(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2F8%2F8d%2FPoster_Twelve_Years_a_Slave_%28film%29.jpg&hash=1c8e56569f56a6c81c0a02d428bae77fee092030)
Release date: December 26, 2013
Starring: Chiwetel Ejiofor, Michael Kenneth Williams, Michael Fassbender, Brad Pitt
Directed by: Steve McQueen
Premise: In the pre-Civil War United States, Solomon Northup, a free black man from upstate New York, is abducted and sold into slavery.
uhhh, what an oscar release date. i hope it gets any award that it may get. i'd watch the movie tomorrow
i was trying to think how that (me watching the movie tomorrow) would happen. mcqueen and actresses, during afi fest and at grauman's egyptian theatre, presented shame for its city arrival. please let there be no wonder for how excited i would be for that same event with this movie. the answer is "very excited" and "you'll probably cry a lot, mcqueen bristles melodramas that barely exists without him"
I remain very interested in the movie, but I didn't really care for that trailer. I suspect they took all the interesting parts out, so that it would look like a Ron Howard movie.
Quote from: Reelist on July 06, 2013, 10:40:16 AM
I guess from now on I should scroll down and read the comments before watching any trailer,
It's working already. Thanks, Matt. I will not watch this trailer based on your review.
Thought Hunger was great, but I completely lost trust in McQueen after Crash Shame. One pattern I'm seeing in his films is that he tends to come into material with a definitive moral bias, and attempts to impose that bias on scenes instead of approaching each scene individually to find the unique truth of the different situations at hand. Regardless if the bias McQueen comes into the material with is right or wrong, it taints his ability to fully explore the drama of whatever story he's telling, so the films become exercises in proselytization.
you've described the base of melodrama. he makes melodramas. he heightens the particular emotions of his characters in a way that folds the patterns of his cinematic textures. those textures don't disclose the indefinite. you're aiming your own morals at mcqueen's deliberate disregard of your morals, and you've concluded by saying that aside from that point, he's tainted because he can't take you where you want to go
he doesn't go where you want to go. no. he goes where his characters go. the arrangement installs itself inside the character. that's a melodrama
you compared the movie to crash, and i can guess which crash you mean. that insult has become a consistent insult within certain cinema communities, and betrays what you express. you don't like it when they attempt to make the rules, and when they think they've assembled rules into narrative. exactly. the same for cinema. no rules. go at what you go at
from hunger, to shame, and clearly to 12 year a slave, mcqueen explores what's happening to his characters, and how it's happening. i cherish the cinema he uses for that goal. the individual is the truth he gives
i reread this and my summary is "gogogogo mcqueen"
Quote from: trashculturemutantjunkie on July 18, 2013, 05:25:12 PM
you've described the base of melodrama. he makes melodramas. he heightens the particular emotions of his characters in a way that folds the patterns of his cinematic textures.
I'm a big fan of melodrama, but the definition I subscribe to (one of many competing ones), is a story that unfolds with heightened emotions without visible causality, but that still strikes notes that feel emotionally true. This is why Sirk movies work for me, some Fassbinder, and why I'm a big fan of Todd Haynes. Due to our slightly differing definitions, and the personal subjectivity of mine, we might have to agree to disagree. All I can say is that the emotions McQueen portrays in attempt to to create a psychologically sound portrait of his characters (at least in Shame) strike me as patently false and two-dimensional not for the sake of simplicity or deliberate artifice, but because the very psychology of the characters in the script is unsound. Something as heightened as the scene in Nicholas Ray's Bigger Than Life, where James Mason, under the effect of the drug Cortisone, is cruelly making his son do endless math problems while his wife implores him to stop and see his family as he did before he became under the influence plays with more emotional believability to me, despite its heightened nature, than anything represented in Shame.
Quote from: trashculturemutantjunkie on July 18, 2013, 05:25:12 PM
you're aiming your own morals at mcqueen's deliberate disregard of your morals, and you've concluded by saying that aside from that point, he's tainted because he can't take you where you want to go
he doesn't go where you want to go. no. he goes where his characters go. the arrangement installs itself inside the character. that's a melodrama
[...]
mcqueen explores what's happening to his characters, and how it's happening.
