For our project we created an Adobe Spark page. Enjoy!
https://spark.adobe.com/page/F6qtIam7L8Z1p/
Posts
1776
Synopsis of the movie (Christopher Plummer)
1776 follows the life of John Adams during the great debate of whether or not the 13 colonies should become their own country, separate from the British Empire. We open on the 380th meeting of the second continental conference on June seventh, of 1776. The great debate begins on the occasion of Richard Henry Lee getting the written proposal to officially cut ties with the British monarchy. Although many congressmen wanted to vote, it was postponed by the proposal of Pennsylvania and the support of Rhode Island, to the beginning of July. John Dickinson, a delegate from Pennsylvania, deducted this issue was too important to have separation between the delegates, and called for an unanimous vote for action to take place. This action was seconded which aggravated many, especially Adams. The congress came to the agreement that a vote will only commence once a formal declaration is written. Many names were thrown out as to who the author should be, and it was decided it should be Thomas Jefferson. During the writing process, we see many relationships between the committee members and their female companions. John Adams speaks to his wife, Abigail, yet it is implied this communication occurred through letter writing. Jefferson is visited by his wife Martha (in person), who also shares an awkward dance with Adams and Franklin. The declaration was completed at the end of June; however, great debates were argued such as British relations, new names of the country, and slavery. Slavery, and the rights/citizenship of the slaves, was arguably the issue that separated the congress more than anything else. On July 2nd, the voting of the congress occurs. New York decides to abstain and South Carolina only agreed to vote “yea” when Adams agreed to their terms of slavery. The decision comes down to Pennsylvania, the home of Dickinson which contradicted Adams the most. Two of the three delegates agree to the terms of the document, which causes Dickinson to leave the community. The vote passed 12 to zero and independence was officially adopted on July fourth, 1776. The closing scene shows all the members of the second constitutional congress signing their names below The Declaration of Independence.
Genre (Christopher Plummer)
I believe the genre of the film 1776 to be a musical comedy, with aspects of a romance. Many times throughout the movie, the actors breakout into song and dance in order to express their internal emotions and conflicts. Because show tunes play multiple times during the same story, we have the ability to deem this movie a musical. Many characters, although this story occurs in the 1700’s, are defined by the means of their usage of modern humor. Some forms of comedy I noticed were satire, sarcasm, sexual implications, and parodies. There are also many scenes that create a romantic feeling between the congressmen and their wives; however, much of the story does not revolve around these connections, so the story cannot be deemed a romance. For example, John Adams speaks to his wife, Abby, through the implied use of letters; additionally, Thomas Jefferson is visited by his wife, Martha, to be motivated to finish the declaration. Combining musical numbers, repeated human, and brief scenes of passion, I can conclude the genre of 1776 to be a musical comedy with aspects of romance.
Narrative Approach (Christopher Plummer)
The story of the United States claiming its independence from the British being told through a musical comedy film, creates an unrealistic narrative. The story may have details that are historically accurate, yet the audience knows historical figures did not sing their emotions, communicate over 300 miles, nor use twentieth century humor. It was likely the writer and director of the production decided to include these aspects in order to make the film more appealing to audiences. If producers can make money, it is unlikely they concern themselves with everything being historically accurate. Because all these techniques make the story seem fictional, it may negatively affect the viewers. The spectators may perceive this movie as fictional to the point of not separating what actually happened in 1776 and what was invented for the purpose of 1776.
