Free State of Jones

watch pls

"It ain't my fight you know. Don't own no slaves. Ain't gonna die so they can get rich selling cotton." Newton Knight (McConaughey) lives in Mississippi and enlisted in the Civil War like everyone else did. His feelings about the fight begin to conflict with those of his superiors and when it reaches a breaking point he finally deserts, and joins a group of runaway slaves. More and more soldiers begin to join him until Knight decides enough is enough and him and his own army begin to stand up for what they believe in, against the Confederates. This is first off a very good movie. The story is true, interesting and important. On the other hand you have to look past what is on the surface to find the real important aspect and true meaning of the film. Yes, its about a man not believing in the cause of the war, but the real meaning and message deals with what happens after the war and what Knight did to advance the cause of the newly freed slaves. The movie is a type of Civil War Patriot, but to me this movie does more to show and describe the problems with reconstruction than any movie I have seen. The reconstruction issue is the real message of the movie and because of that I highly recommend this. Overall, a very good movie that is extremely important and shows how little the country has actually advanced since the 1860's. I give this a B+.

Biopics are generally difficult to make. Making a cohesive story based on a life that spanned 84 years is borderline impossible, especially for someone with the legacy of Newton Knight. Free State of Jones fails to put together said story, and never succeeds to reach the gravitas that the source material seemed to exude. It's hard not to be a fan of the material Matthew McConaughey is pursuing these days. Although the 'McConaissance' is pretty much over, he's still a world class talent of an actor and is sure to give us another Oscar caliber performance soon enough. While this wasn't necessarily the film to do so, he's not at all the issue. I wasn't emotionally connected with many, if any, of the characters but McConaughey certainly adds plenty of credibility to the scenes he's in. I've liked quite a few of Gary Ross' films, but this won't go down as one for the positive end. Knight's story is a hefty one and it seems like Ross and his writers didn't have a grasp as to how they wanted to approach such a story. The film jumps around in time quite a bit and it never quite settles on the part of Knight's life that's most compelling. I liked the material I watched and the actor's portrayals, but it's hard to truly get invested in a story with choppy editing and a confusing direction. The film runs to just under 2 and a half hours long, but it felt like three. I couldn't help but think something like Free State of Jones is much better served as a mini-series. The more the film flashed forward in time, cut away in the middle of a big battle, or pushed characters away right when they started getting interesting, the more I began to dislike the film and Ross' direction. With formidable performances from McConaughey and up-and-comer Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Free State of Jones is far from the worst film of 2016. But it may very well be the most disappointing film I've seen this year. With juicy source material and plenty of talent on and off screen, there was a good chance for an academy award level picture here, but it wasn't meant to be. +McConaughey & Gugu -Sloppy editing -Confusing direction -Didn't know what to focus on 4.1/10

I knew nothing about it when I went to the theater. Now I know: the Free State of Jones really happened, and most everything in this movie really happened. There really was a Mr. Newton Knight of Jones County, Mississippi, who had a white wife, and then a black wife named Rachel, and a guerrilla army of escaped slaves and Confederate Army deserters, who functioned as probably the first racially integrated army ever, in the swamps of Mississippi, during the Civil War. It was all real. They took over a portion of the State of Mississippi, for two years, against Confederate Army attacks. They held, for a while, three counties, and the largest town in the area, Ellisville Mississippi, and raised the Union flag (that's the American flag) over the courthouse there. Knight and his small army were still wreaking havoc on their bitter enemies -- the Confederacy, the slaveholders, and King Cotton -- when the war ended. They did all this with virtually no help from the Union Army -- William Techumseh Sherman was in the area, and knew Knight's rebellion was happening, but he either didn't trust Knight and his counter-rebels, or couldn't believe it, but in any case he spurned Knight's requests for arms and gave virtually no assistance, and did not even allow them to join the Union Army. All this is in the movie. Given this amazing story, it would be hard to miss turning out quite a show. And quite a show it is. Writer/Director Gary Ross says after "Seabiscuit," he was directing and screen writing "Hunger Games" and doing other odd jobs while working on this project -- his real passion for the last ten years - learning the history of Newton Knight and the counter-rebellion in Jones County, Mississippi, 1863-1865. This was Gary Ross' special project and he has created a wonderful, monumental film. Matthew McConaughey does a great job as Knight, a backwoodsman who evolved dramatically in his life. McConaughey starts off a subsistence farmer, gets drafted, then made a good soldier (he rose to sergeant), but eventually starts to see what a hideous racket the war is, and how evil slavery is. Gugu Mbatha-Raw does a fine job as Rachel. Mahershala Ali (Hunger Games) is also very good in his supporting role as Moses. The combat scenes are realistic, and wrenching, as are the depictions of the rapes, tortures, dog maulings, hangings, family separations ("How far is Texas," asks Mahershala Ali, as Moses the escaped slave). And the film continues into the anarchic "Reconstruction" era, when hooded terrorists reduced many newly "freed" blacks to a condition, in some ways, worse than slavery. When they were slaves, their lives at least had money value. From the impressive history professors and professional historians listed as consultants in the end credits, the film appears well researched. Unfortunately, the list of consultants has not made it into IMDb as of this writing -- can someone please add this?) Some reviewers are lukewarm. They say, not enough character development. Not enough love story. Too long. Explanatory historical facts pop up between scenes. Flash forwards confuse (the film jumps to the 1940's trial of Newton and Rachel Knight's grandson, who was actually convicted under Mississippi law of being "1/8 black" marrying a "white" woman. You can't make this stuff up). Some reactions are outright negative -- why? Maybe because Free State of Jones, despite a great script, fantastic sets, a story by turns astonishing and frightening, is not exactly entertaining. Because it's too real. We've created a comfortable myth of the Civil War, in which men became brothers again once all people were free. But the myth doesn't hold up to the reality. The Civil War erupted along huge differences -- deep rifts in this nation's society, which will not heal, unless we grasp the legacy of slavery, and sectarianism, which persist to harm us.

