The American Film Institute canceled its screening of ‘The Birth of a Nation’

parker1

At some point, Vanity Fair or some magazine will do a deep analysis about how badly Nate Parker and Fox Searchlight f—ked up the promotion for The Birth of a Nation. I would imagine it would even make an interesting book, the story of how a huge Sundance success ended up being the indefensible albatross of the 2016 awards season. As I said in an earlier post, I understood the rationale behind putting Parker “ahead of the story,” knowing that the film’s promotion would end up with a discussion about the 1999 rape trial. But I get the feeling that Fox Searchlight and Nate Parker had zero idea that the trial transcripts were public record, and easily accessible to any media outlet with a FOIA request. This is not a “conspiracy” in that a group of people have just decided to smear Nate Parker. This is a situation where people are simply reading the transcripts or coverage of the transcripts and deciding that they want no part of Nate Parker and his film.

While the film is still scheduled for a big premiere in Toronto next month, Parker was supposed to screen the film at the American Film Institute on Friday. That screening has been canceled. Not by Parker – by AFI. Per Variety:

The American Film Institute has canceled its Friday screening of “Birth of a Nation,” which was to be followed by a Q&A with filmmaker and star Nate Parker, whose 1999 rape case has put the filmmaker and distributor Fox Searchlight on the defensive this past week. AFI dean Jan Schuette made the announcement to students late Tuesday. The AFI screening would have been Parker’s first public event since the story about the rape case became widely known earlier this month.

“I have been the recipient of many different passionate points of view about the screening, and I believe it is essential that we discuss these issues together — messenger and message, gender, race and more — before we see the film,” Schuette said. “Next week, we will be scheduling a special moderated discussion so we may explore these issues together as artists and audience.”

Fox will hold a different AFI screening of “Birth” later this year. The studio has vowed to continue its theatrical release and publicity tour for the Nat Turner biopic, which opens Oct. 7, despite the recent headlines involving Parker.

AFI will instead hold a screening of Paramount’s “Jack Reacher: Never Go Back,” directed by Edward Zwick, on Friday as part of its “Opening Day,” a special screening for second-year fellows that occurs at the end of the first week of the new semester.

[From Variety]

I do side-eye the fact that in Nate Parker’s place, we have the Crown Prince of Scientology stepping in with a screening of Jack Reacher. Then again, Tom Cruise has never been on trial for gang-raping an unconscious woman (but Cruise is still pretty problematic). As for this AFI cancelation… it will be very interesting, from an industry-watcher stand-point, to see what happens in the coming months. What happens when Nate Parker’s GQ cover profile comes out? What happens when Fox Searchlight tries to do a big premiere in Hollywood a month from now? How uncomfortable and infuriating is this going to get?

parker2

Photos courtesy of ‘The Birth of a Nation’.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

114 Responses to “The American Film Institute canceled its screening of ‘The Birth of a Nation’”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. manda says:

    FWIW, I wasn’t planning on seeing this movie anyway. I’m sure it’s over-the-top violent, at least for me. I read the history of what happened though, so I guess there’s that. I agree with snoop dogg, who has mentioned he’s tired of slave movies. And while this doesn’t totally fit into that mold, because of the uprising and the fighting back, it’s just not what I want to see. I doubt people leave the theater feeling good. Not that that must always happen after a trip to the movies. I feel like a movie on Harriet Tubman, who didn’t resort to violence (as far as I know….) would be a better example of a movie where slaves are working to overcome their circumstances, and would possibly be uplifting in the process. The Nat Turner rebellion just ended up with a lot of death on both sides

    • FingerBinger says:

      This comment is very problematic. 1 Slavery wasn’t a circumstance to overcome. 2 Most slavery films aren’t made to make you feel good. They’re capturing a brutal part of history. They’re to make you remember. 3 Nat Turner was fighting for freedom ,a peaceful outcome wasn’t going to be possible.

      • Trixie says:

        No one has to go see a movie they don’t want to see.

      • HH says:

        @Trixie – No one told her to see the movie. That’s not what the comment was about. However, given that’s what you took away from it, I’m assuming this won’t reach you.

      • Lexie says:

        I agree with you.

        There’s also the matter of the hollywood dollar. If Hollywood thought non-violent Harriet Tubman would put butts in theatres and make money, they’d make that movie (as it is, they’re making an Underground Railroad tv series that, while not exactly based in historical fact, at least is telling the story of runaway slaves).

        Movies about revolution and violent conflict are pretty good bets for Hollywood. That’s why they make tons of WW2 movies and superhero movies and Holocaust movies. Hell, even Rocky movies fall under this category.

      • Trixie says:

        @HH

        My point is that if she doesn’t want to watch a super violent movie, she doesn’t have to. Saying she would rather watch a movie that has less violence and an uplifting message is not “problematic”. It is not “problematic” to say a certain type of movie is not for you and to ask for a different type of movie.

      • manda says:

        sorry, I was trying to not offend, and did not succeed.

