Within Our Gates

"Within Our Gates" is of enormous historical interest as a remnant of a brief period in the early twenties/late teens when there were (due to segregation laws) films made and distributed specifically by and for African-Americans. In this way, it has most deservedly been chosen for placement in the National Film Registry.

By today's standards the film is as silly, half-baked, and paper-thin as something by a high school playwright. The performances are pretty atrocious, but for the most part they are at home with the style of acting that pervaded films of the silent era.

It dealt with provocative issues of the time, such as overt racism, lynching, and the sorry state of education for the black community. Eighty years later we may have done a bit of shoring up, but no one's foolish enough to say that we're doing any better today. One positive thing that can be said is that a film dealing with these subjects today is encouraged, whereas in 1920 "Within Our Gates" was crushed by disapproving educators, legislators, and spineless distributors.

With this month being once again Black History Month, I'm-for the second time since first writing these IMDb reviews back in 2006-commenting on various films made by African-Americans both in front of and behind the screen in the order they were made and released chronologically whenever possible. So it's 1920, which is the year from which the earliest surviving movie made by writer, producer, and director Oscar Micheax comes from. In Within Our Gates, Sylvia Landry (Evelyn Preer) dedicates her life to helping poorly educated kids of her race get a good education in the Southern states she resides in. But the money the school gets are not enough so she goes up North to get some more funding from a rich white lady. I'll stop there and just say that while there are some compelling scenes concerning other characters-like that of a couple of people that betray their own race like that of Rev. Wilson Jacobs (S. T. Jacks) and Efram (E. G. Tatum), a loyal butler of a wealthy white man named Gridlestone-the most compelling focus of the story concerns Sylvia's background concerning her previous family life with the Landrys which consist of father Jasper (William Stark), his wife (Mattie Edwards), and their young pre-teen son, Emil, (Grant Edwards) when we learn of their fates and that of Sylvia herself when she nearly gets mixed up with another man named Gridlestone, especially when the intertitle reveals his connection with her. Some of the other characters like that of fiancée Conrad Drebert (James D. Ruffin), Alma Prichard (Flo Clements), Larry Prichard (Jack Chenault), Dr. V. Vivian (Charles D. Lucas), and Det. Philip Gentry (William Smith) don't seem so connected especially concerning Conrad but they also have some compelling scenes. One more thing, as a Chicago native, I was fascinated seeing the Windy City as it looked at the time and learning that some of these players came from there. So on that note, Within Our Gates is worth seeing.

I disagree with the first comment. I did not find this movie silly at all. I believe it was up to par with any other silent movie of this same period, and the acting was not atrocious. I think it was a very provocative movie for its time and, whether it was purposefully or not, a great response to DW Griffith's "Birth of a Nation." That movie showed a mulatto man trying to force himself on a White woman, along with numerous other stereotypes of Black people in that movie. "Within Our Gates" showed the true side of what really happened, especially with the lynching, and the main character and her *real* father. I feel privileged to have seen a Black silent film, especially one of such high caliber.

Within Our Gates (1920)

*** (out of 4)

Oscar Micheaux's response to Griffith's The Birth of a Nation faced its own share of controversy when originally released and was banned in black communities all over the country. The film was thought lost until a print showed up in Spain in 1993 and this remains the oldest surviving feature from a black director. A light skinned black woman, living up North, travels to the South to teach at an all black school. Since the government isn't helping to educate black kids, the woman goes back North to try and find rich white folks who will help in her cause but she's met with racism, from blacks and whites and a secret from her past might catch up to haunt her.

As with the Griffith film, you could overlook all the controversy surrounding this film and judge is for what good it does do and its historical importance. Watching the film with today's standards and politically correct nature, it's still easy to see why so many black folks were offended by a film that was made to have a moral tale. Micheaux shows racism going from black to white and white to black but, unlike the Griffith film, he also shows that races can show hatred toward their own race. Not many people have viewed this film, which is a real shame because it's heart is certainly in the right place and if you take the historic importance away from the Griffith film, more folks should be checking out this movie instead of that one.

Technically speaking it's rather amazing at how well Micheaux pulled this low budget film off. The editing is very good and really helps build up the suspense towards the end of the film. The story could have been worked on and a lot of the performances are quite poor but that doesn't take away from the film's message. The ending involves the backstory to our main character and this includes a lynching scene as well as a rape scene. Both of these scenes are very well done and pack quite a punch for a 86-year-old film. This sidestory, which is basically a remake of the ending to the Griffith film, has some over the top moments, which weren't needed but again, the film's heart and message is in the right place so hopefully more will seek this film out and let the other one die.

Before the film even begins, 'Within our gates' is a bit of a marvel. Seemingly the oldest surviving film directed by an African American in an industry that was (...and remains) predominantly white, the picture was nearly lost in the memory hole of time. Available background information indicates that the restoration archived by the Library of Congress is still only an approximation of Oscar Micheaux's original work. Moreover, the title claims a predominantly black cast, and the practical limitations under which the production operated make it somewhat extraordinary that the movie ever came into being in the first place. Without even considering the content - from a cultural and historical standpoint, 'Within our gates' is frankly essential.

Any regard for the film must necessarily take into account the difficulties of its completion and unfortunate shortcomings of its restoration. With that said, on the face of things, the feature does suffer from what feels like a staggered and stilted presentation. Each subsequent scene builds a cohesive narrative, yet the frequency of cuts between shots, scenes, and intertitles makes for a bit of a rough, choppy appearance, and a sense that every element is indelicately forced. Plot development is less than smooth or natural, and given the number of characters that are introduced, and the many ideas broached in the narrative, the viewing experience is unquestionably one that requires active, attentive, and indeed forgiving engagement.

Still, with all that said - provided one can abide the regrettable deficiencies, there is much to admire about 'Within the gates.' Micheaux approaches the topic of race relations with a blunt and unfiltered sensibility that squarely opposes the broad bigotry in society, and white supremacy as a personal and institutional prejudice, and that was sometimes mirrored in the uglier side of early cinema. The hypocrisy and indifference in northern cities is examined as much as the brutality of southern lands, and the cruel selfishness and betrayal of well-positioned black individuals as much as the utmost ignorance and iniquity of whites. 'Within our gates' champions education, advancement, and equality within a story that does not hold back from illustrating the dire obstacles and obstinacy that inhibit such progress, including violence not least of all. It's a narrative, and a movie, that if made in 2021 would be a beacon of passionate defiance in a world that's still all too complacent with the tawdry racism rampant throughout society - and there can be no doubt that in 1920, it signified a still greater turnabout.

Even keeping in mind and putting aside the issues thrust upon the film in light of its production and restoration, it's not unblemished. The inelegance in the presentation can surely be chalked up at least in part to not just its rediscovery decades later, but also imperfections in Micheaux's craft - writing, direction, and editing. For all the value herein, I'd be lying if I said it weren't a bumpy ride. To be fair, however, this was only Micheaux's second picture - and considering the remarkable circumstances and context in which this was made in the first place, it's easy enough to both acknowledge and largely overlook the weaknesses as they present. The strengths far outshine and outweigh the disadvantages, and the result is a feature that was both of and ahead of its time - and an important watch for all, for nigh every possible reason.

Yes, some of the subject matter is difficult; obvious content warnings abound for racism, and racial violence including lynching. And any viewer who can't parse the idiosyncrasies of the silent era, or handle a less than pristine exhibition, will likely be put off by what we see here. Yet the worth far exceeds the burden, and I'm hard-pressed not to recommend this to just about anyone. Wherever you can watch it, 'Within our gates' is a substantial, imperative classic of cinema that even 100 years later deserves far greater recognition.