2013--12 Years a Slave, Steve McQueen

 

2013—12 Years a Slave, Steve McQueen

Nominated: American Hustle, Captain Phillips, Dallas Buyers Club, Gravity, Her, Nebraska, Philomena, The Wolf of Wall Street

Should have won: Dallas Buyer's Club

Be sure to see: Blue is the Warmest Color, The Conjuring, Evil Dead, 42, Star Trek: Into Darkness, You're Next

“I don't want to survive; I want to live,”--Solomon Northup

     Directed by British filmmaker Steve McQueen (no, not the Steve McQueen from The Blob and Bullitt), 12 Years a Slave is one of the most depressing, rough, unflinching movies about slavery ever made. Perhaps it is the most though Roots tells a broader story. But for a two hour movie, 12 Years a Slave certainly tells a more depressing story than Amistad does, though I think Amistad is the better movie. 

 

     I didn't really want to watch this movie. I was hoping Dallas Buyers Club would win the Oscar. It was a fantastic movie, for one, but also I just didn't want to see this movie. But since it won I knew I had to knock it out. It was very good and an important subject, but a slavery is a tale that is not new to Hollywood. Dallas Buyers Club, though set in the early '80s, is about an issue which still runs rampant today, the AIDS crisis. But both stories are important, of course. Both deal with characters in danger of death. And both are true.

     It is 1841 and Solomon Northup, a former slave and current family man living in Saratoga, New York, has a skill for playing violin. He seems to be well-liked around town, even by the whites and is especially friendly with Mr. Parker, a shopkeeper. When two men offer Solomon a position in their circus, he accepts. What he doesn't realize is the men intend to sell him into slavery and he wakes up in shackles and accused of being a Georgia runaway. Protesting his freedom does him no good as his papers have been lost.

     Northup is sold into slavery with the new name Platt and his new owner is is Ford. Ford seems to be a kind man, as far as a slave owner could be portrayed I suppose. Remember Robert Reed's character in Roots? Until he sold Kizzy away, he seemed to be more kindhearted than most slave owners would be. That is how Ford is shown here, even when Solomon tries to share his tale. Sure, he won't offer aide but he doesn't punish, either.

     Ford's chief carpenter is John Tibents (according to the credits; Tibeats according to IMDB) played by Paul Dano who is an actor who has kind of grown on me. Perhaps he is best known for his role in Little Miss Sunshine or There Will Be Blood, but he shines most in Ruby Sparks. Here he shines his acting skills too, but his character doesn’t shine. Tibents is a cruel man but not in the way some slave owners have been depicted in movies. His cruelty doesn't come from whipping or beating, it comes from intimidation. One of my favorite parts of the movie comes from Tibents. I'm hesitant to use the word “favorite” since it occurs in a negative light but not all great movie scenes have to come from an upbeat occurrence; take Psycho's shower scene or the final shot of Planet of the Apes for instance. Tibents has a number of his new slaves lined up, about to tell them what they are to expect. He does it in a song and has them clap along as he sings it. The song is about what they can expect if they try to escape and I thought of two things. One, it is clear he has sung this song on more than one occasion to various groups of workers and two, well, it is kind of a catchy tune. I know I'm supposed to be sickened by it and, in truth, I am. But I'd be lying if I said it wasn't effectively infectious.

     Solomon must have felt low. One could imagine how bad life would be as a slave but to know he was, and still should be, free would be infuriating. But he is an educated man and this causes a dilemma. On one hand, it is very dangerous to let anyone know he is able to read and write. On the other, he must use all his strengths to better a situation.

     McQueen does a fantastic job of letting the camera stay rolling, making for long shots. Two examples stand out. When Solomon fights back to Tibents' cruelty, he is strung up by the neck in a way that keeps his toes on the ground so he won't strangle. McQueen stays with this image for a full minute and a half. He hangs; people walk in the background, paying no attention. There is no music, only the wind blowing and cicadas chirping. However, before he is finally cut down a little over three minutes after being strung up, the camera angle had changed. I was a little disappointed in that. Staying in one shot was powerful for me, changing lessened the mood, but only slightly. I think McQueen made a mistake doing a different angle but the scene still works.

     Solomon is sold again to a man named Epps and here he meets Patsy (Lupita Nyong'o in an Oscar winning role). Along with having a good eye for letting the camera linger, McQueen is great at the use of depth in his foregrounds and backgrounds. Take when Solomon retrieves Patsy and tells her to stay clear of Epps. Epps wants to know what Platt and Patsy were talking about and proceeds to chase him around the yard and through a pigpen. Though we are supposed to focus on the two running, notice the people fleeing for cover in the background. Similar to the hanging sequence, it seems the background's purpose is to be ignored and noticed at the same time.

     One of the most powerful scenes occurs with Patsy is whipped after going missing trying to acquire an item and I don't think I should spoil what that item is. I feel it is this sequence that won Nyong'o her Oscar. And the scene is capped off by a camera tilt, showing the fallen item. A great shot in a movie filled with brilliant shots.

     An Amish man appears late in the movie and Solomon sees him as his last hope ticket back home. From this point the movie reaches its home stretch. The final 10 minutes or so are perfect and I think if they had gone any further with the ending, in a “What happened next?” style it would have been overkill. Instead, the movie wraps up in title cards explaining what happened to Solomon and the fate of his kidnappers. However the text was so small it was virtually impossible to read. As were the credits.

     It was a very good and moving film but I had two issues. One, there were never any title cards. Ever. So the title could or could not be true. I never saw a “two years later” or a date pop up, except early on. So there really is no indication that the title of the movie is accurate, not that I doubt it had spanned a dozen years, the filmmakers just expect us to take their word for it. The other issue I had was the way the slaves spoke. Their dialogue sounded straight out of a Shakespearean play, almost as though they were all educated. But it is a good film. I don't feel it should have beaten Dallas Buyers Club or Gravity, but years from now it certainly won't fall into the forgotten winners category. But I also have no desire to rush out see it again.