That's not what I'm saying at all. There's an obvious demonization and slant to the portrayal of the scenes he includes in his movies, and in the very arrangement of the scenes themselves. It's hammering the same note over and over instead of showing us a reciprocal dynamic we can draw our own conclusions from. It's the equivalent of making everyone a foil character in your script except your lead.
what melodrama are you watching? you're not watching sirk, fassbinder, or haynes. you're watching ray. when you describe that ray scene, you're describing causality. i understand your fear of a word scramble here, and i think that's happening. "patently false" and "two-dimensional" has compounded the scramble
unsound psychology has been the launchpad of criticisms against the movie, and befriends the patent and the dimensions. if you want what ray did, which is a want that i also support, you have it when brandon jogs when he does. there's the disconnect you long for, there's the psychology. the scene is necessary because it's his run into a direction that's being built from the path of his life. what happens after that, what happens to his sister, is not his end, it's a question of what his end is, and every person who sees shame has the same question for themselves. the complexity here -- if we cracked the complexity, you'd find your unsoundness. and i believe the unsoundness is his own
your 2nd portion: there's a sex journey towards the movie's end that bolsters all those claims. the journey, in my opinion, establishes the realm of the movie's melodrama. here is where you find my reason for calling it a melodrama -- the heightening emotions are all that are happening. i didn't even mention when he kneels himself on the ground. how else could you end such a journey? there are notes to this, there are hammers to this, and mcqueen gives us the notes, shows us the hammers, and the character continues his path toward the dimensions you seek. he seeks them too
My memory of Shame is that the emotional moments the characters portray are arrived at preemptively before the interactions (shown in the film) that would create them. This is different than excising emotionally explanatory scenes from a narrative that leave the viewer with gaps about emotional progression to fill on their own, but still showing an evolving story. I believe this applies to those other filmmakers as well as Ray. That specific scene in Bigger Than Life isn't the best example of this specific narrative style, only the heightened emotions, but plenty of other portions of that movie do represent this storytelling technique. The difference is an evolving understanding of character even if progressing artificially rapidly, which is brought about by the new experiences and people they encounter over the course of a film. There was almost nothing in Shame that evolved the story from the place Brandon started at, very little that aroused new emotions relative to the beginning act of the movie, and so what is left is a static portrayal. In lieu of progression there's, like you pointed out, a magnification of those initial emotions, but even this magnification is brought about by scenes rooted in dubious starting points, manufactured out of a desire to prove an unsound thesis instead of an interest in creating actual drama. Nothing we see creates new insight. This is why I describe Brandon as two-dimensional. I reject the idea that melodrama is an excuse to eschew dramatic principles for the end of portraying intense emotion rooted in nothing.
Apart from Shame's fitting or not fitting into the definition of melodrama, the movie made me feel nothing, which for me stems directly from the movie's dramatic weakness.
Quote from: wilderesque on July 18, 2013, 06:59:42 PMMy memory of Shame is that the emotional moments the characters portray have been arrived at preemptively before the interactions (shown in the film) that would create them . . . the movie made me feel nothing, which for me stems directly from the movie's dramatic weakness.
I had exactly the same experience with Shame. It barely registered.
this would be easier for me if i couldn't see where you're coming from. i do. my intention wasn't to portray a definition for melodrama, my intention was to portray mcqueen's link to creators before him. if there's a better word for shame i'd want to learn it, and if there's a better history for this type of creation, i'd watch and watch it
i don't think you shouldn't want the parts you want. i think those parts are there in a way that you don't want to see. the emotions are the drama, the emotions are fissured because the character is, and i felt every bit of the movie
Quote from: trashculturemutantjunkie on July 18, 2013, 07:28:48 PMi think those parts are there in a way that you don't want to see.
Elaborate? At the end of the day the movie made you feel and it didn't make me feel, so there's really nowhere to go from that. Curious what you're seeing that does it for you, though.
