The film is subdued and takes great care not to hurt sentiments of the white population and also avoids the probable civil unrest that may be caused with the coloured community watching it, if it was to be made in depth. The director has stopped with pointing to the facts rather than explore the possibilities as a film. Therefore there has been no bias except that there was a tighter reign in exploring the issues.
4) - What are the director's visible goals? What did he/she try to do with this movie? What might be his/her thesis?
She probably wanted to highlight the plight of the Haitians and their history and that was sought to be done through their hero -- a person who gave them the constitution and stood up to Napoleon. However the thesis failed because neither was she able to present us the personality of the central character in full, nor was she able to explore the theme in which she wanted it to be set- issue of racial discrimination and the slavery.
5) - if there is a thesis, does he/she prove his point to your satisfaction? How well?:
It was answered above in the 4th question. In my opinion there were two objectives,, bring about the life and times of Toussaint Louverture, through which the greater issue of the island's current and past history of the coloured people were sought to be explored. Since it took on too vast a subject justice was not done to both.
6) - Does the documentary have any noticeable biases? Is it fair and objective to the subject? Does it portray its subject in a negative or positive light? How can you tell?
No there are no biases noticed in the film and it is fair to all the involved characters. The portrayal is normal without...
It did not mess the issue of
race, slavery, life of the hero all into a puddle but was straight and unbiased over the issues that were addressed.
7) - Is the documentary based on a written work of history? Did it have any historical advisors? (Look carefully at the credits).
T has advisors and documents and persons like Laurent Dubois, historian and author Jean Claude, Eduard Duall painter and the labour of the black Jean Kashmir - Haitiaan Ambassador were all contributors and reviewers. Therefore the documentation is correct.
8) - Does the documentary cover its topic well? Does it leave out major aspects, events or personalities that you think should have been included?:
One thing is that to cover the entire issue there need be more time -- more than one hour. It must be a two hour documentary to do justice to the entire gamut of the slave question as the director wants. In the short time it could not do justice even to the
biography of the principal character.
9) -What did this film teach you
The film was produced well, and the editing rest. However it for those who have already studied the history of Haiti and the one who sees the film without a background would be at unease. That is because the issue needs
treatment in depth but time constraint makes it rush.
10) - How well or badly crafted was this documentary?
It was well crafted with smooth flow of information, editing and very great visuals. In other words it was a good documentary that would be a supplement to those who would like to see visual representations of their knowledge of Haiti. However for the uninitiated it requires some research to understand.
11) -Would you recommend this documentary? Why? To whom?
Would recommend it to those concerned over the fate of the Island, and whom I can be sure have had some idea about the history of the island.
References
Documentary. (n. d.) "Egalite for All. Toussaint Louverture and the Haitian Revolution"
Retrieved 12 April, 2013 from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6F5dXqTCfo
Facebook. (2013) "Facebook" Retrieved 12 April, 2013 from https://www.facebook.com/paste1
IMBD. (2013a) "Egalite for All. Toussaint Louverture and the Haitian Revolution"
Retrieved 12 April, 2013 from http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1368166/fullcredits-ref_=tt_cl_sm#cast
IMBD. (2013b) "Patricia Aste
producer" Retrieved 12 April, 2013 from http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1622172/#Producer