      • Miss Jupitero says:

        Fwiw, Harriet Tubman always travelled with a revolver, and once had to make it clear to an escaping slave who wanted to give up that she would shoot him if he tried to go back. The people who helped escaped slaves escape did so at great risk to themselves and their families, and she was absolutely willing to do what was necessary to protect them. She famously “never lost a passenger” because she demanded commitment from all who made that journey with her. She was willing to fight. Sorry but slavery just isn’t a warm feel good topic.

      • Merritt says:

        @Finger

        I don’t think that is the point. Many people have criticized that most films that prominently feature black actors are about slavery.
        Why are there not more movies like “The Best Man”? “Hidden Figures” looks like it could be good, but apparently it has been given a kiss of death January release date.

      • HH says:

        @Manda / @Trixie – It is in no way an issue to say for one to say that they prefer to see movies without violence in them. It’s not an issue someone to prefer to see uplifting films. However, the comment did not read that simply, ESPECIALLY given the material in question. And, perhaps, this latter part is the real issue at hand. Slavery was an incredibly brutal time in U.S. (and world) history. A time that Americans have yet to truly reconcile with. People say it’s awful/terrible/bad. Yet, people don’t want to know and truly acknowledge just how bad. The brutality of slavery is not fully explored in textbooks, because yes, it is heavy material. Yet, that puts people in the position to learn on their own time, if they feel like doing so (and many don’t). Complicated with the fact that people (in general, not you Manda), like to see a white protagonist that does something good to help out, thereby making themselves feel better about the situation, and we’ve got an overall larger issue. Essentially, slavery was awful, but there were some stories of goodness, I’d like those. And #NotAllWhitePeople were bad, so can we isolate and focus on those too? In the bigger, sociocultral context, the statement was problematic.

        @Manda – Totally get that this wasn’t your intention.

        ETA – Also, like Naya said, we can have the uplifting films TOO. The issue is those are the only films society really wants to see.

      • Ginger Gal says:

        I agree with your comment. If someone actually LIVED through this, the least I can do is watch and learn.

      • Breakfast Margaritas says:

        Haha! You want a kinder gentler rebellion?

      • Pamela says:

        I think these films are important. I know on a surface level that slavery was “bad” because just the very idea of owning PEOPLE is horrible. But watching, for example, 12 Years a Slave, while very difficult to stomach, it was also enlightening in that it gave me a very specific view into the day to day horrors of slavery. Slavery was no longer a concept, it was someone’s life and it was heart-wrenching. I think people need to know these things, and remember these things, even if they are not pleasant.

    • Naya says:

      I decided to keep off this story because what was done to that girl is so disturbing but also because theres so much more going on in the response that its impossible to unpack without doing her an injustice. This comment though touches on one of the this things going on under the surface. Nat Turner is an “unacceptable” freedom fighter for white people and with the rise of BLM there are having flashback jitters.

      When George Washington takes up arms to drive out the British, thats necessary violence and it is depicted as a glorious war on big screen every few years. When black slaves rise up against white slave masters people write comments like “people will not leave the theatre feeling good” and demand a tale in which the freedom fighter “did not resort to violence” against a population that beat them, raped them and sold their children like animals. We do need a Harriet Tubman movie but one shouldnt take the place of the other. Nate Parker is a piece of work but never forget that theres MORE going on here. Perhaps one day, somebody will take this whole incident apart into its bare components.

      • HH says:

        +1 to EVERYTHING. I was gonna write more, but I can’t. I CAN’T with that comment.

      • Lucinda says:

        I agree that there are many things going on with this situation on so many levels. It leaves me very conflicted. I found myself wondering if the actor was white, would the reaction have been the same? If the movie was another topic, would the reaction have been the same? And as a woman, I’m torn that I’m even questioning the reaction instead of being happy that there actually is a reaction at all.

      • Sixer says:

        I hear you, Naya.

        I perfectly understand that some people prefer to avoid violence in films and on TV. Not everyone can cope with it.

        But the corollary to that is that you need to avoid films that have themes where the accurate depiction of violence is unavoidable – and yes, sometimes righteous – not ask for those films not to be made or to be sanitised.

        Personally, I would rather see truthful violence than the plastic-pretend stuff in spy and chase movies, for instance.

      • barb says:

        > When George Washington takes up arms to drive out the British, thats necessary violence and it is depicted as a glorious war on big screen every few years

        To be fair, I’ve never seen 1 George Washington movie let alone reboots every few years…

      • manda says:

        sorry again

      • Moneypenny says:

        Dead on, Naya.

      • You don’t have to keep apologizing manda, but yeah Naya you hit the nail on the head. Everything about this situation is a mess and I do feel saddened what could have been a powerful piece of black art and message is trounced by Nate’s despicable and inexcusable actions. I too also can’t help but wonder what would be different if circumstances were different.

      • Mia4S says:

        @Naya I agree with much of what you’ve said but this is Hollywood. People pick movies more often than not to feel good. That’s why we are on superhero movie #343234. You say: “When George Washington takes up arms to drive out the British, thats necessary violence and it is depicted as a glorious war on big screen every few years. When black slaves rise up against white slave masters people write comments like “people will not leave the theatre feeling good” .