an elaboration would swell the mentioned and require a multitude of references. how can i shorten this --
sex. creation, and an attempt to wire into creating oneself. as what kind of person has brandon created himself? shame shows the routine and displays the size, the battles, the failures, and the injuries, of those and those around brandon
Walter Chaw Review (http://www.filmfreakcentral.net/ffc/2013/09/telluride-13-12-years-a-slave.html#more)
Vulture (Kyle Buchanan) (http://www.vulture.com/2013/09/12-years-a-slave-will-win-best-picture.html)
IndieWire (Eric Kohn) (http://www.indiewire.com/article/telluride-film-festival-review-steve-mcqueens-12-years-a-slave-anchored-by-brilliant-chiwetel-ejiofor-is-a-slavery-movie-for-the-ages?page=2#articleHeaderPanel)
HITFIX (Gregory Ellwood) (http://www.hitfix.com/in-contention/review-powerful-12-years-a-slave-wont-turn-away-from-the-brutality-of-slavery)
SCREENDAILY (Tim Grierson) (http://www.screendaily.com/reviews/the-latest/12-years-a-slave/5060149.article)
nice. i like and appreciate the spread you've supplied
the release date is now october 18
the marrow of this movie will bring its awards, as anticipated (championed) by multiple reviews here and elsewhere. walter chaw and tim grierson engage perspectives of the skeleton. chaw himself describes this: "No one in their right mind would argue that slavery is good, so, really, taking that as a given, what else is 12 Years a Slave saying? For me, what it says loudest is that Steven Spielberg would have directed this movie if he hadn't instead bought the rights to The Color Purple." quotes from those reviews that target the movie --
chaw:
QuoteAt the end of the day, the problem with 12 Years a Slave is that it's neither fish nor fowl: neither a Steve McQueen film the equal of the abstract existential artistry of his Hunger and Shame, nor a straight costume adaptation without room for challenge.
QuoteHunger and Shame were mimetic where 12 Years a Slave is diegetic.
grierson:
Quote12 Years A Slave eschews an inspirational tone and avoids making Northup a symbol of the human spirit or a man whose imprisonment is meant to be a spark for profound character growth.
In truth, Northup's inner life is kept somewhat opaque, the depth of his anger and sorrow largely hidden from view.
QuoteWith its first-rate production design and costumes, 12 Years A Slave is visually rich, but McQueen and his long-time cinematographer Sean Bobbitt have done a commendable job turning the beautiful Louisiana locations into both an Eden and a hell.
QuoteBut the broader approach to storytelling on McQueen's part robs 12 Years A Slave of some of the precise, up-close vibrancy that was the hallmark of his earlier films. As a consequence, this new film feels a little less personal, although that criticism should not dismiss the intelligence and feeling on display.
as an admirer of mcqueen i'll say if the movie didn't already have unappreciative reviews, i'd be more worried. yet the tone of criticism is different for this movie from his others, and i don't already know what it'll be like for me. looking forward to this movie
Yeah, this is great. McQueen is 3/3 for me and I'm glad he was the one to make this film. It felt like something that needed to be said and needed someone who wasn't afraid to say it. I was moved to tears at a handful of points throughout the film but not in a Spielbergian choreographed way, sometimes just an image would hit me so hard that it was impossible not to think of the real people that went through this not even that long ago. There is one shot in the film that lingers for a few minutes (it feels like) and is just perfect/brutal/heartbreaking/everything. I picture McQueen just holding your face down in it, right next to it. The ending is emotional of a more conventional kind but as effective as anything I've ever seen. I have literally, no exaggeration, never heard so much sniffling in a theatre before. It was in stereo, happening all around during the last few quiet minutes. Myself, I was crying so hard that my chin was quivering. Powerful shit. There are a few things that didn't entirely work for me (a performance here and there, it doesn't build as you think it might, certain sections drag on) but it's still easily one of the best films of the year and feels like an important one. White people need to see this movie.
was this like McQueen hearing about Django getting made and said fuck this and went out and done it?
this and that to say and speculate, and a related portion can be seen:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XG4ytB4z-WE
i was impressed by the scale of social perspective. solomon northup has to learn the context of his situation, and learn the behaviors that allow him to survive it, in order to conquer it. such strength to endure his ordeal! strength in his eyes. strength that pains him. the audience sees pains through torments and tragedies, but also through conversations with eliza and patsy, and his fiddle can sometimes hide his pain, and he can sing. i was very moved
it's not like hunger because northup doesn't choose death, and it's not like shame because northup doesn't create the problem. but you can see mcqueen using techniques he has learned. i missed the phenomenology of those early movies, but liked to see textures as they appeared, from mcqueen and sean bobbitt, and writer john ridley. john ridley: martin --> fresh prince of bel air --> u turn (based on his book) --> three kings --> red tails --> 12 years a slave. a realdeal writer, imo
for credits, the audience clapped the most for chiwetel ejiofor and michael fassbender. steve mcqueen, sean bobbitt, and lupita nyong'o all received big rounds of applause
controversial statement: hans zimmer is the worst part. i didn't like it when his music appeared when it didn't need to be there. it was telling me emotions i thought i could already have
12 Years a Slave ** (http://www.slantmagazine.com/film/review/12-years-a-slave) (Ed Gonzales, SLANT)
Review: Emotionall raw '12 Years A Slave' is true-life horror film of the highest order (http://www.hitfix.com/motion-captured/review-emotionally-raw-12-years-a-slave-is-true-life-horror-film-of-the-highest-order) (Drew McWeeny, HITFIX)
"Slave Porn" Steve McQueen gives himself a bad name -- again (http://www.colesmithey.com/reviews/2013/10/12-years-a-slave.html) (Cole Smithey, Colesmithey.com)
Fighting To Survive "12 Years a Slave" and "All is Lost" (http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/cinema/2013/10/21/131021crci_cinema_denby) (David Denby, The New Yorker)
NYFF Review: "12 Years a Slave" a wrenching odyssey (http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-207_162-57606373/nyff-review-12-years-a-slave-a-wrenching-odyssey/) (David Morgan, CBS News)
Armond White's take via the playlist
While the accolades are rolling in for "12 Years A Slave," can Fox Searchlight convince awards season voters to sit through the brutal, hard-to-watch drama? "I've read all about the Civil War and slavery, I don't need to see a movie repeating what I already know," one voter told the LA Times (which makes you realize how arbitrary this whole awards season can be and the type of people who get to cast a ballot), who also reported that the first screening for Academy members was hardly full (approximately 600 people for the 1000 seat venue; by comparison, "Gravity" had people being turned away). But has Armond White just made the case that this movie is too awful to endure?
