The Birth of a Nation | Based on a True Story
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 сер 2024
- The Birth of Nation was the first major motion picture success, and because of its historical inaccuracy, the Ku Klux Klan was revived for another round of terror. This is the worst case of a Based on a True Story film. So today is a prime time to go into why it was so bad, and get some President Wilson bashing in.
Through UA-cam's cowardice, this video has been demonetized.
------------------------------------------------------------
more videos:
previous:
• The Revenant | Based o...
related:
• Historical Orthodoxy, ...
------------------------------------------------------------
references:
Blee, Kathleen M. Women of the Klan: Racism and Gender in the 1920s. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1991. amzn.to/2NzeHbl
www.npr.org/sec...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
en.wikipedia.o...
------------------------------------------------------------
SUBSCRIBE FOR MORE VIDEOS:
www.youtube.com...
contribute to my Patreon:
/ cynicalhistorian
LET'S CONNECT:
/ cynicalcypher88
/ cynical_history
-----------------------------------------
Wiki:
The Birth of a Nation (originally called The Clansman) is a 1915 American silent epic drama film directed and co-produced by D. W. Griffith and starring Lillian Gish. The screenplay is adapted from the novel and play The Clansman, both by Thomas Dixon Jr. Griffith co-wrote the screenplay (with Frank E. Woods), and co-produced the film (with Harry Aitken). It was released on February 8, 1915.
Three hours long,[5] the film was originally presented in two parts separated by an intermission; it was the first 12-reel film in America. The film chronicles the relationship of two families in the American Civil War and Reconstruction era over the course of several years: the pro-Union Northern Stonemans and the pro-Confederacy Southern Camerons. The assassination of President Abraham Lincoln by John Wilkes Booth is dramatized.
The film was a commercial success, though it was highly controversial for its portrayal of black men (many played by white actors in blackface) as unintelligent and sexually aggressive towards white women, and the portrayal of the Ku Klux Klan (KKK) (whose original founding is dramatized) as a heroic force.[6][7] There were widespread African-American protests against The Birth of a Nation, such as in Boston, while thousands of white Bostonians flocked to see the film.[8] The NAACP spearheaded an unsuccessful campaign to ban the film.[8] Griffith's indignation at efforts to censor or ban the film motivated him to produce Intolerance the following year.[9]
The film's release is also credited as being one of the events that inspired the formation of the "second era" Ku Klux Klan at Stone Mountain, Georgia, in the same year. The Birth of a Nation, along with the trial and lynching of Leo Frank for the 1913 murder of Mary Phagan in Atlanta, was used as a recruiting tool for the KKK.[10] Under President Woodrow Wilson, it was the first American motion picture to be screened at the White House.[11]
Griffith's innovative techniques and storytelling power have made The Birth of a Nation one of the landmarks of film history.[12][13] In 1992, the United States Library of Congress deemed the film "culturally, historically, or aesthetically significant" and selected it for preservation in the National Film Registry.
------------------------------------------------------------
Hashtags: #History #BirthOfANation #KKK #Review #BasedOnATrueStory #WoodrowWilson #DWGriffith
As one might expect, UA-cam was too cowardly to monetize this video.
The Cynical Historian why is kkk a tag?
Patrick Murray I know, but like, why does homophobic, racist bastards a tag? I know they are in the movie but you didn’t have to put “them” as a tag
@@kissthechef3206 Might be a good way of baiting racists into watching the video?
@joseph tiso probably
so basicly wodrow wilson is like joe biden in its era
The movie seems racist even by the standards of the 1910s
Hollywood was surprisingly regressive for almost half a century. This movie was protested in much of the US, but that didn't stop Wilson from legitimizing it
@@CynicalHistorian From what I've read it was a HUGE hot topic issue on the film. Sadly Wilson was Wilson, but I don't think that Hollywood as a whole was so regressive like Griffith was. Maybe that's just due to me watching tons of old Zorro movies so I might have a bit of a bias.
I mean the KKK:satinist and racist are the heros in the movie
@@knowledgehub9271 True, but in The Mark of Zorro (1920) the movie I mentioned above, Zorro was way more liberal and fought for the human rights of Native Americans and peons, as well as poor clergymen who are all abused by the system.
