This movie isn’t a Bach fugue, or a Mozart Sonata, or a Beethoven Quartet of movies, all about the beauty and perfection of some intricate, elegant inner logic.
It’s a Bruchner Symphony or a Wagner Opera of a movie, with a simple earthy story rendered on a massive and overwhelming canvas.

I don’t have a problem with this. It’s exactly the sort of movie I wish the big-budget super-studios would make more of!

“Birth of a Nation” consistently makes lists of top movies for, as I said in my article, its revolutionary use of cinematography and direction that were, until that movie, unseen in the film industry. As I said in my article, the film’s story and message are racist and the movie is not remembered as being great for its plot points. In fact, from that standpoint, it is remembered as being rather ridiculous and very offensive. However, that does not change the fact that it was a groundbreaking film. See these links for evidence:

http://cinepad.com/awards/afi_100.htm – The American Film Institute ranks “Birth of a Nation” at Number 44.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birth_of_a_nation#Significance – Look at the “Significance” section. The Library of Congress has included the movie in its collection of preserved documents for “culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant films.”

I draw a parallel between “Birth of a Nation” and “Avatar.” This is not because the material of the movies are in any way related, but because “Avatar’s” plot is so utterly predictable, hackneyed, and juvenile that, while it will surely revolutionize the way films are made and viewed, it will not be remembered for having contributed anything artistically commendable by way of plot. This is the same argument I make concerning “Birth of a Nation.” Both movies employ cinematography that is revolutionary. Both movies’ plots are terrible.