Poor production values and a horribly cliched script with some of the worst dialog outside of a Jacqueline Susan or Harold Robbins novel makes this one of the most shameful movies of the 1960's, an abomination about a bigger abomination, and not even laughable. It's obvious that Ossie Davis thought that this was going to be a serious look at the evils of slavery, and had the script been tweeked of all those horrible lines and the sound not reminding me of a gladiator/Peplum film dubbed into English, it might have had a more serious impact. But starting with the presence of David Huddleston as a seller of slaves in the pre-civil war North, and continuing with the contradictory character played by Stephen Boyd (certainly no Rhett Butler), this becomes awfully cumbersome and painful to watch.
The film does try to show certain white characters in a good light, starting with Northern slave owner Shepherd Strudwick, his wife Nancy Coleman, and a New Orleans matron played by Gale Slondergaard, in her first theatrical film in 20 years. Dionne Warwick is basically playing the same character that Yvonne De Carlo played in "Band of Angels" over a decade before, forced to hear Boyd spout some ridiculous analogies about what it means to be black. Davis, sold back into slavery by former owner Strudwick (blackmailed by Huddleson), ends up far away from his wife, and is determined to remain loyal to her even though there are plenty of opportunities for him to stray. Marilyn Clark is a stereotypical Scarlett O'Hara like Southern lady, riotten to the core, spurned by Boyd, and setting her sights elsewhere.
The use of music in this film is just plain eye rolling, and makes it seem like a much older film than it is. It reminds me of two unfortunate later films, "Mandingo" and its sequel "Drum", and it wouldn't be until the TV mini series "Roots" where the subject of slavery would be dealt with seriously and more realistically. Certainly, this does show the physical anguish of working in the cotton fields and being exploited for pleasure, but it is destroyed by its good intentions because of all of the elements that contradict everything that is trying to tell its audience. Director Herbert Bibberman, who had been responsible for some excellent docudramas in the 1950's, seemed blinded by his reverence for the anti-slavery message and in trying to be profound didn't see the damage he was doing to his own good intentions.
The film does try to show certain white characters in a good light, starting with Northern slave owner Shepherd Strudwick, his wife Nancy Coleman, and a New Orleans matron played by Gale Slondergaard, in her first theatrical film in 20 years. Dionne Warwick is basically playing the same character that Yvonne De Carlo played in "Band of Angels" over a decade before, forced to hear Boyd spout some ridiculous analogies about what it means to be black. Davis, sold back into slavery by former owner Strudwick (blackmailed by Huddleson), ends up far away from his wife, and is determined to remain loyal to her even though there are plenty of opportunities for him to stray. Marilyn Clark is a stereotypical Scarlett O'Hara like Southern lady, riotten to the core, spurned by Boyd, and setting her sights elsewhere.
The use of music in this film is just plain eye rolling, and makes it seem like a much older film than it is. It reminds me of two unfortunate later films, "Mandingo" and its sequel "Drum", and it wouldn't be until the TV mini series "Roots" where the subject of slavery would be dealt with seriously and more realistically. Certainly, this does show the physical anguish of working in the cotton fields and being exploited for pleasure, but it is destroyed by its good intentions because of all of the elements that contradict everything that is trying to tell its audience. Director Herbert Bibberman, who had been responsible for some excellent docudramas in the 1950's, seemed blinded by his reverence for the anti-slavery message and in trying to be profound didn't see the damage he was doing to his own good intentions.