@@JackClockerinos Even Griffith wasn't so regressive. His next feature film contained an interracial love story portrayed +vely
Here's something to think about. The 1915 Birth of a Nation movie was made closer to the Civil War (about 50 years) than we are to WWII right now (about 70 years).
We still fly the B-52, first flown in the 1950s. Flying it in Afghanistan today is the equivalent of flying the wright brothers flyer in Vietnam.
Pretty sure the director himself was the son of a confederate veteran.
You mean ww1
@@thunderkatz4219 Actually, 2017 - 70 years = 1947. So, WWII. I realized that the comparison was kind of wonky, though. It would have made more sense to compare it to the distance to WWI.
@@doggonemess1 we’re closer to the Vietnam war than the civil war.
Why would it make more sense when the point isn’t how far away but how recent the civil war was?
Someone asked me my favorite president, I said Teddy Roosevelt. They said Woodrow Wilson. The ensuing fight was a one-sided affair.
I had me a good laugh from that one. Too right man! People who like Wilson typically ignore what he actually did, and just talk about his rhetoric. Actions speak louder than words though. I want to say Teddy is mine as well, but I also really dislike his jingoism before the presidency. Then again, he learned the error of his ways, unlike basically anyone else in his position.
When I say Teddy is my favorite, what I should clarify is that he's my least disliked president. He was an incredibly warmonger (though witnessing the horror of the Great War reportedly purged him of that in his last years). I have to give him credit where it's due, he gets major props for inviting Booker T Washington over for dinner, he backpedaled following the outcry from the rest of his more racist peers, but the fact that he didn't think for a second that such an outcry would happen sorta endears him to me. To him, it seemed Washington wasn't 'a black man who I am inviting to the White House for formal dinner' but more 'My friend, with whom I want to spend my evening meal conversing.'
There's a strange purity to that given the times, I think. All things considered, as an Italian I probably shouldn't like Teddy, but almost every account I read about the man makes me believe he was a pretty okay guy, for a President.
Mine is Calvin Coolidge. Can't find anything in his governance that can be criticized. Hoover screwed the roaring 20's over to no end.
John Beam The American working class called. They said to go fuck yourself
FDR was the best president
I always hated Wilson, because of his promotion of the KKK
Wilson was one of the worst Presidents. lynching black Americans, arresting socialist Americans, and forcing Americans into a world war…
@@alexscriabin
Wilson didn't personally lynch black people, but he may have contributed to the atmosphere of racial prejudices that led to the lynchings.
Watching Birth of a Nation is like watching Leni Riefenstahl's Triumph of the Will. You can't believe what horrors you see on screen, but have to marvel at the achievements for the art of movie making.
You don’t see any horrors on screen in Triumph of the Will though right? Isn’t it essentially just a bunch of parades and speeches?
Some Potato What horrors? It’s a bunch of parades and ceremonies of Hitlers rise, and really well done to boot.
Didn't even see this got replies. I don't think Triumph of the Will is boring at all. It's a technically remarkable film.
And Nazi parades and speeches are horrors for me.
It’s a sh$t film
This is very interesting. I used to drive by Griffith's grave on my way to work. It's interesting because you noted that the next movie he made had the opposite message. And later, he came out with a movie where a Chinese man in an interracial relationship was the protagonist. If he hadn't made Birth of a Nation, I wonder what his legacy would be today.
But then if he hadn't made Birth he likely wouldn't have made those films afterwards as they were largely an effort to answer the protests surrounding Birth and prove himself "not-racist." Those movies were like his Black Friend that today's racists like to trot out to prove that the racist thing they just said doesn't make them racist.
@@satidog Good point.
If you listed All of the inaccuracies of this film it would be longer than Birth of a Nation
Option poll
Who is worse?
Wilson= like
Andrew Johnson= comment
Fun fact: I'm related to the actor who plays the abolitionist. The actor, Ralph Lewis, is related to me through my maternal grandmother.
Great work as always. From what I remember reading (I don't remember where) DW Griffith was a very strange man. He made this movie and he also made Intolerance like you said. Before that he made a short film about the plight of the displaced Native Americans. But then he made a movies about native "savages" working with the British diring the Revolution. But he also made a biopic about Lincoln. I have no idea what the hell he was trying to do with his career.