This story should be seen by all Americans! Sure there are parts that are gory but ALL wars are gory. When we noticed how long it is we decided to watch it in two viewings. However once we got started we could not stop. We HAD to see what was happening next. I remember reading some of these kinds of things happening to the fighters and country people but never had the whole story like this one shows. Great Grandpa was in on most of this war but sadly we were unable to hear what he had to say. No wonder the people involved never do speak of such horrible things happening. This story tells the human side of folks, too. And the story ends on the up-side. They did a WONDERFUL job of telling the whole story. It IS a great movie. We do hope they all get the recognition they all deserve.

This film is an important piece of work - it informs the kids of today that life was not all iPads and Play Stations in the past. Just a few hundred years ago, people were enslaved and were treated barbarically. Segregation was sanctioned. Race killings were conducted routinely. Life was hard and the work harder. Newt Knight doesn't start out to be any kind of hero or leader. He just "does right" by his own standards. His doing right, combined with a generous heart sees him take up a leadership role for people in a similar situation to himself. Over time, his influence and stature grows, but Newt is no 4-start general - he is just a man who wants to be free and for those around him not to suffer unjustly - no matter who those people are. As I watched the film, I was struck at what an accomplishment Barack Obama's presidency is and how far America has come in a few hundred years.

A powerful action-drama about a local Mississippi rebellion against the Confederate rebellion, brought about by Southern corruption, conscripting men, and confiscating supplies and livestock, without reimbursement, in order to support the army in its fight for the Southern plantation system. The last straw for the main character, Newton Knight, superbly played by Matthew McConaughey, was the passing of the 20 slave law that exempted 1 white man for every 20 slaves—in order to prevent a slave rebellion what with so many white males being off to war. It's a gritty depiction of the sordid underbelly of an already corrupt slave economy. It's a reminder, as if we needed one, of the reprehensible conditions some of our ancestors (on both sides) imposed on their society; but neither justifies either hate or guilt this far removed from it or the Jim Crow laws. It also depicts the courageous good things that others got right. The end of the movie balances things with a political statement when it shows a mixed-race group, armed with guns I must add, marching into town on election day and demanding Republican ballots. It's easy to forget that Lincoln and the Abolitionists were Republicans; while Klansmen (including "former" Klansmen) occupied some of our highest offices, and were allied with Democrats into the 21st Century.

I think, to many southerners like myself, the story told in the movie Free State of Jones was part of a hidden history. Growing up this stuff was omitted from our collective education. It's not hard to see why. It's a very ugly and insidious part of history. It's our nations most terrible war from which healing has been extremely longstanding…even still 150 years on. However, to achieve a freedom from future tyranny I'd say the movie's timetable works. The time is right because what lingers needs the transparency that allows a fuller healing through the art of the story told. To never repeat the mistakes of the past we must learn, and that involves honesty. So, here we have a very different Civil War drama based on actual events. Instead of centering on great battles it explores the human drama that corrupt elements rather than any particular battle caused. While it's certainly true crimes were committed on both sides, the desperate elements operating within the Confederate movement were particularly ominous. Illegal conscription and seizing of property from those without a voice ran rampant. This is a climate which created many a defection, and here a subversive movement. Newton Knight was turned in an instant and it galvanized what would follow. Knight's defection from the Confederate Army results in his spearheading a group of slaves and small farmers to secede from the Confederacy and form a "Free State of Jones" This is a powerful story which cost many lives ultimately prevailing when the Union won the war. Though it prevailed, the freedom it was promised was slow to come. Afterwards, even with new constitutional rights granted, norms were steeped in old traditions. A messy time for sure which was purposely written out of the collective history. I think this movie serves the basics well without getting mired in diatribes of moralities. Even with the story's slow pace the viewer gets a powerful history lesson. The characters ring true and their life and death struggle is eloquently unraveled. Not since Matthew McConaughey came on the scene in the movie "A Time To Kill" has he had a more important role. I think it's one of his, if not his best, performance. He's not so much acting as inhabiting a man whose voice was silenced long ago. He carries that voice to a whole new generation and it speaks volumes. Perhaps the movie is a bit slow paced and long, even using the clunky device of segueing to a much later date's court case at odd times. But, these are small criticisms that do not take away from a forgotten history. The segueing part even reinforces how so much was to take so long to truly change. Overall, a masterfully constructed important story with great period feel and realism. I recommend it for all as it does entertain and enlighten. Yes, this many years on there's still a powerful lesson we should never forget and continue to seek that all important truest expression of freedom so many have given so much for.

