12 years a Slave

It's the only adjective I can use given that I found myself feeling bored when I was watching it. I felt it could have been made better. I'm going to watch it again when it comes out on dvd from a visual aspect but I was expecting to be blown away by the film and I wasn't.I think seeing films are like looking at works of art, you either 'get it' straight away or you don't. I just don't get on with that particular director. I felt no empathy for Simon [and, believe me, I wanted to].

Boring? did you know the story before? It was not a perfect film but boring is not an adjective I could have used about it.

Saw it tonight. Found it rather boring .

@petallus That was so realistic (the flogging) in The Passion of Christ. Terrible to watch but mesmerising.
The actor, John Cavaziel (sp) has been in a recent Channel 5 series called Person of Interest.
I certainly found him so

Moving post anno. I first learned about the slave trade at school, aged 13, with a wonderful history teacher. We had a number of Eastern Europeans in our class and as we were born after the 2 WW, all had some knowledge of the Holocaust and horrors their families had escaped. I didn't meet people whose family history started in the West Indies, rather than Africa, until I was living and working in the north west about 10 years later. That widened my understanding of the longer term impact of oppression and abuse of others

I have heard mixed reports about the film. A friend who saw it said that she kept her eyes shut during the whipping scenes which were prolonged. I might read the book though. I know my GD1 would be interested and I am sure she will see it. Her ancestors, on her mum's side, were slaves and she is very conscious of the struggles for freedom and, later, civil rights.

Yesterday

I am not sure I can face seeing the film but I managed to get the book for my Kindle at 49p

Yes Glamma we took our children then grandchildren later when they were 10ish. I said earlier, I do hope this film leads the way on a more open acknowledgement of the horrors and the longer term implications of this kind of abuse.

I don't think I will be going to watch this film I too am aware of the awful mistreatment of slaves coming into Liverpool Port and have over the years taken DGC when they where old enough to see the actual bollards and chains that these oppressed people where chained to and to the Museum as I don't think enough is told about these horrific times in school and that they should be aware what went on in their local area.

I continue to feel a bit haunted by this film. I wasn't sure about going to see it, but I don't regret it. I learned about the slave trade at the age of 13, in history which was taught by the very wonderful Miss Slater. I hope the film will add to a necessary debate about the longer term implications of brutalisation and oppression.

I have no great desire to see it, though I am sure it is a fine film. I don't go to the cinema to be depressed. I know about the evils of slavery and the maltreatment of slaves. Philomena, on the other hand, gives a rounded picture of hope and humanity, cruelty and tragedy.

The worst flogging scene I ever saw was in The Passion of the Christ.

I don't plan to watch it.

I saw one at Christmas which was very similar and anyway I try to avoid 'social conscience' films.

Saw it tonight - unremittingly grim. I already knew about the terrible treatment of black slaves and I'm not sure if watching scene after scene of torture and cruelty was particularly valuable.

I read this week that Solomon was a farmer in the north. Like Penstemmon, I was unsure that a freeman would have the very positive relationships shown between Solomon and white businessmen, professionals in a middle class neighbourhood. I need to do a bit more reading don't I.
Penstemmon, like you, I found the scene with the plantation owner, wearing his nightgown, drunk and leading the little girl, who looked about 8 around with him very distressing. I was even more distressed when he suggested to her, let's go inside and get you some candy. The film has stayed with me, I still don't feel the violence as gratuitous.

I was surprised to read that Solomon's death and grave are unknown.

It was based on his autobiography so I would imagine it was pretty factual. Hoping to see it later in the week [after the new Coen Brothers film]. One of my concerns is that I didn't like McQueens two previous films [actually that's an understatement; I loathed 'Shame'].

Nonu I did know quite a lot about the slave trade and appalling situations/ conditions and history before I went. It told a story about one man's experience and told it well. I do not think the scenes of violence were gratuitous and the story could not have been told without them.

Sadly man's inhumanity to man continues in a similar vein across the world.

Would not be my bag at all !
We have been in several museums in the the USofA and seen the things that were used to keep the slaves in oppression, to be frank , I could not really bear to look.
Talk about mans inhumanity to man !!

I saw the film on Thursday. There were some great performances , notably Michael Fassbinder as the slave owner. Chiwetel Ejiofor was also good and Sarah Paulson as Mrs Epps. To me the most sinister scene for me was not the lynchings/whippings but seeing the slave owner basically grooming a young black girl who, in her innocence,had no idea what the future held for her.
There were some fantastic cinematography in the good framing, lingering shots, holding images for longer than is often seen in films.

The story was very interesting and made me look up a lot of information about abolition of slavery in the US as I have no real chronology in my mind about that.

One aspect of the film I was not convinced by was the lifestyle of Solomon Northrop as a free man in Saratoga. I plan to learn more about that to see if my assumptions are right or wrong

However overall I found it hard to get emotionally involved in Solomon's story and I am not sure why.

Successive governments have been hiding slave trade files for centuries. Some date back to 1662. It will be interesting to find out what is so important that it still needs to be hidden.
One thing to be thankful for is the Freedom of Information Act, without which these files would still not be known about. These files should have been in the National Archives before now. Some historians are saying they might have to change their ideas on the first world war because of these discoveries.

I'm sure it's a brilliant film, but I have no wish to see it. I go to the cinema to be entertained and I certainly don't think this would be entertainment.

I saw the Wolf of Wall Street at the weekend and that is entertainment!! Appalling language but hysterically funny in places. Everyone in the cinema was laughing with tears rolling down their cheeks.

It is harrowing but I think calling it 'torture porn' is very unfair. The physical brutality is not lingered on in the way horror movies do. It is very moving.

Whilst I feel I should see this film I think it will be too harrowing for me. I have seen some "clips" on TV and whilst it does appear to be very well acted I'm not sure I could take seeing the suffering. That probably makes me a moral coward - I will have to wait until the film is being shown near me before I make my final decision.