Steam Death of a Nation

Death of a Nation

Death of a Nation is a movie starring Dinesh D'Souza, Victoria Chilap, and Pavel Kríz. This docudrama draws parallels between the dramatic fracturing of the nation over Abraham Lincoln's presidency and the presidency of Donald Trump.

Running Time
1 hours 48 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
History, Documentary
Bruce Schooley, Dinesh D'Souza
Dinesh D'Souza, Dinesh D'Souza, Dinesh D'Souza, Bruce Schooley
Victoria Chilap, Rafael Prazák, Dinesh D'Souza, Pavel Kríz
Audio Languages
日本語, اللغة_العربية, English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
Japanese, اللغة_العربية, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

This docudrama draws parallels between the dramatic fracturing of the nation over Abraham Lincoln's presidency and the presidency of Donald Trump.

Comments about history «Death of a Nation» (13)

Melissa A. photo
Melissa A.

The short answer to the question, "Why did the news media attack this movie?" is because it does not fit their predetermined narrative. The narrative in this case is the vilification of the United States by the Russians, and the media has played along with this narrative to cover their own agenda. The reason that this movie was not shown at the Oscars is that the media would have gone through the usual motions and not dared to take sides. There were plenty of other Oscar contenders that were worthy of the awards, but that is not the point. The point is that it does not fit the narrative that the media is pushing and the political propaganda that they are feeding us. If the media were more honest in their reporting, they would have done a lot more than just the negative to it. And if you are a viewer of the news, you know that the media is not always truthful, and that is why this movie should have won. In the end, I am glad that the media was not given the opportunity to play the Russians like a fiddle and the fact that the media did not do their jobs and show the truth to the American people was the only good news that this movie delivered.

Stephen Jackson photo
Stephen Jackson

It is a bit hard to imagine how a movie this controversial could be made without losing all credibility. However, it is a film that should be watched, because it shows how good the concept of the documentary is. It is an excellent example of how to document a very controversial topic with a non-political approach. For instance, they didn't show the "white house", but instead the "government" and "military" and the "media". This gives the movie a unique tone, and keeps you on your toes. It is a must see for those who believe that a documentary should not be about politics, but about facts and opinions. This is a film that has been criticized, and if you don't like it, that is your own opinion. But I believe that if you like it, you will like it more. It is a good documentary and it should be watched, but I can't say that it is a must see.

Dennis Hunt photo
Dennis Hunt

The current events of Ferguson, Missouri are a reflection of the whole country. The film tells us about the riots, the protests, the killings and the police brutality. It shows us how the police is always in the right, and how they treat everyone in the wrong. I think this film is very important, and it will probably be more important in the future. It's a great movie, and I think that Ferguson, Missouri is a reflection of the whole country. It's not about Ferguson, but about the whole country.

Sharon L. photo
Sharon L.

I saw this film with my mom and my dad. They were both appalled at the hate and the attacks on the film. They did not like the fact that I was an immigrant. I have not been a great fan of Obama, but I was shocked at the hatred and the attacks on the film. My dad was extremely angry at the hate. I was a little surprised that my mom was not so shocked, she had heard the film before and she was expecting the film to be a slam dunk. I think the film has a great message. It is not one that the left will like, but it is a great film that will reach the people that need to hear it the most. I hope that people will see this film and realize that this is not just an attack on the president, but an attack on the entire country.

William Parker photo
William Parker

I would have to say this documentary was very accurate. I would say the first half of the movie was more interesting and I think the second half of the movie was more accurate. This documentary is very good. I would recommend this documentary to anyone who is interested in the events that took place in the civil rights movement in the 1960's. I think that people who are not familiar with the history of the civil rights movement will find this movie interesting. If you are interested in the history of the civil rights movement you should definitely watch this documentary.

Gloria photo

I'm not going to say that this documentary is great. I think it is a decent documentary. I also agree that the acting is a bit wooden. The lead actor, William Butler, is a bit wooden, and the supporting actors, Amy Davis and Mark Ruffalo, are wooden as well. The only person I liked was Samuel L. Jackson, who is a real force in his own right, and that's why I'm rating this 7 out of 10. This documentary is about the infamous Oklahoma City bombing, and the murders of the people involved in that bombing. The documentary is well-made, and the documentary footage is well-filmed, so I think that it was worth watching. However, I don't think that this documentary was a great documentary. It is a good documentary, but it could have been a much better documentary.

Jeremy photo

I have seen many documentaries and in some cases I have found them to be boring. But I was truly amazed by this one. It is a documentary about the movement to end slavery. It is not a documentary about the history of slavery. It is a documentary about the progress that was made in ending slavery. This is a very exciting film, full of excitement and interest. It is well worth seeing.