        I don’t think that’s a good comparison. Simply put: Washington won, his forces defeated the most powerful Empire in the world. A father figure to his men he becomes the father of a nation. A few other issues get glossed over (*cough*) and voila, Hollywood ending! In contrast Turner’s rebellion failed. Horribly. It ended in not only his death but the other revolutionaries and countless Blacks both slave and free who had nothing to do with it. Then laws were passed that managed to be even more oppressive to slaves (!). They banned literacy. It is a violent, sad, heartbreaking story, with no relief. Worth telling? Yes. But I’m not going to condemn anyone for pointing out that a “feel good” story would do better at the box office and bring in more viewers. For better or worse, that’s just reality.

        A “Hollywood” story in this area of history? There are not many! Haitian Revolution maybe.

      • P says:

        But the slaves didn’t inflict much violence upon the slave masters. Most recipients of Turner and co.’s violence were women and children.

      • Edwin says:

        What I wonder is the same people that feels this kind of violence will leave some feeling in despair. I say how where your feelings watching the Godfather Triology or Goodfellas or the HBO Sopranos. It seems to me that as long as there is a white savior in most of these slave movies everyone mostly (white people) feel at ease, The true murder rape of men women and children as yet to be put on screen. The black people who were used as science experiments is not talked about, the stealing of inventions and credit of discoveries are still unknown to most. I say all of this to as I completely agree that his actions to this young lady based on what I’ve read is egregious however this story should be told, especially now in 2016 with the BLM and the racial climate of today. I also believe ( my opinion) that some powers to be really don’t want this movie shown for some reason. This man has over 20 or films that he has appeared in and now this case comes up public or not.

      • nikko says:

        I wasn’t going to comment but what happen in his past in in the past. People are still ranting and raving about Woody Allen’s movies, all Hollywood wants to be in one, and let’s look back in Woody’s past and what he did. What about Roman Polanski, everyone is going to his films and look at whatt he did in his past and he was found guilty for it; if he ever sets foot on American soil he’ll be going to jail. I didn’t want to make it racial but I believe it is. Here’s a black man accused (he wasn’t found guilty) of raping a white female and now his film is being tainted and the executive branch of the Academy doesn’t want anything to do w/ it. Same old same old, very little has change from slavery days to now.

      • sunny says:

        ITA. This comment is everything!

    • Jade says:

      I watched 12 years a slave and walked out bailing, did it upset me yes, but it was still important to see what society did to people or we are in danger of repeating it

    • ViolaFan says:

      I’d love to see a Harriet Tubman film. Oh my God, Viola Davis in all her magnificence…Hollywood Make It Happen.

      And yes to this latest development. No fancy film screenings for barely apologetic, self-gratulatory gang rapists. Nope.

      • Tiffany :) says:

        I would LOVE to see Viola as Harriet. I “know” of Harriet from school, but I think it is so telling that I have never seen her story brought to life in film or TV. Of all of the life stories that could be made into a film, I would think hers is an obvious choice. It really says something that it hasn’t been done yet (on a big scale and as far as I know).

      • Original T.C. says:

        Harriet Tybman was the first woman in the USA to lead a military expedition. She was also in the Union Army as a spy so I believe she was given military honors post death. On top of running the Underground Railroad being one of the first Black nurses, running the first Black retirement house for ex-slaves and raising her own children.

        So yes a movie about her will include military violence. These were violent times.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      Violence was being committed against them! How can you question their tactics when they were dying?

    • littlemissnaughty says:

      History isn’t told to make us feel good. We can’t just pick the stories where the outcome is palatable or inspiring. We all know Schindler’s List is a fantastic movie but for all that the man did, it’s not uplifting. It’s not even particularly hopeful.

      I’m actually incredibly angry that THIS dude and his buddy were the ones to tackle this part of history. Because I want to see the film. But I also want to go home and pop in my Cosby Show DVDs which are collecting dust now. I simply can’t watch that anymore and I won’t be able to watch this movie which makes me SO ANGRY. None of the other people involved deserve this.

    • Iknowwhatboyslike says:

      Slavery was not a peaceful occurence. Slavery is violent and bloody. It wasn’t this sunny and light breeziness that most will like to paint it as. It’s comments like these that makes me so pissed off at Nate Parker. He ruined what was sure to be one of the most poignant slavery related movies ever made. This movie was about a man who said enough was enough. Nat Turner and those brave souls who rebelled against tyranny and murder chose self-determination over servitude. Why was his rebellion anymore violent than the rebellion that birthed this country? I really hate Nate Parker for making this about him rather than this great hero. Ugh!

    • Betsy says:

      I’m with you in that my tolerance for movie violence – any at all – is so low that I pretty much don’t watch movies. It aggravates my PTSD (which was itself caused by repeated head injuries), so I don’t watch. If movies were made with 1950s levels of movie violence depiction, I’d see a lot more.

      But given Nate Parker’s history? Really not ever going to see it.

  2. HH says:

    This is good. I’m glad the AFI is doing this. As I posted on the other thread, my issue with Nate Parker (aside from being a rapist) is that he keeps insisting he’s changed, grown, etc and wants forgiveness, all the while maintaining his complete innocence. That he did nothing wrong and the sex was “unambiguously consensual.” Then, what is there to forgive? How could you have changed? What did you grow from? In fact, teaching young men what consent is, is actually a point we’re trying to GET to. So…..?????

