Difference between revisions of "329--Week 5 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
| Line 57: | Line 57: | ||
I too wondered about whether the Middle Passage scenes should have been even harsher, though they were effective in showing the inhumanity of the situation. I did wonder whether a woman that was super pregnant would be selected to make the journey knowing full well the conditions were less than optimal for childbirth? Also, I guess this is nitpicking but I believe that only 5 of the 9 Justices were slave owners but in the film it was reported that 7 held slaves. Lastly, I have always read that JQA was one of, if not the smartest of the presidents, so was it accurate to have him be such a bumbling eccentric?-Bryan Mull | I too wondered about whether the Middle Passage scenes should have been even harsher, though they were effective in showing the inhumanity of the situation. I did wonder whether a woman that was super pregnant would be selected to make the journey knowing full well the conditions were less than optimal for childbirth? Also, I guess this is nitpicking but I believe that only 5 of the 9 Justices were slave owners but in the film it was reported that 7 held slaves. Lastly, I have always read that JQA was one of, if not the smartest of the presidents, so was it accurate to have him be such a bumbling eccentric?-Bryan Mull | ||
| − | I thought Morgan Freeman’s character might be a fabrication at first because he didn’t seems to fit with the Pennington discussed in class. It turns out he was indeed made up for the movie. What was the purpose of Joadson at all? And, of course, I was expecting a ''Big Damn Heroes'' moment from John Quincy Adams considering how much they were building it up. And that’s what we get. Now, the speech had pretty much nothing to do with the trial, and it was all about anti-slavery which would have turned off the Southern judges, and, hey, it only felt like it was hours long instead of being the actual eight hours of JQA’s real speech, but it was awesome. Still, I would have loved to see the judges dismiss everything he said like they did in real life, but then again, the movie isn’t a comedy. And it ''would'' have been funny to see, since he was set up as the final hope since the start of the movie. --Taylor Brann | + | I thought Morgan Freeman’s character might be a fabrication at first because he didn’t seems to fit with the Pennington discussed in class. It turns out he was indeed made up for the movie. What was the purpose of Joadson at all? And, of course, I was expecting a ''Big Damn Heroes'' moment from John Quincy Adams considering how much they were building it up. And that’s what we get. Now, the speech had pretty much nothing to do with the trial, and it was all about anti-slavery which would have turned off the Southern judges, and, hey, it only ''felt'' like it was hours long instead of being the actual eight hours of JQA’s real speech, but it was awesome. Still, I would have loved to see the judges dismiss everything he said like they did in real life, but then again, the movie isn’t a comedy. And it ''would'' have been funny to see, since he was set up as the final hope since the start of the movie. --Taylor Brann |
== 2 Film's relationship to current scholarship or to primary sources from the time == | == 2 Film's relationship to current scholarship or to primary sources from the time == | ||
| Line 102: | Line 102: | ||
Though we touched on this movie in high school (mostly to show the horrors of the Middle Passage) I agree with Jason as to why this movie has in some ways failed to capture the public's imagination. As inspiring as JQA's final speech was (loved the portrait of JA slightly blurred over his shoulder), as in real life this wasn't an anti-slavery ruling. This was a matter of property. Perhaps this is why when asked most people probably wouldn't come up with this film before other examples of Spielberg historic films. I know I would have referenced Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, and Munich before Amistad, which in some ways is a shame. Ultimately I feel that this movie is most valuable in its depiction of the Middle Passage which struck me as the most realistic that filmmakers could likely get away with.-Bryan Mull | Though we touched on this movie in high school (mostly to show the horrors of the Middle Passage) I agree with Jason as to why this movie has in some ways failed to capture the public's imagination. As inspiring as JQA's final speech was (loved the portrait of JA slightly blurred over his shoulder), as in real life this wasn't an anti-slavery ruling. This was a matter of property. Perhaps this is why when asked most people probably wouldn't come up with this film before other examples of Spielberg historic films. I know I would have referenced Saving Private Ryan, Schindler's List, and Munich before Amistad, which in some ways is a shame. Ultimately I feel that this movie is most valuable in its depiction of the Middle Passage which struck me as the most realistic that filmmakers could likely get away with.-Bryan Mull | ||
| + | |||
| + | Overall, ''Amistad'' is my favorite of the movies we’ve watched so far. With Steven Spielberg, John Williams, and talented actors, it better be good. Though Morgan Freeman always seems to play the same character (whatever works), I could barely recognize Anthony Hopkins and Matthew McConaughey. I also want to say it’s the most historically accurate film that we’ve watched so far, but I’m not sure if I’m confident enough to say that. It’s not without its problems. I think one of the biggest issues is that the Amistad case was made out to be some kind of turning point in antislavery, but the case was more about illegal slavery than slavery itself. Also, the characters kept mentioning a civil war between the North and South, as though everyone knew it was definitely going to happen. The movie even seemed to make it look like the Amistad case was one of the causes! --Taylor Brann | ||