Granted, Armond White taking a stance against a movie that is near universally acclaimed is hardly a surprise. Nor is his tendency to delve into verbose hyperbole shocking either. But for the few looking to deem "12 Years A Slave" as an exercise in unflinching, harrowing sadism and nothing more, you have a champion in White (even if he ventures off into the ridiculous from time to time). You can read his whole review right here, but here are ten lines that will certain give you pause. (And here's our review as a counterweight). And before you dive in, remember, this is the same guy who said "Ghost Rider: Spirit Of Vengeance" and "Taken 2" were better than "Zero Dark Thirty."
1. "Depicting slavery as a horror show, McQueen has made the most unpleasant American movie since William Friedkin's 1973 The Exorcist. That's right, 12 Years a Slave belongs to the torture porn genre with Hostel, The Human Centipede and the Saw franchise..."
2. "This is less a drama than an inhumane analysis—like the cross-sectional cut-up of a horse in Damien Hirst's infamous 1996 museum installation "Some Comfort Gained From the Acceptance of the Inherent Lies in Everything." (click here to see Hirst's work).
3. "Some of the most racist people I know are bowled over by this movie. They may have forgotten Roots, never seen Sankofa or Nightjohn, disliked Amistad, dismissed Beloved and even decried the violence in The Passion of the Christ, yet 12 Years a Slave lets them congratulate themselves for 'being aghast at slavery.' "
4. "The only conversation this film inspires would contain howls of discomfort."
5. "...the perversion continues among those whites and non-Blacks who need a shock fest like 12 Years a Slave to rouse them from complacency with American racism and American history. But, as with The Exorcist, there is no victory in filmmaking this merciless.
6. "McQueen's "sympathy" lacks appropriate disgust and outrage but basks in repulsion and pity–including close-up wounds and oblivion...Nothing in The Exorcist was more flagrantly sadistic."
7. "The fact that McQueen's harshness was trending among Festivalgoers (in Toronto, Telluride and New York) suggests that denial still obscures the history of slavery: Northup's travail merely make it possible for some viewers to feel good about feeling bad (as wags complained about Spielberg's Schindler's List as an "official" Holocaust movie–which very few people went to see twice). McQueen's fraudulence further accustoms moviegoers to violence and brutality."
8. "The egregious inhumanity of 12 Years a Slave (featuring the most mawkish and meaningless fade-out in recent Hollywood history) only serves to perpetuate Hollywood's disenfranchisement of Black people's humanity."
9. "It proves the ahistorical ignorance of this era that 12 Years a Slave's constant misery is excused as an acceptable version of the slave experience. McQueen, Ridley and Gates' cast of existential victims won't do. Northup-renamed-Platt and especially the weeping mother Liza (Adepero Oduye) and multiply-abused Patsey (Lupita Nyong'o), are human whipping posts–beaten, humiliated, raped for our delectation just like Hirst's cut-up equine. Hirst knew his culture: Some will no doubt take comfort from McQueen's inherently warped, dishonest, insensitive fiction."
10. "The story in 12 Years a Slave didn't need to be filmed this way and I wish I never saw it."
