civil War history is a psy- op
Yeah, by the South. History books are getting so fucking skewed, because they MUST sell books in Texas, so the point where Longstreet takes all the blame for Gettysburg and Lee gots off Scott free (which any civil war historian will tell you is a fucking joke).
Fucking idiot gay. Suck start a shotgun
>The Supreme Court, dominated by Southerns you know, had declared it unconstitutional
What court case?
>All no source
I'll take “Things That Never Happened” for $1,000, Alex
>Confederates: We started this war because we want to keep slavery
>Some gay 200 years later: they dindu nuffin
Yep, Conservatives being historical revolusionist again
>To who, pro-war Satanists?
the same people who spend $100 billion on ukraine after blowing $1.5 trillion in afghanistan
Wait, so did the union fight to keep the southern tax base, or to free the slaves? And which of those is supposed to be "based" enough to send hundreds of thousands to their death?
remember what we did to the indians? it was like that.
Why didn't you finish the job.
that would be inhumane
They fought to keep the other half of the continent's land, just as they fought to obtain it in the first place. It's too much on the line to let go of.
So just to keep the taxes of a region that today is a money sink? So a fed could buy one more boat?
>Oklahoma was going to be a Native American ethnostate with full recognition within the Confederacy
wtf why does no one talk about this? how would it have turned out, I've never met a native american before
governments say that about every remote territory before minerals are found there
It was different from how the US did/does treat them, instead of some nebulous vague description of land it was literally a state with all the protections and recognitions. Like if Ohio today was an ethnostate.
>doesnt this sound nice
>please help us
>we promise we wont do anything after
Same way it turned out without the confederacy.
>lol jk, ours now
If we didn't fuck it up then, we would've fucked it some other way. People love telling themselves "it would've been different if only". But it was always going to be this way.
Griffith did nothing wrong
He really didn't. He tried to make a centrist movie about not letting hatred consume and divide you and then ironically got attacked by the NAACP, a racial self-interest group.
"This fallacy is committed when one shared trait between two subjects is assumed to show equivalence, especially in order of magnitude, when equivalence is not necessarily the logical result. False equivalence is a common result when an anecdotal similarity is pointed out as equal, but the claim of equivalence does not bear scrutiny because the similarity is based on oversimplification or ignorance of additional factors."
You are either being disingenuous or just falling for the oldest propaganda trick
I don't think you even understood what I said
The north was even more evil than the south. The south had slavery, which was a greater evil but thats only one of the many facets of the conflict. It was a brother war where the abusive older brother defied family morals just to help his younger brother quit his sick addiction
it's UNITED states. The war was to avoid changing the name
More like UNITED at gun point of the yankee oppressors. What if you tried to divorce your husband and he threatened you with gun when you tried to divorce him? Would that be a real marriage? Of course not, that would be evil.
So the south was a woman, or a gay?
And there would be no problem, right up until the bitch tried to take the house.
the second amendment says you can carry guns. the north just decided as a group to carry guns southwards. You should have welcomed them
>it's different when we do it!
Clockwork, some things never change, etc.
Yes that war was about slavery. Only people saying otherwise are chuds and retards.
I really like the scene where he rams the flag down the cannon barrel
Cool it with the anti-semitic remarks.
Every single one of them Republicans.
Yeah, BotN is about an oppressed group of people who violently rebel against a Republican government. Strange how so many leftists hate it today
wuz those real black actors n shiet?
I thought they wuz all black face crackkkas
This would be more racist to me except you could change the clothes and apply it to today or any time period.
Not that all blacks are like that, but having lived around them, that scene is not at all hard to imagine.
The point the movie is trying to make, which is lost on people who are actively seeking to be offended, is that people whose only experience with the law is being oppressed by it don't take it seriously as a force for egalitarianism. They're going to use it for oppression too.
in real life that would in in a mass brawl with shootings and stabbings so that scene was already kind of woke
The American South as a region was a parochial and backwards entity full of Ulster Scots trash, a hotbed of British Loyalism and indentured to an outdated mode of production. The North was right in subjugating it both to secure the borders of it's national territory and to ensure the historical ascent of the United States as a country into the global epoch defining historical revolutionary force it would eventually emerge as.
I love reading all the trannies seethe at this masterpiece
Those kind of commends are in every somewhat political movies like death wish but this is glorious
allah poster has to be a PrepHoleer
Even if the confederates had won, slavery was about to become economically obsolete anyway because of the cotton gin. Slavery was a stupid thing to fight over just to keep ultra-rich plantation owners ultra-rich for a few extra years at the expense of both slaves and the majority of the white population. The Civil War was stupid shit.
That said, studying the war also makes it clear that the confederates were objectively the more skilled side in terms of war and tactics, and that the union only one by basically spamming hordes of Irish meat-shields as if they were a Call of Duty killstreak.
It was fought over state rights, not slavery
>over state rights
States rights to do what?
Is it? Especially since no rights were being limited before they attempted to leave the union, and Lincoln not calling to limit any states rights.
not him but a state theoretically had the right the to secede at any time for any reason. The power is derived from its citizens. Saying "your reason for secession is something we now deem immoral" is itself completely irrelevant. Mormons should've been allowed to practice polygamy, it was their territory they settled. Self determination shouldn't be a hard concept to understand. You can't had a secessionist civilization founded by slave owners and then tell their descendants down the road that those same seceding states can't secede again because "we all now think slavery is... le bad."
