Customer Reviews

Africa In Flames

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I am glad that this film exists as an historical artifact of early efforts to satisfy audiences' interest in "exotic" peoples and places. And maybe some of the images are even realistic for the times. It is a basically a black and white "silent-style" film with narration instead of subtitles -- not surprising for the 1930 (1948re-release) date. It claims to be ethnography, explained by the voice of an authority, but it does not go deep at all by more recent standards. It is more like motion-film-snapshots of their lives.

Frankly, however, few people will want to watch this. I am going to imagine perhaps those with an interest in the history of film in the broad sense, or in the history of films about Africa, an interest in "ethnographic" film depictions (say e.g. along with Nanook of the North) and representations of "primitive" people in cinema (these people are apparently Islam-icized herdsmen, I would guess from their robes and names, and have metal spears etc.). Then too perhaps stoners who won't be worrying about the ethnographic or historical accuracy and could just see it as something novel and escapist or meditate on the rough life these people lead. Why not?

Africa has been photographed to death, and so the wildlife shots cannot stand up to the considerable competition. There is nothing outstandingly artistic about the production -- I mean this is not exactly German expressionism! And the dramatic tension did not grab me, and I doubt would grab most people. I don't want to nit-pick about such things as a couple of young orangutans somehow finding their way to Africa and getting in front of the cameras. Film companies quite commonly filled in with stock shots and it can actually be fun to catch these bloopers. So I will give them a break on this.

This film could have been done much better by today's standards. But has it? I don't think so, and so not only am I glad that it exists as an historical artifact and curiosity, but maybe it will challenge a contemporary film maker to do a better job telling a story about a whole people in Africa who have to cope with lions and pythons and drought and fire. These are very interesting facts of life for various peoples in these parts.

Even viewed through the lens of understanding how Africans were portrayed in the late 1920's, this "documentary" still has some weaknesses. However, if you factor in how sub-Saharan Africans were depicted in other venues, then this one stands up reasonably well. They are depicted as having intelligence and culture, not as mindless and simple savages.
The video was filmed in the small Habbania town of Buram in Southern Sudan, stars the actual people of the village and was first released in 1930. It depicts them in their daily lives, the dangers from predators as well as some of their ceremonies. The title of the video is taken from the main event, a prairie fire that forces the villagers to flee across a river.
While the video is narrated, it is not of the high quality that was seen in later "talkies" If you are experienced in the history of film then you could come close to dating it by realizing that it was made in the transition from silent films to the days when the art of including dialog had been perfected.
One amusing aspect is that some of the women are bare-chested, which is a reminder of the old standard that bare breasts were allowed to appear uncensored as long as they were covered by black skin.