Differences

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

--- 329:question:329--week_5_questions_comments-2024 [2024/09/26 07:59] – [How does this movie work as a secondary source? What does the movie get right about history?] vveriak
+++ 329:question:329--week_5_questions_comments-2024 [2024/09/30 21:34] (current) – 76.78.172.116
@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 This movie works relatively well for me as a secondary source. As far as telling the story of Cinque and the slave trade in general (especially the progression of slave laws before the Civil War broke out) the movie does a really good job. Anyone beginning to learn about this topic in school or just clueless in general would be able to gain a pretty good understanding. However, some of the courtroom scenes were a little exaggerated and maybe not as accurate as the other parts of the movie. --Emma F.
-In terms of accuracy, the Amistad does far better than that of the films we've watched so far this semester. It stuck fairly close to the accuracy of the events that transpired, from the horrors of the Middle Passage, the insurrection of the Mende on the Amistad, their capture and imprisonment in the US, and the later court trials they had to go through to achieve freedom. A big thing that I thought the movie did especially with is depicting the language barrier that existed and how frustrating it would be trying to fight for your freedom but not being understand due to that barrier.-Vumiliya V.
+In terms of accuracy, the Amistad does far better in that regard than
+the other films we've watched so far this semester. It works as a secondary source due to the fact that it stuck fairly close to the accuracy of the events that transpired, from the horrors of the Middle Passage, the insurrection of the Mende on the Amistad, their capture and imprisonment in the US, and the later court trials they had to go through to achieve freedom. A big thing that I thought the movie did especially well with was in depicting the language barrier that existed and how frustrating it would have been trying to fight for your freedom but not being understand due to a difference in language.-Vumiliya V.
+One facet of history that Amistad gets right was the transatlantic journey undertaken by slave ships known as the Middle Passage, and the indescribable horror that awaited those being transported within the timbers of those aforementioned vessels. Depictions of the Middle Passage were not unheard of in American media by 1997, though they were undoubtedly uncommon (Roots, which came out in 1977, is the only prior depiction that comes to mind as being widely-viewed). Not only is it important for depictions of the Middle Passage to be spread by films like Amistad, it is crucial that they actually be ACCURATE. Based on the autobiography of Olaudah Equiano, it seems safe to suggest that the depiction of what occurred on ships like the Tecora was an accurate one, and portrays the inhuman manner in which Africans being transported were treated with, as well as the high mortality rate amongst the enslaved. -John M.
+I think that Amistad works very well as a secondary source. Maybe some viewers actually were led to believe the filmmakers got every single detail right, but for the most I would assume they know the filmmakers are going to take creative liberties. Even if they exaggerated the characters and scenes, it is still a very valuable film in bringing awareness to this compelling story. It may not have been able to capture all the complexities and brutality of what happened, but it gave the viewer some insight into what the slaves had to go through. Amistad was able to do that as well with detailed contexts and scenes to get a feel for what the atmosphere was like. One of the smaller details I noticed during one of the courtroom scenes was Cinque starting to sweat and even freak out during the session. This seemed to me signs of PTSD, most likely from all the white men around him, reminding him of the terrible things that he had to go through. Seeing that showed me that the makers of this film did give a lot of effort into trying to get the story right. While they weren’t perfect, overall Amistad is a great secondary source for people to have to introduce them to this part of history. -Matt S.
+I think that the Amistad movie portrayed a lot of the history accurately. Most of the characters were real and did things that the real character would have done. It also shined light on the court scenes that transpired after what had happened on the Amistad. I think that they did what they could, while taking some liberties to try and make the movie more exciting or interesting when they thought they had to. - Kazu Ferris
 ====== Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ======
@@ Line 41: / Line 51: @@
 A big thing that I noticed while watching this film was that it seriously overestimated the impact the Amistad would have in the continuance of slavery in America. While it's true that the case gained national attention due to the nature of it, there was little to no fear of civil war erupting within the states because of the case. In the movie however, there are constant mentions of the fear of civil war. Another thing was the character of Theodore Joadson who was one that was completely made up for the film.In this way, the film does a poor job of depicting race relations due to the fact that Joadson, and other black people excluding the Mende, were seen within the courtroom when it's all too likely that they would have been kept out of court proceedings. Another thing that stuck out to me was the campaigning of Martin Van Buren for president early on in the movie. While I'm not quite sure when exactly this change took place, I do know that during this time period in question openly/publicly campaigning was something that wasn't done by candidates due to the fact that it looked bad. -Vumiliya V.