    That being said, there is most certainly a race element here. This (rightful) backlash is occurring mere months after Woody Allen attended the Cannes and had his film shown there. And Hollywood still continues to work and praise that man. Not all of HWood mind you. I get that he has his detractors, but he’s still far more popular than he should be.

    After all is said and done, I was excited to see this movie, but I can’t support the work of a rapist and his co-conspirator. Also, something about that friendship maintaining throughout this years is angering to me.

    • Mata says:

      “my issue with Nate Parker is that he keeps insisting he’s changed, grown, etc and wants forgiveness, all the while maintaining his complete innocence.” This. It’s like he’s just frustrated that it’s effecting his career and he doesn’t understand why people are making a big deal about it.

      I think some in Hollywood are able to turn a blind eye to Woody Allen because he’s never been charged with anything. I think he’s taken a hit with the public, though. His movies don’t do nearly as well as they once did.

      • HH says:

        RE: Hollywood – Nate Parker was never charged with anything either.

        And agreed in regards to him just being frustrated about his career being affected. This is why none of his apologies stick. He’s saying the “right” words ( to a certain extent), but there’s no sense of understanding the magnitude of his actions in relation to the victim. Just himself and his career.

      • Missy says:

        @HH, Nate Parker was charged with rape and he went to trial. However, he was not *convicted,* i.e. he was not found guilty of the rape.

        Charged means bringing a formal claim against someone in a court of law. Convicted means being found legally guilty of an offense. I think you got the two mixed up!

      • Maire3 says:

        edit: NM, Missy covered what I was going to post

      • HH says:

        @MIssy, yes, you are right 🙂

        I do still think there’s a race element, but HWood is able to hide behind the courts in this instance. As I posted below, there is some very creepy undisputed evidence in the Allen case as well.

      • TotallyBiased says:

        Also, he was acquitted on what many consider a terrible logic: since he and the victim HAD had consensual sexual interactions the previous day, any sex they had the night she was basically unconscious was still consensual. Or so ruled the judge.
        Beyond that, he invited another to join them, he bragged about it afterwards, finally he and his good friend who WAS convicted harassed the victim and even enlisted the help of others to pressure and harass her. The school handled it very poorly, presumably because universities were even worse at handling rape reports back then and because they will always protect their male athletes over female students. Even if the athletes are black.
        So I personally find the argument that he was acquitted of the charges not even remotely the same as he was exonerated. He hasn’t even come close to showing repentance or sincere regret for his actions and their repercussions (his victim KILLED herself, after trying to deal with her fractured life for over a decade.)

    • Georgia says:

      Yes to everything you wrote.

    • MC2 says:

      I disagree and I don’t think this has to do with race. I think this story got more press, attention & emotion because the proof is there and the crime was so heinous. We have witnesses (the men who he invited to rape his victim but passed since it was too brutal for them). We can read a transcript of the pos telling her that he doesn’t feel bad. I think this is the piece that sets it apart- we can read what happened and also the fact that she is dead adds an element of ire.

      • Georgia says:

        So Dylan Farrow publicly telling her story isn’t enough proof?

      • HH says:

        Those transcripts are heinous true. But Woody Allen married his stepdaughter (granted he never legally adopted her). Woody Allen had nude photos of her after being her father figure for a decade. Yes, the Parker case has more court evidence (because they didn’t want to put Dylan Farrow on the stand). However, the Allen case has it’s own INCREDIBLY CREEPY and troublesome evidence as well.

      • Maire3 says:

        MC2: I also suspect the recent issue of campus rape at Stanford (and Denver) where the person charged * was given a ridiculously light sentence is a factor. There is a lot of fatigue about college athletes being protected by the system.

        That this all went down at Penn State makes it worse.

        *Edit

      • MC2 says:

        Georgia- whoa there. I never said that Dylan’s story wasn’t enough proof and you missed my point.

        I am in no way saying that other crimes didn’t happen or comparing other crimes. I am comparing the public’s outrage to the crimes, which has been significantly more in this case, and saying that it is because of an overwhelming slew of evidence that is difficult to combat rather then race.

        The difference is that in this case there is a charge, transcripts, telephone calls, etc. which is rare in abuse cases. There is more evidence for the media & public to view, see & have a reaction to. This is why I think the mass of people are reacting more severely to this then other cases. I think this is the element that makes a difference, not race.

        Maire3- I totally agree! Hearing how Penn State handled this is sickening. I hope that her family sues Penn State and Parker for having a part in her mental distress & death now that this has gotten more attention…..it’s a pipe dram but I hope.

    • LadyMTL says:

      I am also glad that AFI has made this decision, though I am surprised about their choice of film to replace it. (Jack Reacher? Really?) I do think that there is an element of race at play, because as you said plenty of other Hollywood types have messed up big-time, but I also believe that Nate Parker really is oblivious and should not be lauded in any way.

      Now I’m curious to see what TIFF is going to do. They supposedly have a gala premiere / party scheduled, and I hope to hell that they wise up and cancel it.

    • Scal says:

      Nate Parker was charged and tried in a court of law. Woody Allen it’s been accusations and rumors, and part of a custody hearing. That’s the whole reason why there are trial transcripts.

      The only reason Parker got off is because a jury decided that a previous sexual encounter was a lifetime ‘free pass’ between the victim and him. Which he clearly also still thinks which is another reason why his apologies don’t really stick. He doesn’t think he has anything to be sorry for.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      I think the biggest difference between Polanski, Allen and Parker is time. The first two built their careers when attitudes about rape and victimization were different. I think people are more aware now, so it is affecting Parker more because his career is just beginning.

      From my non-statistical opinion based on my own limited experience, it seems the people that support Allen and Polanski are older. But that could be wrong.

      • MC2 says:

        I agree. I can’t imagine that a director who was charged with (and admitted to) the drugging & anal rape of a 13 year old would be given a pass now.

    • Kate says:

      I think Allen (and Polanski) are treated differently for a number of reasons. Both had already made their masterpieces and cemented their cinematic legacy before their incidents occurred. Allen has mostly stayed behind the camera since then, and Polanski was always a director who just did a few little cameos now and then. They aren’t the faces of their films, or not anymore in Allen’s case. The biggest thing though, is that while both have at various times denied or minimised their actions, neither has ever tried to convince people they’re a good human being. Even apart from their crimes, they’re unpleasant people and they don’t really pretend otherwise. Nate Parker on the other hand tried to convince people he’s a good man, a man with integrity, a man of God who was tested and didn’t fall short. People don’t respond well to that kind of hypocrisy.

      • Georgia says:

        The point is that they shouldn’t be treated differently. Past accomplishments do not remove the FACT that Roman Polanski drugged and raped a teenage girl and fled the country because he was given a ridiculously light sentence that was going to be overturned. Past accomplishments do not remove he FACT that Dylan Farrow has herself said that woody Allen molested her when she was a child. He was not charged because her mother and the prosecutors chose not to put her through a public trial.

        All three men should not be rewarded in any form because they are gross and inexcusable pieces of shit.

      • honeybee blues says:

        Actually, Georgia, the reason Allen wasn’t tried or indicted is because he passed several lie-detector tests, and Farrow failed the one she she took. He’s appalling for falling for and seducing his ling-term girlfriend’s daughter, but she was not his daughter, and he never lived in the same home. I’m not defending his gross behavior with Soon Yi, but I was living in NYC at the time, and I remember the DA clearly stating that Mr. Allen passed multiple lie-dector tests, and Ms. Farrow’s results suggested deceit (re: the Dylan accusation). I understand she was beyond pissed and humiliated by both her lover and her daughter, but two other children in the home at the time said she coached then 5-year-old Dylan. Repeatedly. I wasn’t there, but facts do matter. He’s disgusting for Soon Yi, but it’s highly unlikely that Farrow’s accusations about Dylan are true. Too much fruit from a very poisoned tree.

      • MC2 says:

        Honeybee blues- I am not as educated as some in the Allen case but I do know enough to know that your analysis of the case is incorrect. The prosecution decided not to move forward with charges against Allen because Dylan was deemed to fragile to testify but the attorney involved has said that she was believed.

        And you are defending his behavior with Soon Yi by leaving out key details. He may not have been her parent legally but he was in a parenting role with her for years. Then he took nude photos of her while he was together with her mother. He did not end one relationship & then start another. How long was he with Soon Yi before Farrow founds those pictures? And do you think it was just pics? Allen acts like a pedophile, talks like a pedophile & people have said he is a pedophile.

        There is no reason to not believe Dylan Farrow today. The ‘facts’ you talk about are not facts at all but a media campaign by Allen’s people that you bought. Dylan is an adult woman who is supported by others and has maintained her story for years. I believe her 100%.

    • my3cents says:

      In addition to all the rightful comments, I would also like to add that as evidence that he truly thinks he did nothing wrong- is his ongoing friendship with the man convicted of the rape.
      They were friends then, and they are still friends- he is co- writer in this movie I believe.
      If any friend of mine was found guilty of rape there is no chance in hell I would have anything to do with them.
      This just shows that in his mind there was nothing wrong with what they did, and no he did not grow, change ,evolve bullshit…

  3. Mata says:

    I feel sorry for all the other actors and crew involved in this project. They worked their butts off, had success at Sundance, and now see it all crashing down. I agree that I don’t think they realized the transcripts were public. Or maybe they thought if they got their version out there first, nobody would dig deeper.

  4. Jegede says:

    Damn. Armie Hammer can’t catch a break!!!!!

  5. Oatmeal says:

    Harriet Tubman kept a pistol.

    What in the world?

    People fighting.for.their.very lives.arent polite.and.nice about.it

    The Turner.rebellion.was.a garden party compared to.Haitian liberation

    Human history is.violence, period

    This country.was.built on.violence but you want a movie about docile negroes calmly and peacefully working.towards.freedom?????

    Its.too early for this.bs

  6. embertine says:

    And now if we can get screenings of Woody Allen movies banned from film festivals, we might be getting somewhere.