Sam Dolan to be fair First Nations were that nations, so depicting British allies like Iroquois as demons and people's like Cherokee as betrayed victims, is no different than a WW1 movie that depicts the French and British sypathetically, while demonizing the Germans.
then in 1919 he made a movie called "Broken Blossoms" which is about a white woman's romance with a peaceful Chinese immigrant while she's dealing with her drunkard husband. This man is savage of his time, he dont give a fuck lol
That's real creative liberty!
Griffith is truly a genius man.
As with demonizing British allies but being fair towards Cherokees makes sense, as it's more just "Britain is evil so it's friends are evil."
My theory about Griffith is that his political opinions changed throughout the years. Maybe I'm wrong, but I have no other way to explain how the hell Griffiths films were the way they were.
Birth of a Nation (1915) reminds me of the old saying ‘in war, truth is the first casualty’.
I'm feeling quite ignorant right now. I knew this movie existed, and I knew that it was racist as hell... But I never knew that it was made that way UN-ironically. Up until now I thought it was satire, and wasn't actually pro-segregation. And it was the FIRST movie ever screened in the capital of the United States of America? Holy FUCK that's depressing.
It's not a racist movie it's just against race mixing. Sit down, be humble.
@@firstnamelastname6926 ,yeah I'm sure they didn't mean for this movie to come off as racist.
Idiot.
@@firstnamelastname6926 I think a brain would come in quite handy, you need one?
@@tyrian_baal sit down, be humble. White boys like you need to STFU and let us do the talking.
@@firstnamelastname6926 That's racist
So... /pol/ the movie?
Salokin Sekwah No there would have to be Nazism for it to be /pol/ the movie.
@The King Nice joke
@Genghis Khan yeah not gonna lie that pizzagatescandal was kinda stupid
If you took out the irony that drips from /pol/, then yes.
Pol is too much of a larp to be like the 3K, atleast the latter actually cared for their stupid beliefs
possibly the most racist film I have ever seen.
I second that👏👏
It’s very easy to make a fake movie about a fake topic very easy because you can make it be anything but actual history
I think you mean 'punitive' not 'putative.'
Yeah. Ordinarily not worth pointing out, but in this case the whole video kind of turns on that one word.
well "puta" is spanish for whore... so maybe there is something to that ;-)
Interesting video, thanks for this. One thing: on two or three occasions, you used the word "putative" ('seeming to be, reputed') where you clearly mean "punitive" ('concerned with punishment').
hmm, yep that's what I meant. thanks
The only thing I took issue with here was the claim that Reconstruction under Andrew Johnson wasn't meant to be a punishment. The understanding I've always had was that Lincoln planned a wholesome reconstruction, Johnson hijacked it, and then Grant had to try and reign it back in.
Well done. To perhaps reinforce your point, perhaps you might work the Tulsa Massacre into the narrative. You also leave out the continuing instances of lynchings, denial of the vote (recently revived by the Shelby decision) and other post reconstruction tropes.
Good work however as with most of your videos. Thanks
I'm kind of wondering why the KKK in this movie had toilet plungers on their heads.
Augh... why did the first feature film have to be THIS film of all movies, of all concepts? Its such a shame.
United in the hatred of Wilson.
There is honestly much more groundbreaking work from DW Griffith's film catalog instead of this. His short film The Musketeers of Pig Alley is considered by many to be the first gangster film.
It’s always a good day to trash President (🤮) Woodrow Wilson.
An interesting historic fact, I'm almost positive Hitler watched and imitated some in Birth of a Nation: The 1st Klan never used the blood flag, but after Birth of a Nation showed Klansmen dipping a flag in the blood of a killed white woman, the 2nd Klan was revived on top of Stone Mountain just a few months later, supposedly in the blood of a white girl killed in 1913 in Atlanta, by a Jewish businessman. Some years after this, at the Beer Haul Putsch, one of Hitler's SA bodyguards took a bullet for him, falling on the flag. They paraded this flag everywhere they could, and "consecrated" all official Nazi flags after it by touching them against the Blutflahne. In both cases, it was a lie: The Jewish man never killed the girl, and the SA guard never jumped in front of Hitler - but it's strange to see an appeal to this weird idolatry this early. It was clearly powerful, if the SA followed it.
holy shit man, idk that shit about woodrow wilson. its crazy to think that all the history classes i took never mentioned his racial views. and to push the view on america says alot. im glad your portraying everything in facts.