I was in the eight grade when I went on a week long trip to the east coast with many students to the east coast on an educational trip. We went to Williamsburg, Virginia and Washington D.C. but we also went to Gettysburg. This was my first hand glace at seeing the fields of where the Civil War was fought. Given the size and scope, I was surprised by how much space both sides had. This was where I learned about ones contribution to the war when the confederacy would be able to simple come onto one's property to take what they need. That to me defines everything that goes against America's dreams and ideals. The government should not have to take from people that are supposedly free. I know your thinking that I'm making some commentary about the troubles of today's government, but I'm mostly referring to the cruelty of the South during the war. If slavery wasn't awful enough, then common man has to suffer as well. Today's film refers to someone on the lines that didn't agree with their own cause, which is something you don't hear about too often. Does Free State of Jones make enough of an impact to tell an interesting part of the Civil War? During the early parts of the Civil War, a farmer/medic confederate solider Newton Knight (played by Matthew McConaughey) is feeling disenchanted by what his side is fighting for. He feels that the only ones benefiting are the rich ones who by rule, don't have to serve as long as they have the right amount of slaves. After his son is shot on the field, he deserts his post to return home to Jones County, Mississippi. It's here he teaches his family how to use guns against fellow confederates who want to take their share. On the run, Newton is able to escape into a swamp along with fellow runaway slaves. He learns a lot from runaways like Moses Washington (played by Mahershala Ali) and Rachel (played by Gugu Mbatha-Raw) about their desire to walk the streets like any other white person. Through the passage of time, more deserters of the confederacy join Newton in the swamps. It's he who decides to form a militia, and uses his experience to help capturing a large part of land in order to declare their own free state. We get a glace at their lives through the War and parts of the Reconstruction. What we have here should be an interesting part of history. This should be like a Civil War Robin Hood with plenty of action. What's strange about Free State of Jones is that it's simply boring. Instead of action, we are given speeches about race, speeches about being free, speeches about strategy, speeches about relationships, speeches about farming; pretty much a movie with speeches. I think much of the focus was more on being historically accurate then being an entertaining movie. Director Gary Ross (Pleasentville, Seabiscuit, The Hunger Games) took a strange turn within his writing and directing by not only giving us a visually dull film, but an uninterested script as well. Aside from a lot of speech dialogue, the presentation also makes random jumps to months, years, and even decades latter for another story that could have been cut. McConaughey is clearly trying as is most of the newcomer's, but with a script this dull, no one could have saved it. Free State of Jones needed to be a fun, swashbuckling tale of a man who fought his own system for the common people. I can't even imagine a Civil War expert getting into this. I'll give this three confederate uniforms out of five. If you're an insomniac, then Free State of Jones will help you fall asleep. Rather then being a sweeping epic, I felt like I was at school with one of the most boring history lessons ever given.

'FREE STATE OF JONES': Three and a Half Stars (Out of Five) The new Civil War drama flick, starring Matthew McConaughey and directed by Gary Ross (who also helmed 'THE HUNGER GAMES', 'PLEASANTVILLE' and 'SEABISCUIT'). Ross also co-wrote the movie, with first time feature screenwriter Leonard Hartman. The film is loosely based on the life of Newton Knight; who lead a resistance group, of deserters and slaves, against the local Confederate Government (during the Civil War). It also costars Gugu Mbatha-Raw, Mahershala Ali, Keri Russell and Jacob Lofland (who also costarred with McConaughey in 2012's outstanding 'MUD'). The film received poor reviews from critics, and it also bombed at the Box Office. I found it to be good, but somewhat disappointing as well. The film is set during the Civil War, and it tells the story of Newton Knight (McConaughey). Knight was a Southern farmer, who deserted the army and fled into the Mississippi swamps (in Jones County). There he befriended several runaway slaves, and later lead a militia (of other deserters and slaves) against the corrupt local government. The movie is a fictional account of his dramatic adventures. The film has several great scenes, scattered throughout a meandering (and very depressing) historical fiction tale. It's either too long, or the producers cut too much out of the movie; because (either way) the film's pacing is severely off. It does have many exciting action scenes though, some hard-hitting drama, and some inspiring rebellious moments. McConaughey (once again) gives a great performance, and Ross's direction is decent. The script and editing could have used a little more work though. Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: https://youtu.be/YnZSF_6sbsA