Quote from: Kellen on October 16, 2013, 03:31:29 PM
the first screening for Academy members was hardly full (approximately 600 people for the 1000 seat venue; by comparison, "Gravity" had people being turned away)
lame intro. mentioned i saw blue jasmine with 997 elderly people. it's the same as any theater: most people arrive for the names. gravity, oscar certified. 12 years, could build to oscars, doesn't begin there. the crowd came early and there was much excitement. it wasn't like a gravity crowd, no, it was like a the master crowd
(edit)
"serves to perpetuate Hollywood's disenfranchisement of Black people's humanity"
the movie didn't lack humanity, not at all. it's easy to miss because people focus on the slavery side. armond white 100% focuses on the slavery side
This is a good interview and McQueen isn't so defensive, in fact, I think he's game, if the questions are interesting and not the usual bullshit. Sean's also great. I remember PTA cringing through some of those godawful Master interviews like that Charlie Rose tidbit where he had to defend/sell the movie to a bunch of dumb-dumbs. Anyways....
12 years a slave completely wrecked me. it's the first film of mcqueen's that didn't leave me ambivalent. it's a tremendous piece of work, flaws and all. i can count the number of films that have made me weep on one hand and his is now one of them. and in light of such a disarming, visceral first viewing i find myself even more inarticulate than i usually am. planning on seeing it again in a week.
i'll second jenkins's sentiments about hans zimmer's score, which i found obtuse or obvious. thankfully it isn't too prevalent.
Jenkins - this film also knocked me the fuck out. I couldn't leave my seat at the end and haven't reacted to a film like this since There Will Be Blood. I need some time to really think the movie through, but off the top of my head: all performers are great, except maybe the slave woman who has to leave her kids behind. Wish we could have had more time with some of the supporting characters, the narrative is super compressed and moves quite quick I thought. The Fassbender, Ejiofor scenes were pretty incredible. And yes, the score is pretty intrusive and a bit horrible, especially during the first half.
SPOILER
The scene that I can't quite get over is the scene where Northop is hanging and everyone in the background is going about their business. There are other more obvious scenes and moments that will haunt me for a long time to come but that long long take absolutely killed me.
Will have to wait till next year to see it again, but I cannot wait. It's an incredible piece of work and McQueen has really stepped his game up.
Spoilers
The moment when Solomon looks into the camera left me in complete bafflement. In the best way. That basically put a stamp on the film, I was in a trance at that point.
This movie is a fucking force. With it's flaws like some of you above stated. The thing is, those flaws are only flaws when you compare this film to the rest of McQueens work. Many elements from his previous work like Jenkins said were crafted with a more honest and delicate/tactile hand, but this was great nonetheless. I'm being greedy by wishing McQueen didn't fall into the trap of distracting movie star casting (Pitt, and Fassbender...for some reason I couldn't believe them completely, but I still was enamored by them, LOVED Giamatti in this...as small as his role was he had the most interesting nuances), and Hanz Zimmer cookie scoring, and some hammy dialogue.
All I can say is what a powerful piece of filmmaking. :bravo:
I've seen the trailer of Mandela today. I realized that I really wanted to see 12 Years a Slave. You failed, trailer.
i was checking for the 2nd part on the béla tarr article and found this instead:
http://htmlgiant.com/film/25-points-12-years-a-slaves-glaring-flaws-wont-deny-it-a-oscar-django-unchained-also-discussed/
it addresses topics you've nodoubt heard mentioned regarding this movie. i was interested in what it had to say about brad pitt. i think all he's saying is it's strange how people are ignoring how overall bizarre brad pitt is in the movie. true enough imo
Quote17) Yes, the Brad Pitt/Bass deal is a complete fiasco. As the movie looks to wrap itself up, looks to move Solomon back to his family up North, any continuity of immersion within the narrative (strained at times anyways) is wrecked by Pitt, like a teddy-bear landmine. And most critics are aware of the Pitt disaster (aware also of the movie's problems as a "movie") but in an amazing trick of double think (a strange binary) they don't allow any of this to dull the movie's Oscar glow at all. (on the contrary, the community of critics as a whole are actively buffing up its Oscar glow).
and i think he uses that observation to build the point that the movie's lesson about slavery is treated as important enough to overlook its mistakes. well actually yeah, that's the article's main point. is that a critical point? callers, what do you think
Quote20) Okay, so let's take stock here. There are major problems with dialogue. Problems with the "cadence of time passing" (no small problem!), indulgence and melodrama. But, again, in a neat display of double think so many critics acknowledge these problems but quickly dismiss them as being unimportant because well more "important" things are at play here. (this actually creeps me out a bit).
the problem here to me is that it's the word "important" which is being thrown around. the writer seems against the idea of the movie as an important piece on slavery because the writer doesn't see the aesthetics as important. so the writer is saying one matter of importance is more important than another matter of importance. that's the same kind of trickery the writer derails
Brad Pitt ruined this. Because of him, the last "act" (wtf structure was this?) just fizzled out. It's ironic that he also saved it in that it wouldn't have been made without him.