The Birth of a Nation can be seen on TCM on occasion, and really should be viewed for its technical/artistic brilliance; however, be prepared to cringe very often.
The same thing for Leni Riefenstahl's films which propagate the "virtues" of Nazism. They are technical and artistic masterpieces, but that fact merely made their propaganda more palatable.
Moreover, it cannot be overstated how rotten Woodrow Wilson was, in regard to his attitude towards "other" races, and our very rule of law. The real Wilson legacy needs to be known in order to understand why the US is in the mess that it's currently in.
As always, historical movies tend to tell more about the time they were made rather than the historical subject they try to represent. By the way, have you thought on making videos on tv shows? Since you already did a video about Spartacus, I was thinking about HBO's Rome and how bad it was from a broad view (timeline, certain depictions and character relationships, the age of Cato, patricians not speaking greek, etc), though it was great when it came to small details on roman values and culture. Overall, it would make an interesting analysis.
I think I'm going to stay away from TV shows, because it is time consuming enough to deal with a 3 hour movie. I just don't have the time to do a full TV show. Maybe at some point I can do something without video editing a bunch of stuff, but those don't get many views.
Thanks so much for making this. So far, I've refused to show TBOAN in my film courses though of course I do have to talk about it. I can't imagine that I'll ever be willing to show it, but I can at least offer this.
Why not...im black...I've seen it....provide the context and show the damn thing. It's a movie, it has great historical significance, you're almost a fraud for not showing it.
Cypher, the leading academic of New South Revisionism was probably William Archibald Dunning, and his students.
I would love to see a video on your channel about the Dunning School's thesis on Reconstruction - would that be something you would consider?
And there was much rejoicing.. yay. It's always weird that old movies actually have a rejoicing scene as like the second to last act.
And let's not forget Wilson's greatest "fan" was FDR.
Oh. 'PUNITIVE'! That's what you meant every time you said 'putative'. Took several repetitions to figure it out.
1) Yes I am binge watching your videos today. Don’t know why, just decided to.
2) Are there any historical events you would like to see made into a movie? I’d love to see a film adaptation of the Pullman Strike, or the Battle of Blair Mountain or the Ludlow Massacre, something depicting early labor organizing in the US. Somehow no movie has been made about these, or at least that I’ve been able to find.
You’d love those hypothetical films as it would allow you A LOT of Wilson bashing opportunities.
+Brendan Davison Blair Mountain definitely. Matewan (the film) was utter junk, and that's why they didn't make the planned sequel. In terms of labor stuff, that is the best for movie making. As a Western historian, is like to see some westerns on lynching, filibustering (yes i have a script ready for Walker), or some least known Indian Wars that are honestly depicted. Some other American small wars would be great too. There's so much to do, and Hollywood is too narrow minded to do them.
OMG! THIS IS RIGHT ON TIME AND EXTREMELY ACCURATE! GOOD JOB!
i watch this movie every martin luther king day as a joke
Mp40o95 Jack lmao
a joke to who tho?
creep
3 hours every time. Wow.
Michael Wade that was me I was trying to be edgy
It’s kind of annoying that you keep saying “putative” when you mean “punitive”.
The fact that a full 135 people disliked this video makes me depressed as all hell. That is 5 PERCENT of the people who either liked or disliked the video. We live in quite the country, don't we?
Don't care about them they're just a bunch of resented loosers.
check the l/d ratio on the most popular video on this channel, "10 slavery myths"
I keep hearing you say "putative," when I'm fairly sure you're trying to say reconstruction wasn't *punitive*.
Only in Birth of a Nation does Woodrow Wilson get used as a source
I had a friend from the south who would say "the civil war aint over. Its just halftime." Pretty funny actually.
im a bad film student i have never seen this movie 😔 tbf i think my teacher replaced viewing it with just reading about it and replaced the viewing with citizen kane
When people ask me would I go back in time to assianate Hitler I would say no. I would go back in time to assianate Wilson.
Great video! really helps putting the film into context, i never knew it had
such a wide affect on race relation in america, especially helping to ignite the 2nd klu klux klan.
Will you be doing a film review of the free state of jones? I felt the film did an excellent job capturing the down trodden spirit of white southerners and how the rich southerns profited from the war generated by the labour from both poor white and enslaved black people.
