12 Years a Slave

A drama with two storylines, an omniscient narrator and clearly defined objective and solidly cohesive dramaturgy? Dialogue handled predominantly with the shot/countershot technique? Softening of violent moments though precise editing? Not this time. Though 12 Years a Slave has been reproached for its conservative classicism, what McQueen adopts from the classic Hollywood style is especially an interest in the human body, which could also be described as an expression of his creative signature. Faithfulness to the original book even at the cost of breaking up the narrative into a number of episodes that are not firmly interconnected, and when one isn’t conditioned by another, was one of the many wise filmmaking choices that resulted in a lacerating cinematic account of the atrocities that whites perpetrated against a race that they considered to be inferior. McQueen’s mastery consists in the way he manages to avoid twisting historical facts in order for them to fit into the bigger story (like Spielberg in Amistad and Lincoln), while providing an extremely intense viewing experience. Thanks to the suppression of dramatic tension and the numerous static shots, the film seems like a series of consecutively arranged images that slowly burrow into the viewer’s memory thanks to the spiral repetition of certain situations and shot compositions. True to his background as a video artist, McQueen does not recount history or turn it into a drama, but instead lets it come alive as if it were happening right now. The protagonist’s hardships are therefore not viewed from the outside. We experience them together with Solomon, through his body, eyes and ears. Throughout the film, we know just as little as he does (for example, we never see the whole ship by which he is transported to New Orleans) and, despite the telling title of the film, we have just as few reasons to believe that he can emerge victorious from the uneven struggle for his own identity. The reduction of life to mere survival and the transformation of a person into an animal (or rather property) are highlighted by the loss of consciousness of spatial and temporal contexts, as we are not informed about the time and place of the events, with the exception of the introduction. In combination with the complete lack of moments providing relief, the abundance of unpleasant shots and images, from which the camera never turns away (the unpleasant shots are also the longest) makes 12 Years a Slave one of the most audacious films of last year. 90% (31/01/2014)

The film is shot decently, with exceptional care, and it can be seen that if not the director himself, then the producer was definitely counting on a festival award - after all, the subject matter is the sort where the creators claim a film award in advance. However, my 4 stars are rather meant as my appreciation of the formal qualities rather than an expression of emotional solidarity with the film. It has a strong story and theme, and yet I watched a film that didn't touch me emotionally in any way, and what's more, it didn't surprise me at all. It has exactly what one would expect, and while Hunger from the workshop of Steve McQueen, which is rated worse on FilmBooster, got under my skin and made me think about the film and come back to it in memories, in the case of 12 Years a Slave, I feel like I just ticked off having seen it. Overall impression: 70%. Sometimes the term film academism appears in film comments - I would say that it fits quite well with this film. (25/12/2015)

I’m sort of thinking about the US history. It wasn’t very joyous. And then I think about ours. But I’ll return to the US history and I can only say that people were real bastards in the past. I’m not saying that they’re not bastards nowadays, but what happened on the US territory during its colonization is just unparalleled. The land bought by the blood of Native Americans and then subsequently African Americans that the white men have brought in… that’s not exactly something you can brag about nowadays. And a very interesting British director Steve McQueen introduced one such chapter into a story that made me sick throughout the entirety of the movie. I almost didn’t make it till the ending. And I believe I can take a whole deal when it comes to movies now. But I guess I can’t, I haven’t seen a movie this heavy in a long time. Some of the scenes reeked of absolute despair, loss and sadness from each day spent on a cotton field. But the director filmed it really well. I won’t ever get some of the scenes from my mind. And not only because there were insane things happening, but also because the director has purposely filmed them to be lengthy, sometimes even silent. The ending itself is all-telling. And those actors? I don’t need to take a long time to talk about them. They all left such an impression on me. Not only the main African American ones, but also those portraying secondary characters, who had a whole array of famous names. (28/02/2014)

A film with a strong theme, but unfortunately nothing for me. The acting is very good, Michael Fassbender, Chiwetel Ejiofor and Lupita Nyong'o give solid performances. Unfortunately, even though the film has a strong story it ends exactly as you expect. It's funny that the supposed 12 years in the film feel less than a week, one would think that much more happened in those 12 years than the film presents. But I didn't care much for the characters, the emotions left me cold and it has a very slow pace that drags on perhaps even more than the main character's 12 years. That blacks were slaves and had it tough back then everyone knows, but I don't know why I would watch a two hour movie about it. 5/10. (18/02/2021)

I sort of see parallels with today’s society in this and not an anti-racist fairytale with a happy ending, which they obviously seemed to want. McQueen has disappointed me for the first time, probably because he couldn’t be sufficiently detached from the topic and he forgot to spice it up with something. These torturous 12 years seem fairly relaxed and Platt doesn’t experience proper slavery until he’s with Fassbender, who is cutely eccentric and interprets the Word of the Lord in his own special way. And eventually he alone really deals out punishment. Chiwetel Ejiofor (how the heck do you pronounce that?) acts well, but he honestly doesn’t have that much to do and the nomination for an Oscar is a little bizarre. The concept of time passing was poorly intimated, it’s hard to tell how long he was where and if it wasn’t for the title and the granddaughter, it could have easily been like four years. Lifelessly filmed and if it weren’t for Fassbender, I just don’t know. Nothing exceptional, but it’s watchable. P.S.: Hans Zimmer sometimes shines, but the music is mostly pretty ordinary and the gospel overkill is just awful. I said dance! Come on! Get goin’, Platt! (24/01/2014)