That one agonizing, surreal, incredible long take was the pinnacle of the film. You know the one mean. It alone would make a masterpiece short film.
I struggled to stay awake by the end of it. The score was also distractingly boring. It's only an "important" film because America is a country of idiots. Or rather a country of educated people who are in a losing battle against idiots. At best it serves the purpose of stating the obvious.
I'm starting to think this McQueen guy is a bit of a two trick pony:
- His main trick is Fassbender, very reliable. He adds gravitas to anything.
- Second trick is long takes. Again the intent is to make something seem important and meaningful by lingering on it forever.
Those are the only two things I ever remember about his films and here it's undone by almost everything else. I laughed at that article above that describes the DC dialogue as something straight out of Lord of the Rings. It's true. I don't care for the Django comparisons but the flaws in this film are too significant to ignore.
I don't have any guilt about this particular part of history so I am free to assess it purely as a film with its themes and techniques etc. As that, apart from the gore, it's fairly run of the mill. Would not watch/think of again.
It's funny how QT and Brad Pitt ruined these slave movies because they can't pull off an accent.
QT is entertaining because he's so horrible but Pitt, just out of nowhere- and for what?
Still a fantastic poster though.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.eonline.com%2Feol_images%2FEntire_Site%2F20131127%2Frs_634x885-131227122201-643-12-years-slave-brad-pitt.jpg&hash=fc6a44f7c2432cb76f5f84deea1e6b339bbbcc03)
This poster summarize contemporary Italian culture better than any essay, documentary or movie I've encountered.
You want to know about Italy? Don't watch "The Great Beauty", just gaze at this thing and let the feelings inside you.
There is something so idiotic about selling this movie putting the handsome white guy on the poster that perfectly represents my country.
And if you're wondering, yes, there was a minor uproar on the press about this, but nothing significant.
I see this poster in Rome wherever I go.
wait what? lol. that's an actual poster?! it was so hilarious i didnt even bother to research it. amazing.
I went to the supermarket earlier and I saw they just replaced the billboards with the official international poster, because of this:
http://variety.com/2013/film/news/italys-12-years-a-slave-poster-favors-brad-pitt-over-black-star-1200990875/
But I guess you get the picture :)
mainly agree with Pubrick on this.
Liked the film, but it felt more like a series of shocking scenes, and it just wasn't very memorable.
Hunger is still the best film McQueen has done in my opinion. The minimalist approach in that film ended up putting me in the middle of the conflict and communicated more clearly the spiritual plight of the protagonist.
Also, the "love hate" thing between the psychotic dominant and the slave woman was done with much more richness in Schindler's List.
Ill-Conceived '12 Years a Slave' Promo Mannequin Prompts Apology by UK Supermarket
Mannequin was dressed in ragged clothing similar to those worn by Chiwetel Ejiofor in his portrayal of Solomon Northup in the Oscar-Winning film
Source: TheWrap
A British supermarket store was forced to apologize over a "12 Years a Slave" display with a mannequin dressed to look like protagonist Solomon Northup.
The mannequin was wearing a torn shirt and pants, similar to the clothing worn by Chiwetel Ejiofor in his portrayal of Northup. There was even a twig sticking out of the mannequin's pants pocket at a Sainsbury's branch in Oxford. Bright stickers to promote the movie's DVD and Blu-ray release were all over the display, including the mannequin.
The display has since been removed and the store issued an apology. "We can only apologise," Sainsbury's said in a statement. "It's been taken down from the Heyford Hill store and clearly should never have gone up in the first place."
Sainsbury's is the second largest supermarket chain in the U.K. The display started gaining attention after a shopper took a picture of the unusual marketing and posted it to Twitter.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fp1cdn01.thewrap.com%2Fimages%2F2014%2F05%2F12.years_.a.slave_.mannequin.140520-618x400.jpg&hash=b0cf4ca73e140f151dd7f067f37532eae859f12d)
Nice.
Ahahaha, that's where i live
There's clearly room on the right for a clothing rack. Wasted opportunity.