  7. MC2 says:

    Yeah- I am not interested in ever seeing his mug again. I read the transcripts and read about his rape; inviting other men to rape the woman that he was raping with while she was in and out of consciousness and then the investigator that he hired to out her on her college campus and make her life hell. He raped her and then tried to silence her after she came forward. He succeeded and she killed herself so she can’t speak out now. But her words can and she outed this pos.
    I have thought about this poor girl who had everything in her palm before he got a hold of her for days now. He needs to feel some consequences for the woman he tortured & subsequently helped kill.

  8. Fa says:

    Every trades knew the rape case before and during Sundance but they sit on it and didn’t want talk about it when Fox S secured the deal

  9. Oatmeal says:

    Im pleased with the backlash….

    But one can be pleased and.still acknowledge a.gross.double standard taking.place

    But I feel Nate js the perfect.victim.for.this double standard so….win win.

    • Mia4S says:

      Quite frankly Fox Searchlight and Parker are being idiotic. Continuing with Q&As? A CAMPUS and church tour?!? No one wants to ask questions about the film. Sure they can plant a few but there will be one main story here and one alone. And the story ain’t a slave rebellion. If they try to ban questions about the rape case and aftermath the narrative gets even worse. Either way the subject matter of this film is overshadowed and rendered an afterthought. If you want to release the film…fine (God knows I’m not seeing it) but publicity and awards campaigning? Disgustingly arrogant or outright idiotic.

    • FingerBinger says:

      Nate Parker isn’t a victim in any way shape or form.

    • Fanny says:

      Are you having a problem with your keyboard?

    • HH says:

      Despite acknowledging the racial element here upthread…victim is a STRONG word to be using.

    • TyrantDestroyed says:

      Victim? hahahaha

    • Deepa says:

      I think Oatmeal was happy that Nate Parker is the “victim” of the double standard in which pedophiles like Roman Polanski and Woody Allen are celebrated for their talent but he isn’t being celebrated for his talent because people believe he is a rapist.

  10. als says:

    I don’t know if there is a right way to promote this movie. Not putting Nate Parker front and center would have been just as bad.

    Nothing changes and will change the fact that the abuser succeeded in this thing called life and the victim lost hers.
    What Nate Parker did that night to that girl, the RAPE and everything that followed empowered him, society worked with and for him. And he is just 38. He achieved success at such a young age reflecting exactly how many obstacles got in his way – zero.
    At 38 he has a successful career and a family. It’s almost as if life itself worked in his favor, not just the judicial system.

    No good deed goes unpunished and no bad deed goes unrewarded. Sad.
    Maybe this time, this bad deed will be punished.

  11. justme says:

    Excellent.

  12. Tallia13 says:

    Ugh.

  13. Squiggisbig says:

    Yassss, dragggggg him!

    (Although this does suck for the actors in this film. Saw one of my favorites from htgawm is in the film. So much for a breakout role!)

  14. ElleBee says:

    Day runs until night catches it, as bajans and some others say

    Night (wrong doing) has caught up to him. And what perfect timing!

  15. Frosty says:

    It’s heartbreaking that she killed herself, poor woman.

  16. Maleficent says:

    The whole situation is frustrating, and no one is going to win.

    I really want Nate to experience SOME sort of repercussion of his actions, but this doesn’t seem right. I’ve also seen comments on articles where people are making this a race thing, and Nate Parker is being held out as a sacrificial black lamb. I don’t believe that to be true, but I do wonder if he was a white man, if the response would be the same.

    That poor victim. I wish she was around to speak her truth today.

    • MC2 says:

      She can speak a little through her words during the case. I truly believe that we should honor her by not letting the sick details of this case go without being acknowledged. If people want to say he is a sacrificial lamb then we should bring up how he invited three men that she didn’t know to rape the woman while he (if you believe him) had sex with her. We should bring up the investigator he hired to drag her on campus. We should bring up the suicide attempts that she made that he knew about but still fought the case tooth & nail.

      He is worse then your average run of mill rapist. Dude raped her, turned it into a gang rape , had no remorse & then dragged her for it. He planned an attack on her after the rape, intimated & tortured her.

    • Jade says:

      I think Mel Gibson faced some serious repercussions from the public after his tirade. The reality is powerful rich men regardless of color will always get the benefit of the doubt (Cosby)

    • Flowerchild says:

      “That poor victim. I wish she was around to speak her truth today.”

      Would that make a difference on how you feel about this case today??? She spoke her truth 17 years ago it’s all in the transcript. Nate Parker new PR strategy is to make this a race thing, he wants the black community back on his side. Don’t be surprised if some of those commenters your referring to are paid lackeys.

      • Maleficent says:

        No. It wouldn’t make a difference as to how I feel today; however, I believe people are more receptive to hear the trials and pain she went through now. It’s clear the court system and Penn State failed her. I would hope she could come out shining and tell her story today.

    • Tiffany :) says:

      She also moved off campus, and her apartment was broken into. Only her rape related documents were disturbed. He would appear outside of her dorm, and then her apartment, waiting for her to leave. She ended up not wanting to go outside at all.