1776 vs. John Adams (Christopher Plummer)
Although the motion picture 1776 and the second episode of John Adams tell the same story of the second continental congress, the genres of the spectacles differ greatly. 1776 is a musical comedy, while John Adams is a historical drama. Because the story is told through different lenses, the plot points, characterizations and overall mood of the productions have some similarities, yet many differences. The similarities are found between the timelines of important, historical, events and the personalities of some main characters. Both stories begin with John Adams disagreeing with the productivity of the congress, and feeling as if nothing is getting accomplished. The date of the official vote on the issue is postponed, congress calls for a unanimous vote, New York abstains, South Carolina is persuaded by Adams agreeing to their terms of slavery, and the votes passes (twelve to zero) in early July. 1776 and John Adams both portray Adams as a persuasive public speaker, Dickinson as Adams’ rival and opposite, and Abigail as Adams’ loving wife. Besides these surface level observations, similarities are hard to locate. 1776 never shows John Adams as a caring father who works on the plantations to support his family, George Washington as a present figure for the debate, Abigail taking care of her house and family with other priorities besides her husband, nor Benjamin Franklin as a serious individual. The fact that John Adams is a drama allowed the director to add in scenes that would not be appropriate for a comedy. For example, viewers see the gory aftermath of a tragic disease sweeping across the colonies, as well as Adams’ family becoming “vaccinated” with a knife and injection of puss from a patient on the verge of death. We also see individuals have deep discussions about topics that may have been too serious for a light-hearted musical. For example, Abigail and John discuss women and slave representation in the constitution. Slavery was addressed in 1776; however, the issue was brushed over and was not given significant attention. Similarly, women’s suffrage was never discussed between the characters of 1776. Overall, the mood of these movies conflicted greatly and gave two different interpretations of the same story. The satire and humor of 1776 create a humorous and enjoyable experience for the viewer; however, many important historical details are not explored as they should have been. On the other hand, the dramatic nature of John Adams opens the audience to deeper issues the citizens of the colonies faced and, arguably, a more accurate representation of the second continental congress.
Critical Appraisal of 1776 (Maddie Maurais)
The overarching plot of the film 1776 involves showcases the events leading up to the signing of the Declaration of Independence on July 4th. Overall, the film does use quite a lot of historically accurate elements to showcase the events leading up to July 4th. However, the actual signing of the Declaration of Independence is not depicted accurately.
Most Americans were taught that the actual signing of the Declaration of Independence occurred on July 4th. However, according to many historians, the Declaration of Independence was not fully signed until August 2nd. The film 1776 also leads viewers to believe that the signing of the Declaration of Independence happened on July 4th. Instead, on July 2nd members of Congress voted to become independent from Great Britain then on July 4th is when the members of Congress approved the wording of the Declaration of Independence. However, all members of Congress did not sign the document until August 2nd. The film instead combined the events that actually occurred on July 4th and August 2nd. The film reiterates the “national myth” of the Declaration of Independence being signed on July 4th. The writer of the film Peter Stone probably decided to depict this event occurring on July 4th because this date is significant to Americans. Plus, the pacing of the film would have been elongated if they had all members of Congress sign the document by August 2nd.
In addition, to the inaccuracies depicting the actual signing of the Declaration of Independence, some other smaller events are historically inaccurate in the film. One is that members of Congress did not walk out in protest of the anti-slavery clause. Apparently, members of Congress from both the south and north were in favor of removing the anti-slavery clause from the draft of the Declaration of Independence. In the film, Martha Jefferson is heavily involved in the plots with Thomas Jefferson and John Adams. However, according to historians, Martha Jefferson was not present in Philadelphia during this time. Another small inaccuracy is that there were a lot more delegates present in Congress than shown in the film.
Despite the film having some major inaccuracies, there are still many historically accurate elements of the film. Firstly, some of the dialogue in the film was taken from actual letters sent by members of Congress. In addition, the debates regarding slavery, the role of government, independence from Great Britain and etc., were heavily debated amongst members of Congress during this time.
Even though the events that took place on July 4th are not shown entirely accurately in the film, the film still does a good job portraying the thoughts and feeling that the members dealt with when voting for independence and approving the final draft of the Declaration of Independence.
ROLLINS, P. (Ed.). (2003). The Columbia Companion to American History on Film: How the
Movies Have Portrayed the American Past. New York: Columbia University Press.
doi:10.7312/roll11222
Kauffmann, S. (1972). Stanley Kauffman on films. New Republic, 167(22), 22–35.
http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy.lib.ohio-state.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=f3h&AN=10240680&site=ehost-live
McGilligan, P. (1977). THOMAS JEFFERSON STILL SURVIVES or Will the Reel Revolution Please Stand Up?
