Awful effort on alternative outlook on history. Spike Lee? He made mistakes, too. Why on Earth making such a blatant parody of Ken Scott and Shelby Foote's Civil War masterpiece which was and is an unbeatable peak? Why, even if you did, do this newer effort such a rushes, rash-ed, rueful, woeful mish mash of all wrong elements possible? Badly calculated, poorly executed, terribly done, this short (and this Is the only redeeming quality of the effort) mocks the very core essence of Civil War achievements and depicts several sacred cows as desacralized calves. The worst moment? Alleged older Lincoln interview. Made me sick and filled with wrath. Wasted effort of dubious merit and horrible conclusion.

From start to finish, it's a satire on American history and TV documentaries. The real history is deliberately twisted to show viewers what America might have been like today if the South had won the Civil War. Fake historians recite fake commentaries; fake visuals show action that never occurred or is taken out of context; actors act out characters that never lived. Even the commercial breaks are fictional and presume that slave life is part of America in the twenty-first century.I thought the commercials were funny and clever. Examples include a TV sitcom called "Leave It To Beulah", about a Black maid in a White household. Another commercial advertises "The Shackle", an electronic product put on slaves so that their owners know where they are, at all times. The funniest, though, is "The Slave Shopping Network", where two bubble-headed White ladies advertise Black people for sale; the commercial is funny because it is so outrageous.The history lesson, however, I found boring. Structured like a documentary, its visual images and its various commentaries go on and on in excruciating detail. I'm just not that much of a history buff to spend all that time trying to digest a history that never happened. Further, the viewer really has to know the real history in order to know which characters, scenes, and legacies are bogus, since this false history is a twisted version of real history. In particular, I found the "John Ambrose Fauntroy" character annoying.The film's visuals and sound compare favorably to real documentaries. Background music is appropriate. Casting is generally acceptable, but the narrative suffers from some overacting. The cast is very large, consistent with a long drawn-out historical drama, showing lots of different people from different historical periods.Even though the South lost on the battleground, its values seem to be still embraced by many Americans; that, I think, is the theme of this film. I just wish the satire could have been presented more succinctly and with less confusion. "C.S.A.: The Confederate States Of America" is built on a clever premise. It will be most appreciated by viewers with a thorough knowledge of the real American history.

I found this gem on Netflix.Other reviews are criticizing the improbability of events depicted in the movie, starting with the involvement of France and the UK in the Civil War. That's why it's fiction: the precipitating events *did not happen*. It's a "WHAT IF" work of fiction. The film maker presupposes a few alterations to history, and then examines what would happen as a consequence. Chaos theory indicates that just about any imagined set of consequences of a few initial changes to a system are as plausible as any other. This movie is essentially "alternative Earth" fiction. It's fanciful by definition. It has a lot more in common with something like the sci-fi series "Sliders" or the "barbarian universe" riff in Star Trek than it is to be taken as a serious critique of modern US society. It's essentially "historical science fiction", with the aliens being the citizens of the "US" (CSA) in a different reality.I also really did not feel that it was liberal or minority grievance agitprop (it was pointed out at the end of the movie that "Aunt Jemima" and "Uncle Ben" are major US brands, but I don't need to be preached that they are somehow embody racist evil.) What CSA is, is an exploration of where the US would be if certain of the values of the antebellum South had been captured through the expanding US, and had then evolved to the present day as mainstream US values. How would the US relate to the rest of the world? What would become of the Americas? What about WWII, Nazi Germany, and the cold war? What would the major political dynasty of our time be in such a country? The film explores a fascinating series of possibilities that could have resulted.The film is only "ha ha funny" for the commercial segments. The meat of the narration is a bit satiric. The historical figures that the film portrayed, including Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglas, and minor figures like Judah P. Benjamin and doctor Samuel A. Cartwright, show a serious effort to take one implausible assumption (the Union forces lose at Gettysburg to combined Confederate, French and English forces) and run with it to many logical or at least plausible conclusions.What I found very implausible has not been mentioned by most reviewers. Given that the CSA was born as a xenophobic and virulently intolerant society, I don't see a CSA type nation as having accomplished most of what the US has done, particularly in terms of the sciences, militarily, and economic development. The white supremacist establishment would have rejected and marginalized many of the most productive and brilliant members of "real world" US society. IE, would a CSA ever have developed the resources to conquer most of the Americas? Would the CSA have been in a position to plant a confederate flag on the moon? (Great sight gag, BTW.) Would a CSA have invented radio, TV, atomic fission, and the internet? "CSA" only got this diminished society aspect partially right by showing that the arts and entertainment flourished in the Canada of the film, and therefore arts in the CSA were stunted and mostly tended to government propaganda.The part that I felt rang very true was how values are transmitted from one generation to another. Supposing that abolition had never happened, and also supposing that it a preference of the government - what else could you say about the society? So in CSA, women in 2004 do not yet have the vote. And Canada is despised for "stealing" the CSA's slaves.If you have an open mind and a small interest in US history, I highly recommend this movie. It's fun. It's good when it is over, and you can breath a sigh of relief for our flawed but still superior real life world.