      Her abuse didn’t end with the rape. The torture he and his CO-WRITER inflicted on this woman is beyond any form of human decency.

    • Kate says:

      Eh, if anything people are holding back because of race. People who’ll instantly write off an Allen, Polanski, Gibson or Penn film, even the good ones or the ones about important issues, are agonising over this film because it’s a film about slavery made by a black man.

  17. Miss S says:

    “This is a situation where people are simply reading the transcripts or coverage of the transcripts and deciding that they want no part of Nate Parker and his film.”

    I feel this is REALLY important. This time we had access to documents that show how guilty he actually is and not in an abstract way. I guess many hear the word rape and can’t really grasp how violent it is but reading those transcripts of her description and then his phone call and the details of how she was bullied… I mean, I couldn’t go to sleep on the night I read it. This isn’t a conspiracy, this is people reacting to something he did, some HORRIBLE. I’m actually proud (not sure if this is the right word) of people in general for not letting this go. I’ve read several articles talking about this in detail. It really feels that there’s a movement committed in making him accountable even he doesn’t want to.

    • Brandy Armstrong says:

      agreed x 1000. I too think that bc of the transcripts we ‘see’ the case like no other. You can’t escape the pain she experienced, not only from rape but from being terrorized and stalked. You can’t escape the words/intimidation from the phone call. You can’t escape how he keeps using females in his life like a shield. You can’t escape the fact this woman is now dead bc of his actions. Nor should we.

      • Miss S says:

        And we can’t also pretend that something changed in his mind. We know what he thought about it after it happened and we clearly see that he still doesn’t get it which makes this much much worse. He is sorry for himself, his words about the victim feel hollow and there’s no pittance, no true regret, no redemption. How can we forgive him and forget?

  18. Mindy_dopple says:

    I am so happy he is being haunted by his HORRIBLE, INDEFENSIBLE actions. The cowriter to this film is the man who actually was convicted of rape. He remained close friends for over a decade later, he hasn’t changed at all. I hope this film dies and he goes away.

  19. turtle says:

    I would feel entirely different about this situation if Nate Parker would admit his wrongdoing and make some contribution to the dialogue on rape and sexual violence.

    All I hear from him is me me me and all I hear from his supporters is plenty white people are supported when they do wrong, let the brother live he was acquitted.

    And that is all bullshit.

    My stomach turned when I read the DailyBeast rundown of the case. I know how this woman suffered from PTSD. It is a LIVING NIGHTMARE to be pushed to the brink of wanting to kill yourself due to trauma suffered at the hands of others.

    She deserves for him to acknowledge the truth and make a contribution to influencing young men in this generation to think twice about having intercourse with an incapacitated woman and inviting buddies. But we aren’t going to get that because its clear that he is a very selfish individual who doesn’t care about her legacy or have more than a superficial care about his.

    If I want to know more about these events I’ll visit Amazon. I will not be watching this film or any other he’s involved in until he gets right on this matter.

  20. Kiki says:

    I am so sorry to say this but I think we will have another #oscarsowhite moment again unless the movie Loving comes out. I don’t know about anyone of you but I would rather watch “loving” than that sappy love story The Lights between Oceans.

    • Flowerchild says:

      If you check out the post on Nate Dateline interview and read the comments you would see that thier is a number of fantastic movies written by, acted, directed by POC. Nate movie isn’t the only one out there movies like Moonlight is getting great buzz.

  21. poppy says:

    fox could have had all the information as it wasn’t difficult to obtain.
    the fact they ran those 2 interviews preemptively of the inevitable backlash without even bothering to research any bit of it, especially the fact she committed suicide, was really really stupid. the little money needed to get their facts straight beforehand and teach this guy to to appear genuinely remorseful might have prevented this level of backlash. there’s a way to spin everything if you know all the facts (not that i would condone that but it is a business and they do it all the time).

    as for parker, he hasn’t grown. as in his first horrible choice and subsiquent stand on it, seems he drew the line yet again with his version of the past before knowing all the facts and doesn’t seem to be budging after he’s been made aware.
    zero lessons learned.
    this time he’s an adult with no threat of prison and still couldn’t manage to do the right thing. smh.

  22. Nicole says:

    Screw Nate Parker. 12 years after being assaulted, I still consider suicide. I overcome it, but I hope he truly understands suffering. I never wanted an assailant to feel terrible, but all these men getting away with shit has to stop.

    • Brandy Armstrong says:

      there are no words to express my sorrow that you had to survive that, but I hope that anytime those thoughts reenter your mind, the love you have from others will help keep you strong. I lost someone to suicide 13 years ago and it still knocks me to my knees with grief. Your attacker doesn’t deserve to win in that way. Much love to you and if you ever need it plus use 1-800-273-8255 (National Suicide Prevention Hotline).

    • nikko says:

      And not only men of color, but white men too.

  23. Patty says:

    He’s never going to apologize because he legit believes he didn’t do anything wrong. In his mind, she didn’t say no so everything is fine. It’s that simple.

    I’m not excusing his actions but you also got to remember that back when this happened, things were different. It’s not like today where people have finally acknowledged that a woman who is unconscience cannot consent to sexual activity.