Velvet Light Trap: A Critical Journal of Film & Television, 17, 57–64.
John Dickinson vs. John Adams (Lauren Broderick) (https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/985444.pdf?ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_search_solr_cloud%2Fcontrol&refreqid=fastly-default%3A09211cf22a6cc9132cfc5b3dc8c921bd)
This article provides a background of John Dickinson and what John Adams’ opinion was of the Pennsylvania delegate before meeting him in Congress. Dickinson had built up a well-known reputation because of his Letters from a Farmer in Pennsylvania series that opposed taxes levied on the colonists. However through letters Adams wrote that are included in the piece, Adams’ opinion began to change and a rivalry quickly formed. In 1776, we saw Dickinson as the biggest opponent to Adams, but we do not get the full history. The film does make note of Dickinson being a proprietor – including a song about it – and that it fueled his opposition to voting for independence; however Dickinson was not totally against voting for independence in the future. As laid out in this reading, Dickinson’s major arguments for postponement were wanting to settle land disputes in Pennsylvania through the crown before cutting ties and confirming commitment from France for aid. Therefore, there is a discrepancy in the character Dickinson portrays in 1776 as a never-wavering Englishman and his true arguments for postponement. Nonetheless, as shown in the movie Dickinson did choose to fight for independence.
Extract of a Letter from Maryland, February 6 (Lauren Broderick)
This extract from a letter published in the Providence Gazette, shows the revere that people felt at the time for Thomas Paine’s famous pamphlet, Common Sense. The writer says that there are only three people in his county that do not approve of the piece! In the film, Adams speaks of how the feelings of the common people were different from the Congressional delegates because commoners were reading and agreeing with Common Sense. When comparing this primary source to the film, we can see that there was much excitement surrounding the idea of separation from England in regular American society as John Adams mentioned.
The Role of South Carolina in the First Continental Congress (Lauren Broderick)
While this analysis of South Carolina’s delegates is from the First Continental Congress, we are able to understand the background better for the Second Continental Congress setting of 1776 especially because all five of these delegates returned. In the piece, John Adams’ opinions of the delegates are given, including his distaste for Edward Rutledge. The film can only focus on a few delegates so we are unable to see the full five member South Carolina cohort. However as described in the piece, the Rutledge brothers were known for their conservatism and general agreement with Pennsylvania. As such, one of the harder aspects of the plot through point for me to follow was South Carolina as Edward Rutledge seemed to speak for the entire colony. After reading this source, it becomes more clear as the Rutledges represented the conservative mindset showcased in the film, while the other South Carolina delegates enjoyed working with the Massachusetts men. Another important note is that the South Carolinians staged a walkout in the First Continental Congress to force a compromise on nonexportation; we then see in 1776 that the Southerners walkout of Congress because of their stance on slavery. Moreover, throughout the film it is evident that South Carolina is the power player in the Southern colonies and this piece further emphasizes that proving how the Carolinians utilized this power to force compromises. The prominence most of the South Carolina delegates held during their time in Philadelphia is noted and sets us up for how they would return for the Second Continental Congress.
Signing of the Declaration of Independence (National Geographic) (William Johnson)
I found this article detailing the signing of the Declaration of Independence extremely relevant for assessing and analyzing 1776. The article does a fantastic job of detailing the true events of the signing, which shows that despite many of its inaccuracies, 1776 does a good job of educating its viewers on the historic moment. One key similarity I noticed was the article’s statement “The full Congress then began debating the declaration, making substantial editorial revisions but leaving mostly untouched the soaring rhetoric of Jefferson’s opening paragraphs” (NATGEO). 1776 does a phenomenal job of displaying how daunting the revision process was. Delegates from all the colonies are seen sparring with Jefferson about particular rhetoric or offensive sections. Eventually, a visually exasperated John Adams exclaims “How long is this piddling to go on? We have been here for three full days. We have endured by my count eighty-five separate changes and the removal of close to four-hundred words. Now would you whip it and beat it till you break its spirit? I tell you that document is a masterful expression of the American mind” (1776). Although historically such an outburst may not have taken place, the scene works to show the audience the cumbersome difficulties that the Second Continental Congress went through.