_Free State of Jones_ is definitely on the list, and I have the movie waiting to watch.
Great video sir.
Unrelated, but I've been wondering lately why this country has such an abysmal record in North/South conflicts, and the somewhat amusing fact that we seem to end up supporting the Southern Countries against the Northern Totalitarian Agressors.
Probably something that needs to be talked through with a therapist.
Antarctica secretly offers low cost therapy to Nations with Issues. True story*
(*needs source)
The klan used both this movie and Gone With The Wind for recruitment.
What was in Gone with the Wind
This is the only kind of "Willy bashing" I approve of ;)
He "Willy" got him.
Can you do an episode about the historical accuracy of Mississippi Burning?
Pretty good video, However, Haiti didn’t go on a genocide against white people but rather against French Creoles, Polish people were even named “honorary negroes” and new German immigrants to Haiti were spared
Your videos are consistently excellent
The hell do you mean, "only Successful Genocide!" Anatolia was once filled with native Christians. Where are they all now?
If Wilson had his way, the Greek, Assyrian, and Armenian Genocides would have failed as well.
Fun fact the movie was filmed in my hometown of Calexico
I love that you love bashing President Wilson.
Haiti made Napoleon Bonapart run for his life in his first battle.
BE KIND IN THE COMMENT SECTION?! HAVE YOU LOST YOUR MIND?!
I think most people in the south still call the civil war "The War of Northern Aggression".
...bc Fort Sumter attacked itself? /s
Interesting to know that about Wilson. People always talk about him as a progressive. But I suppose is the same case with Biden..
I think Andrew Johnson would have something to say about reconstruction being punitive.
What I'm surprised about is that Griffith actually got any black actors and/or extras to star in this movie. Then again, pay is pay so they probably took the job without knowing what this movie would end up being.
Most are white actors in blackface
Wilson put downs are like power play goals
7:03 you need to know that some confederacy soldiers were still alive at that time and help write the history of the south
I'd recommend watching it. Though be warned, it is exceptionally boring and extremely long. Its interesting that it really is a lynchpin for both the rise of Hollywood, (the fun blockbusters that generally play it safe and aren't controversial)AND the expansion of jim crow, klan activity, and racism.
I saw this in my film history class 11 years ago, and my God, it was hard to stay awake through the whole thing, especially since this class was at night. 3 hours of a silent movie with music. That's a challenge I'd like to see milennials face: watch a 3-hour-long silent movie without falling asleep.
I did an entire class on European Silent Film. I know the struggle.
How did u do it i only lasted liked 10 mins
5 minutes is to long for a millenial if it isn't a video game. I bet 90% of millennials didn't even finish this video.
KTChamberlain Do you have ADD or something? The movie was pretty engaging.
I shut off the music eventually because it didn't fit the scenes at all
Bravo sir!!! I would bring up Dems and Republicans but because I don't want to start a fight I will leave it alone
Great video. Nice to see where the narrative started.
I assume you meant "punitive" rather than "putative."
And yes, people on all sides of current debates really seem to have forgotten or never learned just how far civil rights progressed during Reconstruction before being almost completely reversed by the forceful, often terroristic (via the Klan) advent of Jim Crow era Black Codes and the Southern Democrat resurgence.
So, DW was kind of the original Oliver Stone?
It was intentionally inaccurate but also what many desired to happen ....
I really appreciate the information about the movie, However, you should be aware that "punitive" is not the same "putative."
I came for the Wilson bashing.
Reconstruction was about totally socially restructuring the south and also making them realise that ideas about deterring any future ideas about secession. Whatever it was intended to be, you can understand why it felt punitive to southerners. Their world was torn apart, burned to the ground and effectively begun again. It must have been frightening for many. Yes undoubtedly it was for the better but Im talking about how it must have felt to the losing states.
I'm glad to find someone who hates Wilson as much as I do.
Great video!
I must take issue with your description of Reconstruction (from 4:46 on) on paper as opposed to actuality. I have relatives from all over, from rural Georgia, New York, and my birthplace, San Francisco, and I tend to think my ancestors would disagree with your interpretation. But that's anecdotal evidence.
Long live Adam west
Reconstruction WAS punitive!
It was not
It really wasn't Andrew Johnson hijacking reconstruction and doing nothing about what the people in the south were doing is not punitive.
