12 Years a Slave, had it been conceived, written and directed by a 12 year old, might have deserved its lavish praise. As it was not, it is unfortunately the most over-hyped movie in a while. For youngsters who were not yet born, nor old enough to remember the TV series "Roots", 12 Years a Slave may well seem shocking, and a serious and meaningful stab at bringing this subject to life, but the superficiality, plodding pace and relentless sermonising killed any emotional impact it could have had. It wasn't short on suffering, most of it endured by the audience who suffered right from the start, as the first 10 minutes or so was irritatingly shot in semi-darkness and extreme close-up, making it jerky and difficult to follow. This broke any rule of "grab their attention right from the beginning", as the stream of apparently unrelated scenes made it seem as though the director couldn't decide on how or where to begin.

Worse was to come, with good actors asked to play stereotypical characters in stereotypical scenes, and even less forgiveably, a complete failure within this mess to meaningfully depict the real horror and despair of an educated man being stolen away and brought so low. This chance was passed up in favour of trotting out the usual overseers with whips, drunken plantation owners, bitter and frustrated wives, and of course the apparently kind and enlightened white man who nevertheless shows his true colours when the chips are down.

This film simply does not compare to the sweeping story told so movingly and effectively in "Roots" decades before. It also has nothing to add. 12 Years a Slave is Roots-lite, with added pomposity. Why it was nominated for best picture and best director is beyond me. Why it actually won an Oscar for best picture says more about the right-on public face of the Academy than the calibre of the work being judged. It is unfortunate that subject matter holds such sway over voters. My verdict is watch it, and then do yourself a favour and watch the vastly superior "Roots".