Steven Spielberg proves to his audience yet again his mastery and skill in the cinematic arts in his 2012 historical drama, Lincoln. Spielberg's directing experience, accompanied by a convincing portrayal of Abraham Lincoln, the sixteenth president of the United States, by Daniel Day-Lewis provides the people with a film stocked with emotion, suspense, and triumph. However, as with most films based on historical events and figures, Spielberg takes certain liberties in his role as a director to adjust with the accuracy of that history. These adjustments lead to a series of questions worth pondering. Even though a director like Spielberg or script-writer like Tony Kushner, the script-writer for Lincoln, has the ability to make these changes, is it necessary? Will changing certain facts of a film make that film more entertaining for the audience, even though some of its authenticity gets lost in transition? A bigger question would be if these changes will distort the audiences comprehension of the history. As a result, these changes tell a different story for its viewers. Several inaccuracies in Lincoln include the representatives of Connecticut and their role in the final vote, the exaggerated role of Lincoln's wife Mary Todd Lincoln, the use of the Gettysburg Address early in the film, and Lincoln's true intentions as president in passing the Thirteenth Amendment. One major difference between the film and the history concerns the voting of the amendment. If passed, the Thirteenth Amendment would call for an immediate end to slavery throughout the entire country. In the film, as the representatives cased their votes of yea or nay, two of the four representatives from the state of Connecticut voted against the amendment. As a resu... ... middle of paper ... ...s true that some changes do contribute to the message of the film and the overall enjoyment of the audience. But it is also important to take into account the possible side-effects of these seemingly minor changes. Sometimes the smallest change can lead to the public viewing a person in a profoundly different way, like today's perception of Lincoln as a courageous pioneer rather than a president simply fulfilling his oath to serve, protect, and preserve the status of the Untied States as Commander in Chief. Despite these changes, Spielberg did not disappoint with this film. Lincoln, in spite of its flaws, effectively accomplished what it set out to do, which was to entertain the audience and highlight the importance slavery played in America's history and the historical impact of the Thirteenth Amendment on a country of the people, by the people, and for the people.
Frederick Douglass goes on a journey to help stop slavery. Anti-Slavery movement. February 1818 – February 20, 1895. Frederick Douglass, Anna Murray, African American people, Slaves. To stop the people from being slaves. Frederick Douglass Cuts through the Lincoln Myth to Consider the Man. Frederick Douglass. 1849. Ireland, Britain, United States. Learning to be equal with others. In Frederick Douglass “Cuts through the Lincoln myth to consider the man”; he motivates his/her intended audience during the Anti-Slavery Movement by using the rhetorical devices or tone and imagery.
In the final analysis, the north refused to impose it. “Massachusetts even called for its nullification, stealing an argument from John C. Calhoun. Northerners claimed the law was unfair. The flagrant violation of the Fugitive Slave Law sets the scene for the tempest that emerged later in the decade.” Yet at this point in time, Americans anticipated that the fragile peace would succeed.
The passage of the 13th amendment seems simple. Lincoln declared the emancipation proclamation and set the majority of the slaves free. General opinion was already shifting toward abolition and a bill like the 13th amendment seemed inevitable. This is the well-known but extremely overgeneralized view of national abolition. Leonard L. Richards attempts to correct this general perspective in Who freed the slaves?. He argues that abolitionists were actually fighting an uphill battle throughout the civil war. Not only was there opposition from Democrats, the majority of Republicans was also against abolition. This only changed near the end of the civil war with countless endeavors to change public opinion and heavy secret bargaining.
important event and part of slavery that should have been shown in the movie. Even though I
Wills did a great job in this book by showing the importance of equality, the unity, and freedom that Lincoln had created among the people. "This is the belief of Lincoln--- that the Declaration is a pledge "to all people of all colors everywhere."'2 Slavery is wrong. We cannot own human beings and have them as slaves, and should not be kings over them. If you own certain things, how can you free it? You can't free property; you can't free your clothes. Those are just items, people are not meant to be owned. It is point out to the entire nation and he even pointed it out even further towards both the North and the South.
There is no secret that films in the genre of biopic can often stretch the truth. These types of movies are frequently mere depictions of myth that is loosely based on factual accounts rather than being accurate representations of history. Many ethical dilemmas arise from these circumstances. Among those are the damaging representations that may skew a viewer’s perception of how history may have actually played out. Should filmmakers warn viewers that certain historical details of their forthcoming motion picture have been changed for the purpose of film? What are the editorial ethics when important details pertaining to vital pieces of history are left on the proverbial cutting room floor? The brand new film “Cesar Chavez” does a lot of work to bring about the often untold story of the California migrant farmworkers labor activism and organizing, yet in the process, manages to erase the pertinent contributions of the Filipino who many consider as the pioneers of these movements.