The article also includes a primary source that I felt was very important for analyzing 1776. Remembering the events many years later, Benjamin Rush recalled the “pensive and awful silence which pervaded the house when we were called up, one after another, to the table of the President of Congress,” to sign “what was believed by many at that time to be our own death warrants” (Rush). Due to its status as a comedy, 1776 utterly fails at capturing the mood of the signing. As Benjamin Rush describes it, the scene was quite austere and somber. The men recognized the gravitas and finality of the situation. They were also well aware of the danger that accompanied open conflict with the current world hegemon. In 1776, the men were cracking jokes and laughing prior to signing. They do not possess the same level of awareness that the founding fathers had. This inaccuracy does not detract from the film, as it is attempting to tell the story as a comedy, meaning artistic liberties had to be taken in order to remain consistent with the overall theme.
National Geographic Society. “Signing of the Declaration of Independence.” National Geographic Society, 30 Dec. 2019, www.nationalgeographic.org/article/signing-declaration-independence/.
The Witch: A New England Folktale
This semi-realistic supernatural horror period piece rose to fame after its initial release at the Sundance Film Festival on January 27, 2015. With a run-time of 93 minutes, the film was both written and directed by Robert Eggers and ultimately grossed $40 million, ten times its budget. It stars three experienced actors: Anya Taylor-Joy, Ralph Ineson, and Kate Dickie. The film is widely acknowledged for its ability to frighten its audience while also conveying many themes of its historical setting.
Historical Accuracy
Overall, the historical aspects of this film may be considered historically accurate. In broad terms, it highlights many of the major, commonly known themes of 17th century New England, including witchcraft, religious hysteria, and parental authority. Robert Eggers also put great effort into making the film’s details as true to the time period as well, such as only using natural and/or candlelight while filming.
Creation of the film’s screenplay began with four years of research, Eggers referencing as many sources as he was able to, including expert historians and primary sources. The characters’ language was based on the grammar of these primary sources, bolstered by an all-English cast. Experts were also consulted and employed during production, including a professional carpenter and costume designer, both specialized in the Jacobian era. Unfortunately, not all details were under Egger’s control, otherwise it could be argued the film would have been more authentic in its portrayal. For example, Eggers was limited by the film’s budget, which led to filming in Canada rather than New England.
Plot Summary
Thomasin (played by Anya Taylor-Joy), the eldest child of the family, is continuously accused of witchcraft by her family.
Set in 1630s New England, the film focuses on a family of seven: father William (Ralph Ineson), mother Katherine (Kate Dickie), eldest daughter Thomasin (Anya Taylor-Joy), eldest son Caleb, fraternal twins Jonas and Mercy, and new baby boy, Samuel. The film opens with William questioning the leaders of Plymouth Colony, saying they are being too lenient for his conservative Puritan beliefs, ultimately leading to the family being exiled and moving to a secluded area far from town.
While under his sister Thomasin’s care, baby Samuel is kidnapped and later murdered by a witch living in the nearby forest. Katherine blames her eldest daughter for the family’s loss and incites suspicion among the children that Thomasin is a witch. Though Thomasin denies their claims of her supernatural ways, her seeming level of guilt only grows when her brother Caleb goes missing. The pair had traveled into the forest, were separated, and Caleb encountered the witch. He shows up later that evening, naked and delirious. The family determines he has been possessed and are trying to save him when he breaks from a coma-like state to scream his love for Christ, spit up an apple, and die.
