Lechuguilla
From start to finish, it's a satire on American history and TV documentaries. The real history is deliberately twisted to show viewers what America might have been like today if the South had won the Civil War. Fake historians recite fake commentaries; fake visuals show action that never occurred or is taken out of context; actors act out characters that never lived. Even the commercial breaks are fictional and presume that slave life is part of America in the twenty-first century.I thought the commercials were funny and clever. Examples include a TV sitcom called "Leave It To Beulah", about a Black maid in a White household. Another commercial advertises "The Shackle", an electronic product put on slaves so that their owners know where they are, at all times. The funniest, though, is "The Slave Shopping Network", where two bubble-headed White ladies advertise Black people for sale; the commercial is funny because it is so outrageous.The history lesson, however, I found boring. Structured like a documentary, its visual images and its various commentaries go on and on in excruciating detail. I'm just not that much of a history buff to spend all that time trying to digest a history that never happened. Further, the viewer really has to know the real history in order to know which characters, scenes, and legacies are bogus, since this false history is a twisted version of real history. In particular, I found the "John Ambrose Fauntroy" character annoying.The film's visuals and sound compare favorably to real documentaries. Background music is appropriate. Casting is generally acceptable, but the narrative suffers from some overacting. The cast is very large, consistent with a long drawn-out historical drama, showing lots of different people from different historical periods.Even though the South lost on the battleground, its values seem to be still embraced by many Americans; that, I think, is the theme of this film. I just wish the satire could have been presented more succinctly and with less confusion. "C.S.A.: The Confederate States Of America" is built on a clever premise. It will be most appreciated by viewers with a thorough knowledge of the real American history.
nickjpittman
Heres the thing, it's a really solid premise that's lent itself to numerous books, movies, sci-fi, etc. What if the Confederacy actually turned the tables and won the Civil War? From the viewpoint of a British documentary, the film covers how the altered outcome shaped the economical, cultural, and political development of the nation throughout the 20th century.There are two main issues here. The first is that the film suffers from what appears to be a smaller budget. I can't fault the filmmakers for this one, they did a solid job with what they had. It just becomes obvious at some points that cuts were made in production, so don't expect something too extravagant. At times it almost looks cheesy (not sure if that was the intention).The bigger issue is that it's almost too much to cover in 90 minutes. They try to focus on key points, but some things are completely glossed over and given little/no mention (sports, pop culture, scientific developments). This is definitely a premise that would be better served by a several part miniseries with episodes focused on various aspects of the Confederate culture. Worth a watch though.
Theo Robertson
The writer/director of CSA Kevin Wilmott is black . I thought I'd point this out to guard my back . I also thought I'd mention that I seeked out this film because it received a rave review on Richard Schieb's Sci-Fi movie review page which can be accessed on the external reviews of this page . I feel the deep need to do this simply because CSA is a film of such biting , brutal bleak and brilliant satire featuring an America that still enforces slavery that it'd be very easy to be picked up wrongly by saying I laughed outloud at a great many scenes . Often it was nervous laughter and this was no doubts Wilmott's intention . I did feel very foolish at the end credit scenes . Again this was no doubt Wilmott's intention The premise involves the South winning the American Civil war and Abraham Lincoln being jailed as a war criminal . With great credit Lincoln is portrayed as an opportunist who wanted to get his hands on the South's cotton fields and one suspects Spilebergs upcoming bio-pic starring Daniel Day Lewis might just miss out this very important detail . As it stands history takes a diverted path where the USA become The Confederate States of America ( CSA ) and all the fall out this involves . The biggest divergence being that slavery is not abolished The story is told as a mockumentary by the " British Broadcasting Service " which hints as how unsubtle CSA is . Credit to the makers because at the outset we're shown a public information film called Why We Fought which does give a rather Eurocentric view of America then we start the documentary proper and everyone will be jumping on the outrage bus at one point . Try suggesting a scenario where " Union forces flee in the face of British and French fire " and you'll get the impression red necks aren't going to enjoy this as much as they were hoping . Of course African Americans will take the brunt of the outrage via stereotypical portrayals but if you've seen BIRTH OF A NATION then you'll realise this is an attack on moral climates of early 20th Century America . And it's the Hollywood sections that are the most scathing and unsubtle which is not a criticism . Quite the reverse because these are the most identifiable parts of the mockumentary to an international audience - Hollywood where men are men , where myths are made and where Europeans with a brain shake their head . The mockumentary is cut with advert breaks and trailers for spoof TV shows such as " Runaway " a send up of COPS complete with banjo music . This type of brutal and scathing satire outdoes the ones seen in the ROBOCOP movies As much as I can praise CSA in its witty satire where it fails very badly is in its alternative history aspect . For example if a scenario is created it can be clumsily forgotten about as in America creating a South American empire but later on we're told the rest of the world has brought in sanctions against the CSA because of its attitude to slavery which means the government has to bring in rationing ? In reality America is more than self sufficient in food and raw materials and widening this to South America means more food supplies so why introduce rationing ? There's also illogical ridiculous aspects such as women never having a vote in this alternative America and at the same time an America crippled by sanctions and citizens on rations this alternative America can still fight wars in Vietnam and lead Operation Desert Storm and land men on the moon In summary CSA is a very memorable mockumentary . It's unsurprising that there's a lot of mixed reviews on this page . Some people will have seeked it out on the grounds that it's an alternative history documentary and they'll be slightly disappointed in it . I certainly enjoyed the satirical aspects of it only to feel foolish when at the end when the " satire " was slightly closer to home than I thought it was . I will point out that I do realise that the photos of dead native Americans and lynched blacks are in fact real photographs and that William Wilburforce deserves to be remembered more than Abraham Lincoln
Lizzie Sparrow
Ho-hum. Sorry. I went into this thinking it was a British-made parody/mockumentary(which it well may be--at this point it doesn't even matter...); had it been, I could forgive some of the lame attempt at "humor" in it, however ironic, understanding that Brit humor is different from American, and as such, might not seem as funny over here. But without citing anything specific--because the entire thing is one of THE most gawdawful wastes of time (like, 90 minutes of my life that I'll never get back--fortunately I was cleaning the living room while watching, so it wasn't a complete loss) I've ever experienced--in addition to being completely unwatchable, I DID NOT realize til the end of this film during the credits that it was another Spike Lee debacle-- DUH. Which explained everything. Anything with that name attached to it is just another angry, snarky attempt at causing more friction between races. The whole thing made me cringe (this was BEFORE I saw the name "Lee" stamped on it), and I can never understand the praise this individual is constantly lavished with in reviews, accolades, etc. (It furthers my suspicion that all paid critics are either idiots or snobs who feel the necessity to drool over garbage like this to seem either politically correct or to create a facade about themselves that their perception of film is so much more sensitive than the average slob in a movie theater.)I wasn't sure if I was supposed to laugh, be ticked off, or ashamed of being white. All I am sure of is that I would never recommend this to anyone, and if I could give it a -1 rating, I would.