If you want to get to it from the union perspective slavery was not the point, it was the point to the south. The North fought to preserve the union, stuff like the emancipation proclamation were political tools hence why they didn't effect states like Missouri which had not rebelled. The war was truly over whether the union was optional, and the side that said it isn't won.
The Emancipation Proclamation never made sense to me when it was taught in school because the war wasn't fucking over so why the fuck would it matter what one side says about territory it doesn't actually control yet.
Political weapon as I said. Big thing is that playing the card when they did was a big factor to why England didn't help the south. As soon as the South was portrayed as fighting on the side of preserving slavery and it was an explicit thing in law than no other power would help the south as Europe had largely banned slavery at this point.
>The North fought to preserve the union
Why? Why fight to be stuck with people you hate and disagree with on many fundamental levels and have a culture completely different from your own?
If you let one domino fall than the entire union crumbles.
The union only existed because states willingly choose to join it. If the states are forced at gunpoint, its not freedom.
No one was forced to join it. But once you are in you are in, you can't just leave on a whim.
>on a whim
It wasn't like everyone in the south just got up one morning and collectively said "fuck it, we're leaving".
Yeah that is basically how it went. Lincoln won the election and then multiple states decided to just leave despite him explicitly saying he wasn't going to ban slavery.
The series of events leading up to that happening had been in the works for nearly 20 years. Lincoln's election was just the last straw.
Doesn't much change the fact the states left because their aristocracy larping elites got mad their lifestyle might be threatened.
That has fuckall to do with the "leaving on a whim" shit said earlier.
The key point is you don't get to leave at all. If you the individual want to than you know where the door is, but you aren't allowed to take the unions land with you.
>The key point is you don't get to leave at all. If you the individual want to than you know where the door is, but you aren't allowed to take the unions land with you.
This reeks of bootlicker mentality. "God I love the federal government govern me harder daddy you own it all"
Yeah that's just how it is, since the guys who tried to leave lost to the federal government. I mean you are free to try I guess but I'd imagine it would end much of the same way.
Its not the unions land. Its the state’s land.
>him explicitly saying he wasn't going to ban slavery.
kek that just means the South were experts at detecting bullshit
you played yourself
Where would be the lie though? He only manage to pull it off since they left and then mostly free states were left to pass the amendment, something that wouldn't have been doable had they not left. So it seems like the south played themselves.
He wouldn't have had the authority to do so. And ironically congress was able to pull it off once the south took themselves out of the vote.
How is this not an argument for letting the south leave?
Hell imagine how happy everyone today would be if they had split back then, or even today
It's not talked about enough today, the fact that the impetus for the Civil War is still splitting American politics today. Race is is still the hot button issue in modern politics, with both political parties split along the lines of social justice vs. American nationalism.
Everything that happens in Birth of a Nation, which is a 1915 depiction of an 1860s war, can still be found happening today.
USA is a true superstate that's more resilient than empires of comparable size. The great fortress and future ark of western civilization. If that project were disrupted, the whole world could fall into chaos.
>Give me your poor and hurried masses!
>except those fucking moronS AND MEXICANS REEE
>>Give me your poor and hurried masses!
Written by a gnomish poet in 1883, has nothing to do with the United States of America, which did specifically and with purpose exclude "morons and mexicans"
that's not what happened
they would fight each other again and ally with rival europoor powers to create an intercontinental perpetual hyper war
Emma Lazarus wasn't American.
So you're saying we'd have a world without a US hegemony? When are you going to say the downside?
>But once you are in you are in
That sounds like a cult
to secede, obviously
There were slaves in the North until the passage of the 13th Amendment.
They were, in practical terms, permitted to form a government and secede. Once they became a foreign country they didn't have rights under the constitution.
The USA did not allow the CSA to secede, did not recognize their government, and considered the war a rebellion, not a war between states. So according to the USA, the citizens of the CSA retained their rights under Constitution.
>Even if the confederates had won, slavery was about to become economically obsolete anyway because of the cotton gin
Anon I think you got your timeline a bit mixed up here since the cotton gin had been around for over 50 years when the war started. In fact it is what made cotton farming viable as a cash crop.
The tractor was coming out at the same time too so either way the "WORK IN THE FULL MOON OR GET BROKEN BUCKS" system was on its way out
>The tractor was coming out at the same time
That wouldn't come around for another 40 years.
>The first half of the 1860s was a period of great experimentation but by the end of the decade the standard form of the traction engine had evolved and changed little over the next sixty years. It was widely adopted for agricultural use.
Much of the prewar officer corps went to the south. Maybe something established during the previous indian wars and mexican hostilities in the area. In a forgotten era of history, the gulf coast and southern border were lands of military adventure before the west.
The "frontier" of Davy Crockett and the Last of the Mohicans didn't even make it to the Mississippi.
it's offensive because it is a masterpiece that took cinema to the next level but "unfortunately" that masterpiece just happened to contain a message that ~~*they*~~ don't like a bit...
>but "unfortunately" that masterpiece just happened to contain a message that ~~*they*~~ don't like a bit...
I really think they would find it fine if they understood it themselves, but it's like anything involving black people turns into a hysterical mess when people try to talk about it. It's not an anti-black movie by any stretch, if anything it humanizes them more than the vast majority of films do. They're depicted as capable of both vengeance and compassion.
the scene where they ask the woman to make KKK uniforms makes me teary-eyed everytime
Mae Marsh is an honest-to-God cutie pie. I need to check out her other movies.
long lost womanhood and purity
Please don't start a thread that belongs in 4chan and try to disguise it as a serious discussion of a film.
Calm down, schlomo