  24. Bonzo says:

    It angers me that Nate Parker is just now feeling the repercussions of his actions from 17 years ago but white guys like Brock Turner, John P. Enochs, Austin James Wilkerson and David Becker get convicted of sexual assault and receive nothing more than a probation or a very short jail sentence. They all deserve long jail sentences and to remain on the sex offenders list.

    Glad to see that Nate is getting some sort of justice (if not in the courts) for his horrible actions against his victim, both during the rape and afterwards in stalking her and trying to intimidate her. I hope she knows that her voice is being heard.

  25. Capella says:

    Much of what ails the world which is the f**king forceful and abusive nature of Men, or more specifically a very DISTORTED masculine/patriarchal paradigm. The distortion creates very little understanding of the true nature of Power and how to Empower others, themselves, and the whole interconnected system of existence. A good book on this subject is Power vs. Force. This man is a scourge on the planet and his actions, along with many more before him, have polluted and tainted the good, and the true essence of valuable LIFE. If women were equal collaborators in running this planet (if not fully empowered to do so) this world would be a whole different place to exist. With almost every important/dire issue that is ever brought up I ultimately feel incredibly angry and frustrated by a masculine dominated/oriented world (but things are slowly changing). Okay, stepping off soapbox ….

  26. Are You Kidding Me? says:

    Do you seriously believe that Nate Parker and Fox Searchlight had no idea the transcripts to Parker’s PUBLIC TRIAL WERE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE TO ANYONE AND THEIR DOG TO REQUEST A COPY? In this day and age NOBODY RUNNING A MAJOR STUDIO could possibly be that naive. What part of “jury trial open to the public” do you think they failed to comprehend? Parker himself had the hubris to assume that it being on his Wikipedia page with the word “acquitted” would be all that mattered. Once Fox Searchlight found out about the rape trial they had to know more than one journalist would go digging for the real dirt on the trial. The problem was, is and always has been Nate Parker’s ego. He really thought his film would force everyone to overlook his sleazy past. The sad thing is that Parker either stupidly believes he really did nothing wrong 17 years ago or just hasn’t got the balls to admit it – even as he hides behind his asinine assertions of being “a man of faith” and “father of 5 daughters and brother of 4 younger sisters” who has a wife and mother.

    The real irony here is that Fox Searchlight was the studio that distributed Plan B’s 12 Years A Slave and steered th Oscar campaign that ended in a Best Picture Oscar. At the time they thought director Steve McQueen was a major PITA and an egotistical jerk. In retrospect they probably think McQueen was a walk in the PR park. Of course the difference here is that TYAS was produced by known entity Brad Pitt’s Plan B in conjunction with other well-known industry players New Regency and Pathe. BOAN was produced and financed by a little Candadian outfit called Bron Studios that’s trying to become a major player with low budget indie films. The question is – were they aware of Parker’s past when they bankrolled the film and took it to Sundance? They financed the movie for $10 million and got $17.5 milion from Fox Searchlight for distribution rights, so they’re probably up in Vancouver snickering their heads off.

  27. molee says:

    I’m glad this film is being pulled. I hate it when a “problematic genius” doesn’t have to follow the rules because the work is considered to be so valuable to art/the cause/the community/the company. Nat Turner’s story is so important for Americans to experience, and Nate Parker’s actions have tainted it. I can’t separate the rapist from his art or the artist from his rape. For me “Birth of a Nation” is poisoned fruit from a poisoned tree. I can’t even look at his smugly defiant face in the film poster. What a dishonor to Nat Turner.

  28. LAK says:

    Toronto has pulled the fiom press conference and interviews. Screenings are going ahead, but no promotion.

    I think it’s too late to pull the gala screening, so that will gi ahead.

  29. Deepa says:

    I wish they would just try to let the film stand by itself, or let maybe Gabrielle Union talk for it. He creeps me out but I feel bad for all the people who worked on it and believed in it. I find it impossible to believe that the studio didn’t know trial transcripts would come out. But it seems like all the other actors might have been moved by his vision and had no idea this was in his past. And I read that he paid for the whole movie himself when it was being filmed, that might mean they turned down big money projects to do this for low pay. But it is too creepy to see a film about fighting for liberation…and know that he was someone who would rape, stalk, and intimidate a woman. I wish that he would tell the truth and openly repent, maybe it would do some good for the world.

  30. Jen says:

    It disgusts me that HW is making this guy pay for his crime, but they defend and praise Allen and Polanski. F***ING transparent and disgusting.
    The AFI is full of racist hypocrites.

    I’m torn because I so want to see it. Nobody wants to hear about Nat Turner or that story because he fought back. Other oppressed groups can have their stories told where some fight back and people cheer.
    African Americans, not so much.
    Oh and to the clueless commenter who thinks I’m a paid lackey, kick rocks. Try Normal Black American sick if this sh*t.
    The fact so many commenters here don’t comention on the hypocrisy of this makes me gag. The AFI and others should do the same to all the white rapist directors they love so much. They too damaged lives snd thety have it on legal record what Polanski did to a kid, and What Allen did to his own little girl by her own account.
    Sick and racist as as F.