William feels he has no choice now but to also accuse Thomasin of witchcraft, who in turn accuses Jonas and Mercy, saying they have been conversing with the family’s male goat, Black Philip. When the twins are unable to recite their prayers, William no longer knows who to trust, leading him to lock all three children in the goat stable for the night. That night, the detainees woke to see an old woman (presumably the witch) drinking from their nanny goat. In the morning, William sees the goat house destroyed, goats dead, twins missing. Thomasin is on the ground, unconscious, covered in blood when she wakes to witness Black Philip murder her father. This incites Katherine to attack Thomasin, blaming her for all the family’s misfortunes. The scene ends with Thomasin killing her mother in self-defense.
Alone, with nothing left to lose, Thomasin entreats Black Philip to speak to her as he did with the twins. Black Philip then does so, transforms into a man, has Thomasin sign her name in his book, and leads her into the forest where she joins a group of witches holding a ceremony. The film closes with Thomasin and the witches laughing and levitating over a bonfire.
Family Dynamics
The family (from left to right): Jonas, Mercy, Katherine, William, Caleb and Thomasin.
Throughout the whole film, the themes of gender roles and family structure are prominent and integral to the story line. Katherine and William are both parental figures, yet they have very different roles in the life of the family. Katherine is never really seen outside of the homestead, and also seems to have a more direct role in raising the children. Katherine’s role can be seen as more in control of the domestic tasks. In contrast, William will do things outside of the house, like hunting and trading, making him less concerned with the day-to-day running of the house and raising the children.
As the oldest children, Thomasin and Caleb have responsibilities mirroring the parent of their respective gender. Thomasin arguably works the most in the family and is seen doing housework, caring for animals, watching the twins, doing laundry, etc. Caleb tends to follow around William and assist him in whatever he is doing, typically hunting. The twins are both too young to be of any real use, so regardless of gender, they really do not have responsibilities.
Overall, it is very clear that this is a very patriarchal family and William is the one seen as the head of the household. This aligns with the culture of the time period; men were seen as the one who had the power, and women were expected to care for the kids and house. Women did not generally have a lot of power. Throughout the movie Katherine accuses Thomasin of various things (stealing a cup, being a witch, etc.) however, Thomasin doesn’t really get in trouble for these things. The reason she never gets in trouble is William speaks up and is on her side, once again showing that he is the final word, not Katherine.
One example of the power structure in the movie is when the parents are discussing sending Thomasin away to work for another family in town. Thomasin is old enough and her mother believes she is causing trouble in their family. In a situation like this, as a child, Thomasin has no control over her fate, it is in her parents’ hands. If her parents decide this is what will happen, she can’t really change their minds. Thomasin has no autonomy in this situation and truly is at the will of the adults of the family.
In discussing gender roles and norms in The Witch, it is important to note that this movie primarily follows only one family and not necessarily generalizable to the rest of the population. The only time anyone outside of the family is seen is the opening scene of the banishment. Even in this scene only men are seen talking, which agrees with the theme of a patriarchal society. Additionally, in this scene only William is spoken to and the rest of the family is ignored. This interaction is brief, but it helps to set a foundation for the gender roles and patriarchy seen in the rest of the movie.
Witchcraft
Twins Mercy (left) and Jonas (right) with the family’s male goat, Black Philip.
The elements of witchcraft in this film were moments of possession, rituals and sacrifice, and symbolism in the form of animals. The fear of Satan and witchcraft was very real during the time period this movie took place. The first hint to any witch in this film was when baby Samuel is stolen by the witch, but only the audience knows this, the family is left to assume the child was taken by wolves. Though suspicion that something sinister is in the woods is in everyone’s minds. The form of a witch first appeared as an old decrepit naked woman living in the woods. This witch also wore a red cape, a color often associated with the devil. Once the witch has the child it appears that she uses it to regain her youth through a sacrificial ritual. Caleb is the first to see the witch when he gets lost in the woods, except this time the witch takes a much younger more erotic form. After this the presents of witchcraft starts to pick up.
