Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- 329:question:329--week_5_questions_comments-2022 [2022/09/22 12:52] – [I.How does this movie work as a secondary source? What does the movie get right about history?] 76.78.225.92
+++ 329:question:329--week_5_questions_comments-2022 [2022/10/29 16:05] (current) – [I.How does this movie work as a secondary source? What does the movie get right about history?] 76.78.225.92
@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 The film was able to get a decent amount the of history correct, which was more than I was expecting. Having the characters speak their accurate languages was a huge deal to me. It showed that they wanted to keep the story true and portray these people as accurately as possible. Which allowed for the film to be both entertaining and authentic. - Neonya Garner
-This movie works well as a secondary source. It gives insight into how people at the time viewed and interpreted this conflict. The movie itself was historically accurate in the events of the film. While many of these events were dramatized and exaggerated, that can be expected and adjusted for. The movie also depicts the horrors of slavery well instead of sugar-coating it like many other films. The rawness of the conditions they faced and the decisions they had to make like the suicides are heartbreaking. -Annika Sypher
+This film was fairly accurate as a secondary source. Like all other movies, if you were to use this as a source you would have to verify everything and back it up with other texts. Many times filmmakers will dramatize or "jazz" up scenes so that they will fit with their narrative. However, in this film, the story was already so heartwrenching. Scenes like the suicide of the boat were both real and heartbreaking, likewise, the scene where the character is going around the dock trying to find someone who will speak the language, is also surprisingly accurate. -Annika
 ====== II.	Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ======