Sunday, December 9, 2007
Amistad (Sorry Matt and James!)
The film I have chosen to write about this week is Steven Spielberg’s Amistad (1997), it is about “an 1839 slave rebellion aboard a Spanish ship that is travelling towards the Northeast coast of America. The majority of the story focuses on the trial that took place after the ship arrived in America.” The website I have selected http://www.uni.uiuc.edu/og/arts-entertainment/2007/12/dvd-review-spielbergs-a discusses quite a personal review of what the writer feels is badly represented within the film. I found the website quite detailed, but briefly in describing the major flaws with the movie in how for example, the creation of the character Theodore Joadson (Morgan Freeman), was made up to reflect the abolitionists viewpoints of this time, even though there were many actual, real people they could have used. The website is easy to read and doesn’t get too in depth, as it is a DVD review. I think that the main flaw with the film is the negative representation of the Africans which could have been discussed at the beginning rather than at the end of the review as that is a major issue of bad representation. I think that the website offers useful facts and advise upon viewing the film to “not watch “Amistad” as a reliable display of what went on in the trial; instead, watch it cautiously and follow it up with some reading.”
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Unfortunately, I haven't seen this film. I have heard quite a bit of praise regarding this film, however. I cannot speak to the images or actors of this film itself, but mostly from what I learned from this website. From this website there is a link to watch the theatrical trailer- I found the trailer very compelling. Especially how it opened with white text on a black backgroud, "freedom is not given... It is our right at birth... But there are moments in history when it must be taken."
The author of this website mentions that like most historical films, a common pitfall is accuracy. This is very true but, after all, that is what makes the movies entertaining. People bend the truth and "spice things up" for entertainment factor. Unfortunately, that is what society has come to. A movie can hardly be appreciated for its historical accuracy without being criticised for being boring. Sadly, the most horrific parts to this movie, the treatment of black slaves, were not bent or fictionalised.
I think this website might have been a harsh review of this film. Although, as I have not seen it I cannot say for sure. I wonder if his opinion is shared by many?
I feel that even though the film is not completely accurate it is very informative and depicts the brutality of slavery excellently. The film covers many different aspects of slavery, the middle passage, issues of identity, brutality etc. I feel this web site is a bit too critical of the film, i felt it was an excellent piece of work by Spielberg. This web site seems to be dissapointed with every aspect of the film. A lot of this web site seems to have stupid expectations of the film. If everything the site says was included int the film it would be about 6 hours long! The only part of the site i agree with is when they say the ending should have had a visual image to accompany the writing. I feel this would have truely made the viewer feel for the characters, and see how truely dreadful these peoples lives were.
The film ‘Amistad’ should not be used as a reliable resource of history. Although it does create an image of how the slaves were kept and treated, the plot does not represent the true occurrences of the situation. Although, the film is quite entertaining and an enjoyable watch.
I can see the reasons why the web site is critical of the picture, as it is a much edited version of actual events, but I feel that the website is harsh in the way that it condemns the film. It was released as a motion picture, not an educational history account, so the director is going to create a scene that is going to entertain the audience. The article about the film seems to bypass this concept, concentrating on the factual mistakes that it made. I’m sure that if the writer of the film wished to write it purely based on facts then they would, the website makes out that it was an ignorant, money-making mistake.
I too haven't seen this film, but I found the website interesting to read. I think the review opens really well, using words such as Gruesome and Inhumane especially in such big bold font really grabs your attention. I thought the person who wrote the review had some interesting points to say. I'm really intrigued by his idea that people would watch this film to learn about history. In my mind you watch a film for entertainment, it maybe based on a historical event however it will never be completely acurate, i agree with Katie that it would just be boring if it had no dramatisation. I can think of many other films which are not historically correct, take the blockbuster movie Troy for example. In some ways this review has made me want to see this film, I am now interested to see how these Africans are portrayed. I do not know how truely gruesome this film is, i can imagine historically it would have be pretty discusting and practically inhumane, I would be quite interested to see Amistad.
Post a Comment