Caleb returns to the farm naked and delirious, he seems to be under some sort of spell or mysterious sickness. This is when the family starts to fall apart and they start accusing each other of witchcraft, specifically Thomasin and the twins. As Caleb suffers this mysterious sickness he wakes at various moments and speaks about witches and possession. The twins also seem to suffer from some kind of possession as they forget their prayers and double over in pain, until they become unconscious. Being unable to recite prayers was commonly believed to mean the presence of something sinister.
The symbolism of Satan comes in the form of a black goat. Having a black goat representing Satan and satanic things stems from the alleged form of Satan himself. Many times he is pictured as a man in stature but with the head and legs of a goat. Black Philip is a black goat that appears on the family’s farm and the twins Jonas and Mercy instantly become transfixed with him. Later on in the film the twins admit to Thomasin that black Philip has been talking to them, and at the end of the film when Thomasin is alone she begs black Philip to speak to her as well. When he finally does we see a form of Satan appear behind her and offer her anything she wants if she signs her name in his book. When she agrees she is led into the woods and finds a group of naked dancing women around a big fire, the film ends with Thomasin floating up into the air with the other women. There is also another animal that appears in the film as a symbol, a rabbit. There are old folklore stories that connect witches with rabbits. Some folklore claimed that witches could transform themselves into a rabbit, and as such they caused mischief. This holds true for the rabbit in this film who most likely was the witch that stole baby Samuel or one of the other witches Thomasin sees in the forest at the end.
Religion
The family begins their meal with a family prayer led by the father, William.
Religion was the biggest contributing factor in this time period and ultimately is the reason for this film. God was the only explanation in the 1600s. One of the main reasons religion was incredibly popular was that it provided a reason for the unexplained. This “explanation of everything” idea was the starting point for the development of witchcraft. Witchcraft was seen as part of the devil’s work and if you practiced witchery you were working with the devil. There was no found “cure” to this witchery and it was always punished by death. The idea that witches could exist undetectable in society increased paranoia in the public and created the obsession of getting rid of all witches from the world.
In the film, The Witch, you get an idea of how serious the fear of witchery is during this time period. The film starts off with William being convicted of prideful conceit. This is a serious sin according to The Bible, being overly prideful indicates you have forgotten that God gives us the intelligence and physical capabilities thus, you should not boast. Portraying pridefulness is punished by death, However, in this film, the family was banished for their father’s actions. This did not deter the family from the Calvinist beliefs. However, this strong belief that god predetermined who goes to the promised land ultimately led William to believe they could survive in the woods alone. He believes if his family asks for forgiveness for their sins God will grace them with survival.
As the days pass with little hope of survival throughout the winter, the paranoia and hysteria begin to take full effect. The family tries to remain strong in their beliefs however the fear of witchcraft existing in the woods begins to alter the eternal faith in god. Katherine begins the first accusations of witchery on Thomasin. She does this because she blamed Thomasin for the loss of her unbaptized new born baby. Even though Thomasin could recite her prayer this did not convince her mother she was witch-free. This accusation leads the family into a spiral.
With Caleb and the twins displaying clear signs of witchcraft the family begins to panic. God is yet turned to again in hopes to save this family. They excessively pray over Caleb and the twins’ bodies with obvious doubt in their eyes. Eventually the whole family is all affected and the faith in God is lost. The family is now perceived to be controlled by the devil and their actions take a turn for the worst. After Thomasin kills her mother, the only family member left at this point, it shows her practicing witchcraft in the woods. This presents the message of how one sin can spiral into working with the devil. This film adds to the ongoing debate of if horror films should be watched by Christians. As people argue this suggests one believes in god out of fear of the devil.
Suggestions for Relevant Reading
- An interview with the films writer and director, Robert Eggers on the research that went into the screenplay and film production
- A critical review of the film’s historical accuracies
- Primary source of an Accusation of witchcraft
- Early American Imprints, Series I: Evans 1639-1800 (accessible through the OSU library catalog)
Colonialism at the Movies
Welcome to Colonialism at the Movies, where OSU history students analyze films about US history!