Sandra Gutierrez photo
Sandra Gutierrez

I saw the movie in the theater, and I must say, I was quite disappointed. It was a good story, and I enjoyed the perspective it gave us on the world's first genocide. However, as an American I was more than disappointed in the way the story was told. The filmmakers portrayed the United States as a bastion of freedom and tolerance, and not a country that committed the greatest atrocities of the 20th century. In my opinion, it is very disrespectful to the victims of the genocide, and the people of the United States. In the end, I feel the movie was a bit too far-fetched. I felt like they could have made it more believable, and I feel that the filmmakers should have added a little more history to the story, to give a more accurate picture. However, it was still a good movie. I would definitely recommend it to anyone. If you want to see an unbiased movie that doesn't make you feel bad about America, I would definitely recommend this one.

Ethan R. photo
Ethan R.

This film was a great step forward for a documentary. It did a great job at not showing any particular side of the war. Instead, it allowed the audience to draw their own conclusions about the events of that day. I think it is a very important film, and I hope that other filmmakers will follow the lead of this one. It should be required viewing for all Americans, as it is still very relevant today. I would recommend this film to anyone who is interested in learning more about the events of that day.

Walter Tran photo
Walter Tran

I can't say that I fully agree with this documentary. The focus of the film is on the horrors of the civil war, and the shocking images and images of violence that were there during the war. The focus of the film is on the war itself, but this focus can be difficult to keep in mind. The fact that the war itself was a war of terror, that there was no doubt that it was an act of war, and that the enemy was a group of people, is something that most people would find hard to accept. This is something that this documentary tries to make clear. However, this documentary is not an accurate portrayal of the civil war, and it is not an accurate portrayal of the war itself. It is a documentary that tries to tell a story, but it is a very strange story, and it is very hard to keep track of what is going on. The people in the documentary are all portrayed as good people, but this is not true. The war itself was the cause of this, and that is the only thing that makes sense to me. The documentary is very entertaining and very thought provoking, and it is a good way to see the real story of the civil war. However, if you have not seen this documentary before, I would recommend that you do not see it.

Jeffrey G. photo
Jeffrey G.

Harsh words can't do justice to the devastating impact that slavery had on the lives of so many African Americans. This documentary gives a detailed look at the history of the slave trade, focusing on the aftermath of the Civil War and the early years of the 1900s. The slaves were forced to work in a vast network of farms in the American South, with little or no control over their lives. Most of the slaves were born free, but were enslaved through their youth. Most were treated worse than animals, and the suffering was unimaginable. The slave trade was not limited to slaves in the states of the old Confederacy, but stretched from the Carolinas in the north to the Mexican border in the south. The South was the most heavily trafficked region in the world. The movie focuses on slave traders in the South, but the documentary also covers the entire length of the American slave trade. The movie is a little long, but it is well worth the time. It is clear that the slaves did not have a voice, and they were treated like animals. The documentary is not anti-slavery, but it is a powerful indictment of the slave trade. Most people were not aware of the extent of the slave trade. In 1820, the United States had a population of 13 million, and of these, some 20 million were slaves. By 1850, the number of slaves was estimated at somewhere between 30 and 40 million. The documentary also includes interviews with many of the slaves who were forced into the slave trade, and the movie also includes footage of slave auctions. The movie is well worth the time.

Dylan Mills photo
Dylan Mills

When a film maker, Michael Moore, said that the media is more interested in covering the latest celebrity scandals than in exposing the truth about the US Government, it was a bold statement. His film 'Fahrenheit 9/11' is an expose of the media, the media's obsession with celebrity, and how the media have corrupted the American people. This film is not for the faint of heart, and it is an absolute must see. If you are looking for a film that will bring tears to your eyes, this is not the film for you. It's a must see for the intelligent viewer, and for those who want to see what is really going on in the world. If you can watch the film without having any emotions attached to it, you will have a great time. I was able to do that, and I highly recommend it. I have been a critic for many years, and this film is proof that I can do it with my eyes closed, and my heart pumping.

Jerry Ford photo
Jerry Ford

It's hard to watch this film and not be moved by the subjects discussed. As a filmmaker, it's hard to stay on topic and keep the viewer engaged. This film is a good example of that. It was a lot of fun to watch the film, and the information was interesting. The documentary was not always clear, and sometimes left the viewer with questions that they did not have the answers to. For example, in a discussion about the role of the media in influencing people to join the Ku Klux Klan, a person said, "If they don't want you to join the KKK, they won't tell you. You have to join the KKK." I thought this was a very important point to make. It's a good point to make, but it's not clear what the filmmakers were trying to achieve. It's clear that the filmmakers wanted to talk about the Ku Klux Klan, but I don't think they accomplished that. In addition, I don't think the filmmakers were interested in the Ku Klux Klan. I think the filmmakers wanted to talk about the actions of the KKK, but they failed to do so. I don't know why they didn't, but I think they were too focused on the other subjects discussed. Overall, I think this documentary was a good one, but it was a little confusing at times. It was a good effort, but I think it could have been better.