+One of the biggest historical inaccuracies I saw in La Amistad is the amount of women and children on the ship. Historically it was mainly men who were brought over since they were valued higher since they would be stronger workers. I think they did this to make the audience more invested in the atrocities that were happening since having families strikes closer to home. This aligns with the film’s general tendency to exaggerate the moral emotional stakes of the story. Doing things like condensing and simplifying the legal battles. And creating a main protagonist out of Cinque to make the audience have someone to focus on. -Ryan K.
+Amistad seemed to me the most historically accurate films out of the ones we watched so far. That being said, it still had its inaccuracies and exaggerations. For starters, Cinque was shown in the movie as the strong leader who gave tons of hope and ideas of freedom to the rest of the people there with him. While this was partially true, it is known from accounts that his traits were exaggerated to portray him as one of if not the protagonist in the film. Another inaccuracy was Joadson, the character played by Morgan Freeman. Joadson was a fictional character used in the film. He was used to represent all the black abolitionists back when this happened. Furthermore, the way Spielberg showed their victory in court made it seem as though this was a major stepping stone in stopping slavery in the U.S. It was a big help in stopping the slave trade and giving help to the abolitionist movement. However, it didn't do anything in stopping slavery domestically. -Matt S.
+The movie portrays Cinque as a sort of character that many people might have believed him to be. However, it is not known if he was truly like this or not. I am sure they did this to make the movie more entertaining in some way, but it is not truly historically accurate in this sense. -Kazu Ferris
 ====== How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ======
@@ Line 46: / Line 65: @@
 The film takes liberties in the portrayal of the Mende people and especially Joseph Cinque for dramatic effect. For example, he is shown with a very exaggerated and intensely aggressive personality and we have no idea if he had any of the characteristics or outbursts depicted in the movie. This portrayal is not based on fact, and not much is even known about Cinque. These choices cause the Mende people as a whole to appear wild and somewhat uncivilized. The film also shows President Van Buren almost non-autonomous and not able to make his own decisions. His advisor is played up as the villain who directs him on how to proceed. This removes the responsibility off of Van Buren, who in actuality, made these decisions and chose to pursue this path. -Jennifer
+Amistad seems to be a film that takes certain liberties pertaining to the facts of the events surrounding the case on which the movie is based, though whether or not these diversions from the truth are justified or not is a different matter. For instance, in the Tappan letter, the abolitionists states that the Africans had not been shackled (‘manacled’, as he puts it in archaic terms) since their being placed in American custody. However, throughout the movie, Spielberg depicts the Africans in chains and ragged clothing; a depiction that is contrary to Tappan’s firsthand account. That being said, I believe that this is an inaccuracy that is perfectly reasonable, and had a particular use for its inclusion. The utilization of chains provides a more striking visual representation for the lack of freedoms that the Africans had, making it all the more powerful for the audience when they are finally unshackled. An instance where certain historical liberties being taken might have been detrimental to the surrounding historical narrative comes from the film’s rather obvious utilization of the well-documented “white savior” trope. The film places an excessive emphasis on the fictionalized version of Baldwin. For instance, it portrays him as the one who reached out to John Quincy Adams, rather than the Africans themselves. This distortion of the facts of the case takes the initiative away from the Africans in freeing themselves - an initiative which they very much possessed and utilized. - John M.
 ====== How does this movie work as a primary source about the time in which it was made? ======
@@ Line 69: / Line 92: @@
  -Jennifer
+This movie is important because it shows the brutality while also showing the legal side of history. It tells a story of human rights and the battle for it. Also, it shows how it was about whether they were acquired legally or illegally, taking away from other important things like their human rights. It also shows how important legal battles such as these, and other such big cases, can affect history up and down the country. Ultimately, *La Amistad* highlights the power of the legal system to both challenge and uphold justice in pivotal moments of history.-Ryan K.