However, the truth is that the new movie rather takes its cues — character archetypes, plot beats, etc. — from recent slavery films like Quentin Tarantino’s Django Unchained , Steve McQueen’s 12 Years a Slave and Nate Parker’s The Birth of a Nation .
These horrors are more awful and true when committed by humans, not monsters (think of Leonard DiCaprio’s hideous character in Django Unchained , decorous yet vicious), and more instructive to our present, when racists may not recognize themselves in sheer brutes and thus excuse or forgive their own abhorrent behavior.
The rage felt by its directors is palpable (for what it’s worth, Bush is Black, Renz is white), and while some of the violence on display is undeniably queasy-making, but it boils over into a final act every bit as cathartic as that of Django Unchained, and probably more earned.
Its pretense of depicting the overlap between America’s racist past and present feels dishonest when it leads to an action movie about a slave revolt that isn’t nearly as good as “Django Unchained,” followed by the reveal of its gimmick.
I could rattle off a number of films that have done this —“Mandingo” (1975), “Drum” (1976), “Roots” (1977), “Beloved” (1998), “Django Unchained” (2012) and “12 Years a Slave” (2013) come to mind—and while I may not have liked all of these films, I would argue that each one treated the subject with enough seriousness and respect (even “Django Unchained,” despite its overtly pulpy nature) to earn those images.