I was expecting this to be about the 1915 film I actually saw that on DVD
First ever film to gross at least ten million dollars at the box office due to its two dollar price for a ticket because of its high status.
This is one movie I've wanted to watch for a while. Not because I'm racist but I just want to see how BAD it truly is
"Step right up Woodrow Wilson."
THAT SON OF A BITCH
Reconstruction was de facto punitive because the rich capitalists that depended on cheap labour instead of slave labour for their industries came down to the South to buy up land cheaply and exploit both black and white labour where there were no other jobs cause of the war.
Ignorant Southern whites and possibly Southern white elites that had something to benefit from this then spun the story that the negative effects were the blacks fault.
So essentially quite a few Southerners that were either slave holders or generally independent farmers or craftsmen ended up becoming (to use marxist terminology) wage slaves or indentured farmers (taking up large loans to save their farms).
You made an error. Haitian revolution was from 1791-1804, not 1781.
timestamp?
@@CynicalHistorian 9:28
He was killed at salvation army parking lot in baton rouge
great video. but:
putative [ˈpyo͞odədiv] adj - generally considered or reported to be.
punitive [ˈpyo͞onədiv] adj - inflicted or intended as punishment.
Can I get a citation about that @ 4:57? AFAIK, reconstruction wasn't really a national thing, especially as radicals stopped short of suffrage in the North.
Wow Hollywood was making a glorification of the KKK, fucking Jacksonville Florida was making lost movies filmed with all Black casts in heroic adventurous early talkies
He didnt really said that, that was taken of context
I'd like to know more about this Schurz cartoon. It looks to be anti semetic.
you should do mississippi burning next
*insert controversial comment here*
Unfortunately, the KKK are pacifistic towards the movie and its visuals. As you can see here, inaccuracies beget inaccuracies.
He was proven innocent in court.
That is inaccurate. Dessaline the leader of the revolt did order a massacre but he focused on the French Europeans. So he didn't massacre all the whites.
OLD TIMES MOST OF THE CAST IS PROBABLY ALREADY DEAD
What do you mean Reconstruction was a nation wide thing? Did non-Southern States have to endure martial law?
+SirGrips yes
Which ones? I do not think Kentucky counts as it was a slave holding state.
+SirGrips discounting border states eliminates a lot of important differences. I wouldn't do that. Furthermore, martial law was declared in a number of northern and western states for one reason or another. For instance, in NorCal, there was some resistance to the elimination of the Indian apprenticeship laws, which were the basis of some of the Black Codes. Also, reconstruction does not mean martial law. That is only one of the methods used.
are you going to review the new movie?
Probably, but not untill it comes out on Bluray
from a historical accuracy POV i have a bad feeling about it. the feeling that its gonna leave out the fact that Nate turner was s religious fanatic who murdered innocent people including children
Tommy Hill Nat Turner was taught to be a religious fanatic by his slave owners so he could use religion to keep the slaves in line. Also, he killed slave owners and their families in the process of freeing other slaves...innocent is subjective in that sense. Both sides of injustice could be looked at as innocent from certain points of view. I don't agree with him killing women and children but I understand his thought process behind it, he thought that if he left any alive they would just grow to be even more cruel than their fathers. That subjectivity being left out of the movie though bothered me, after I watched the movie with my son I talked to him about Nat killing women and children, I also let him read excerpts of other biographies and comments he made so he could form his own opinion of it outside of the movie. He came away with a better understanding of why Nat did the things he did, and while he didn't agree he said he wouldn't know what he would do at that time and in that situation. For that reason alone it should've been in the movie.
You want people to be kind to one another in your comment section?
Good luck
WWWWIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLSSSSSSSSSOOOOOOOONNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Lol man you really have it out for Woodrow Wilson. Interesting that it's in the context of earlier US history. Most historians focus on Wilson's role in WW1 and it's aftermath. Though to be fair Wilson's role in that is probably overstated as the US was not as prominent internationally at the time and the post WW1 reshaping of the world had more to do with David Loyd George and Clemenceau.
Well at least Germany was making good films at the time, but they were about ww1.
Hollywood in 1915 : racist as fuuuck
Hollywood in 2020 : offensively tolerant
Don’t forget modern Hollywood is full of pee dough files.