As Abraham Lincoln was president “On February 1, 1865, President Abraham Lincoln approved the Joint Resolution of Congress submitting the proposed amendment to the state legislatures.” President Lincoln was a big and a decisive part of ratifying the 13th Amendment.” (Our Documents). The passing of the 13th Amendment was one of the most influential Amendments passed in the U.S. ended slavery, but African Americans still did not have the same rights that white Americans did. With the help of the 16th president Abraham Lincoln the ratification of the 13th Amendment would not exist. After the passing of this document the African Americans did not have the same freedom the white Americans did but they had a lot of freedom. Without this document where would the United States be?
Twelve Years A Slave is a story that opens up a new window into the world of slavery. It shows the real colors of slavery, as well as some inaccuracies to help maintain an outstanding plot. This is why this story has several ways to view it. I will show a few of my views over the next couple paragraphs that show the truths, inaccuracies, relativity. and things to learn from this movie.
Dilorenzo, Thomas J.. The Real Lincoln: a new look at Abraham Lincoln, his agenda, and an unnecessary war. Roseville, Calif: Prima, 2002
...ctual roles, or adding in exciting events that revise the storyline. These changes are beneficial to producers because they engage a large audience and generate massive profits. In contrast, they do not always have a positive effect on viewers. Although they are entertaining which is an important aspect of theatre culture, they also are often misguiding. Many spectators take movies at face value, without considering that they may not exactly qualify as primary source material. Even when an historical event is fabricated to teach or enhance a moral message, it still doesn’t compensate for bending the truth. Moviegoer’s may have a positive experience and gain some skewed historical perspective, perhaps better than what they knew before the movie, but they loose out on the truth and therefore, a genuine understanding of the historical event, and its significance.
Abraham Lincoln’s original views on slavery were formed through the way he was raised and the American customs of the period. Throughout Lincoln’s influential years, slavery was a recognized and a legal institution in the United States of America. Even though Lincoln began his career by declaring that he was “anti-slavery,” he was not likely to agree to instant emancipation. However, although Lincoln did not begin as a radical anti-slavery Republican, he eventually issued his Emancipation Proclamation, which freed all slaves and in his last speech, even recommended extending voting to blacks. Although Lincoln’s feeling about blacks and slavery was quite constant over time, the evidence found between his debate with Stephen A. Douglas and his Gettysburg Address, proves that his political position and actions towards slavery have changed profoundly.
It was a delicate balancing act because it defined the war as a war against slavery, not the war between the northern and southern people, and at the same time, it protected Lincoln’s position with conservatives, and there was no turning back. Thousands of slaves had “voted with their feet” for emancipation; blacks and their white allies celebrated with praise songs. Another piece of evidence, the Thirteenth Amendment, proved that Lincoln deserved the title “The Great Emancipator”. Lincoln came to see black soldiers as “the great available and yet unavailable force for restoring the Union”. African American people helped secure equal rights for their people.
Saying 12 Years a Slave is a realistic film is an understatement. According to the British film director Steve McQueen, some people did not want the film made. He stated, “Some people want to close their eyes on some subjects. They don’t want to look behind them.” (Aspden 5). Others feel there have been too many films been made about slavery already, such as Roots, Django Unchained, and Amistad. 12 Years a Slave is a true story that needs to be told. In this writer’s opinion, it depicts the abuse of slavery in the United States with more intensity than any other film previously made.
Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is a film which combines the fantastic with the realistic, and attempts to satisfy both people’s desire for the real story and an adventure. Opening with young Abraham Lincoln’s mother’s death, the audience becomes aware of the supernatural and the role vampires play in Antebellum America. Creatures of the night rule the South in Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter and manipulate politics to sate their hunger for human blood. The story follows the young Lincoln as he trains in the ways of vampire hunting and sets out on a quest to avenge his mother’s death and decide the fate of the nation. Like any good vampire movie, nearly every scene focuses on some epic fight or action to keep the audience riveted. The movie’s
Lincoln is a riveting movie on the true events leading up to the ratification of the Thirteenth Amendment and the end of the Civil War. Lincoln is directed by Steven Spielberg and Daniel Day-Lewis starred in the movie as Abraham Lincoln. Lincoln is based on the book Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln by Doris Kearns Goodwin. Lincoln was nominated for twelve Academy Awards. Daniel Day-Lewis won Best Actor in a Motion Picture at the Golden Globe Awards. Despite all the good praise for Lincoln, there was still some criticisms about the Lincoln by movie critics. The movie critics claimed the movie was not completely accurate and was exaggerated. However, even historians agreed Lincoln was a thought provoking movie that would make people look for more information on the life of Abraham Lincoln.