C.S.A. The Confederate States of America is a mock documentary film – aka a mockumentary - which premiered at the Sundance Film Festival in 2004.
Here is some basic information about it:
** Written and directed by Kevin Wilmott
** Produced by Rick Cowan (and six others)
** Narrated by Charles Frank
** Released on DVD in 2006
** Run time: 88 minutes
This film is an
alternate history based on the question:
What if?
“What if the southern states had won the American Civil war which began in 1861?”
The film-makers assume the southern states (C.S.A.) won the Civil war and then they proceed to tell us what happened since then in a state that is officially based on slavery and racism.
Two mock experts appear from time to time, the first one is a white man who supports the southern way, while the second one is a black woman from Canada who has a critical view of the C.S.A.
Mock commercials appear from time to time. At the end of the film, we learn (to our surprise) that most of these commercials are not false: they are actually based on real cases!
The film is divided into two parts.
Part one
** War and Rebellion
** Reconstruction
** A Splendid Little War
** The Great depression and World War Two
Part two
** Cold War with Canada
** A New Frontier
** Modern Day
The film has an official website where there are more suggestions and ideas for an alternate history of the fictional state.
What do reviewers say about this film?
Here are some results:
56 percent = Rotten Tomatoes (the audience)
62 percent = Meta
64 percent = IMDb
80 percent = Rotten Tomatoes (the critics)
On Amazon there are at the moment more than 750 ratings of this product, more than 350 with reviews.
The average rating is 4.1 stars which corresponds to a rating of 82 percent.
As you can see, the ratings are mixed. I understand. The film is based on an interesting idea, but I think the idea is more interesting that the execution of it. There are several problems with the alternate history that is presented here.
Let me explain:
# 1. The film-makers assume the southern states take over the north, this means the union disappears and the C.S.A. takes over the whole country. This is not very likely. If the southern states had won, there would probably have been two states: the USA in the north and the C.S.A. in the south.
# 2. While they assume American history will change, they also assume almost everything else will remain the same, such as the rise of Hitler in Germany and World War Two. This is not very likely. If you change one significant part of the world, other parts of the world may also change.
# 3. They assume major events in American history will remain unchanged, such as the Great Depression in the 1930s.
# 4. They assume the C.S.A. will have the same leading politicians, such as Kennedy versus Nixon in 1960, although the issues are different:
In the film, Nixon supports slavery, while Kennedy wants to set them free.
Between the talking heads and the commercials there are some historical clips.
Some are real historical clips, which are given a different interpretation, for instance the 1960 debate between Kennedy and Nixon.
Other clips are re-enactments made by modern actors. Unfortunately, some of them are not very successful.
The most obvious example is the clip in which Hitler pays a visit to the C.S.A. The actor who plays Hitler does not look like Hitler at all.
Sometimes real history is turned upside down. In the real world, Japan attacked Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941.
In the film, the C.S.A. attacks Japan on the very same day in order to stop Japanese aggression in the Far East.
This is fair enough, because they simply turn everything upside down. But there is at least one case where the alternate line is simply impossible.
They say several prominent Americans left the C.S.A. and moved to Canada shortly after the end of the Civil War (which is placed in 1864 in the film).
One of those mentioned here is Henry David Thoreau, but this is impossible, because he died in 1862, before the end of the Civil War.
I think the purpose of this film is two-fold:
(1) They want to make you laugh when you see the crazy things that happen in the C.S.A.
(2) They want you
to think about what you see and compare events in the film with what happened in the real world
If you ask me, this film is not quite successful.
While some scenes may be funny, other scenes are embarrassing.
While it is true that slavery was abolished in the USA after the end of the Civil war, we also know that racism did not disappear when the North defeated the South.
While the C.S.A. in the film commits many sins, we cannot say that the real USA has never done anything wrong.
As stated above, I understand the mixed ratings, but the ratings on Rotten Tomatoes and Amazon are too high.
The ratings on Meta and on IMDB are more appropriate. This film deserves a rating of three stars (60 percent).
PS. After the initial release, the film became a so-called “Spike Lee Presentation.”
This fact is mentioned at the end of the film (during the credit rolls). This is a very strange message. I do not know what it means.
Spike Lee has nothing to do with this film. He is neither the director nor the producer. He is neither the writer nor the narrator.
Perhaps it means that he likes the film? Perhaps this is why his name is mentioned during the credit rolls?
*****
C.S.A.
The Confederate States of America
A mockumentary which premiered
in 2004
*****
No comments:
Post a Comment