Thank God, the North won.The enormously original and somewhat frightening CSA: The Confederate States of America is worth a shot to see "what would've happened" had the South triumphed over the North in the Civil War. And anyone who thinks the (real) U.S.A. of today is a bad place, watch this…as it's pretty and, unfortunately, plausible (had the South won, that is.)Creator Kevin Willmott, took the idea of making a Mockumentary of the North's defeat one step further, making this all the more original: he didn't just film a faux pas documentary, he made it from this alternate universe's British TV's point of view and threw in – spoiler – practically real commercials.And as authentic as this all seems – it's scary that facts can be skewed in such a realistic, though fictional format…SEE: political campaign ads – unfortunately, the movie runs out of steam about half way through to the finale. Even at only 89 minutes, it certainly wore out its welcome by its climax. Even the often hilarious, albeit frightening, commercials started to get downright ugly with its racism messages.The movie opens with a fake "History Channel"/type station broadcasting a CSA (Confederate States of America) documentary that cleverly put a disclaimer that this presentation is the British's POV and is not endorsed by the station. It then begins where the Civil War was, in fiction, decided by the North surrendering and Lincoln becoming "black" and fleeing to Canada.From there, the Mockumentary shows the turbulent rise of the Confederate States of America whereas slavery is not only still accepted, but endorsed and used to "rebuild" the union for the economy as well as political gains. Throw in the "station's" commercials – make sure you stay through to the end to get the background on these horrendous statements – the movie actually feels…"real." Sadly enough.If nothing else, this movie makes you appreciate what we have here, because I would want nothing else but to migrate to the "celebrated land of Canada" – the real hero of this story. It's absolutely disgusting what's portrayed and unhappily, a lot of this is very true of our past, and probably our present.One major problem I had with the film, is that, as wildly original as it is, I have a small, but sure doubt this could happen – good always seems to find its way to the surface, I feel, and I truly believe enough actual human beings would rally against this abomination of mankind, whether black, Native American or homosexual. Still, there are nations in existence today, in real life, that are just despicable – regrettably, women are still stoned for the most minute of offenses, so, I do flip flop on this movie's practicality.Though the movie's very well shot, one-of-a-kind and looks genuine, it doesn't demand repeat viewings, and since its 100% false, it can only be taken as a "what if" or "thank God we dodged that bullet" kind of entertainment. It should make you think and regret our past while making even the toughest atheist pray for mankind's future.Warning though: this movie is enormously racist – on purpose, of course. But, that doesn't excuse that it's very hard to watch at times. Yep, I know racism still exists – FOR SHAME: incredibly, I hear it almost daily and certainly NOT by choice – but this movie concentrates a great deal of it in less than an hour and a half. Just be warned; this is a tough pill to swallow.