History 120

The Da Vinci Code

Stephen Pierce

To summarize the movie for those who have not seen it: this movie’s plot is based on the idea that Christ married Mary Magdalene and sired a child by her, and that this proved his mortality. According to the movie, the Priory of Sion was formed to protect the evidence proving Christ’s mortality, then to reveal it at a preordained time. Their adversaries in the movie are a small sect within the Catholic Church, Opus Dei, who possess knowledge of Christ’s mortality, and who seek to destroy evidence of it to preserve the power of the Church.

The “Da Vinci Code” is a enjoyable work of fictional entertainment; however it tends to abuse history in its attempts to be believable. To borrow Lewis Black’s theory from “Man of the Year”,

Black: “TV scares me. It makes everything seem credible.”

Secret Service Agent: “Why’s that so bad?”

Black: “Well, if everything seems credible, then nothing seems credible. Y’know, TV puts everybody in those boxes, side-by-side. On one side, there’s this certifiable lunatic who says the Holocaust never happened; and next to him, is this noted, honored historian, who knows all about the Holocaust; and now there they sit, side-by-side. They look like equals! Everything they say seems to be credible! And so, as it goes on, nothing seems credible anymore. We just stop listening.”

The information presented in the movie varies from historically accurate to patently false, but both are shown, as Black says, “side-by-side”, blurring the truth. For example, the blade and chalice, by cursory Google search of several sources, are found to indeed represent male and female, as the movie suggests. However, the Priory of Sion was an association formed in France in 1956 and is NOT an ancient cult. The story is a bit long, but suffice it to say that the founder, Pierre Plantard, aspired to have himself instated as king of France. To that end, he attempted to make up a long history for the Priory, with himself as a long lost heir to the throne, even going so far as to forge historical documents. See Priory of Sion and Pierre Plantard .

The real confusion of history with this combination of truth and fiction stems from the convincing way it is presented in the movie. At the very beginning, the viewer is put in the place of the audience to which Professor Langdon is giving a lecture. This lecture is all about how history can be misinterpreted given a bias, and how one must always seek the truth. This sets up the viewer with the idea that Langdon seeks the truth, and is the viewer’s advocate for truth in the movie, that is he is “on our side”. This plays into an interesting argumentative technique that Dan Brown (author of the book) uses to lend credibility to his work. We (the viewers) are shown the movie from the point of view of the un-knowledgeable. We are made to trust Professor Langdon as our knowledgeable friend who seeks truth throughout the movie, so as he is convinced, we are convinced. Take, for example, the scene

Again, later in the movie, we are put in the position of Sophie Neveu – and again, un-knowledgeable on matters of history – and we watch the debate between Langdon and Teabing about whether or not the premise of the movie is true, that Christ was married to Mary Magdalene and fathered a child. The argument follows a progressive pattern: at first, Langdon is the ultimate skeptic, smiling condescendingly at Teabing, making counterpoints to his points; by the end, however, Langdon’s counterpoints sound like a face-saving move on his part as he grudgingly admits that he might be wrong. This is a twist on the Socratic Method of argument. As an example:

Langdon: [refering to the argument of whether or not Mary Magdalene was Jesus’ wife] “This’s just an old wive’s tale!”

Teabing: “The original one in fact.”

Langdon: “There’s virtually no imperical proof!”

Teabing: “He knows as well as I do, there’s much evidence to support it.”(speaking to Sophie)

Langdon: “Theories. There are theories.”

The stylistic elements of intensity and gritty realism play into the believability of the film. Everything in the movie is true to real life in that it is a plausible – there are no over-the-top special effects to detract from the realistic situations in the movie. The music is darkly suspenseful, and the lighting is low. Actors always seem to have looks of purposeful determination on their faces, when not otherwise occupied with lines. The movie comes of as a “find-the-hidden-treasure” (National Treasure, The Goonies, Treasure Island) with a “time-is-running-out!” feel. The level of violence also adds to the intensity.

This movie was intended for those with a cursory knowledge of history, specifically the religious history of Catholic, Christian, and Jewish faiths. There is a great deal of reference to various historical symbols (the Blade and Chalice, the Rosacrucion cross, etc.), people (Leonardo Da Vinci, Isaac Newton, Jesus Christ, Mary Magdalene), places (the Vatican, the Rose Line, Rosslyn Chapel, Newton’s Grave at Westminster Abbey), and objects (the Mona-Lisa, the Last Supper,the Holy Grail). Armed with this knowledge, the audience is able to ascertain that the objects, people and places are real, but still have to rely on the characters’ specific knowledge – or misinformation – to understand the plot.

Movie Review -Schindler’s List

The movie Schindler’s List, directed by Steven Spielberg in 1993 and based on Schindler’s Ark written by Thomas Keneally. Is based on the true story of Oskar Schindler, a Nazi Czech, who uses cheap Jewish labor to make his fortune in WW2, but is changes his motives and saves over 1000 Polish Jews from execution. Schindler’s List is based on the Holocaust in the 1940’s where Jewish followers were killed off just because of their faith to Judaism. Not only were Jewish people targeted but the gypsies and disabled as well. On May 9^th,1945 the Nazis surrendered, killing 9-18 million people.

The purpose of the movie was to educate the younger generation on how brutal the Holocaust was and to still provide a voice to the millions of people who died. It also showed that people did try to help and not everyone was bad, example Oskar Schindler. At first he was greedy and wanted fortune with hiring the Jews, but soon realized how much he could help and turned around and saved over 1000 people. I thought that it was very accurate to history and used it to its advantage. It even was in black and white to give it more of an effect.

I think this movie was intended for the younger generation that did not experience this and it was starting to become more of a history topic than a topic that needed to be remembered. I honestly think that if we didn’t have history to guide us, after 9-11 maybe something like this would of happened to Muslim people living in America? History will always repeat itself but it is up to the people to make sure that the bad doesn’t repeat itself.

The style of this movie was a Historical Drama with a little romance thrown in. I thought it was a good idea for this movie to be in the category drama so the audience could relate to the character more. By having this movie made in black and white made it more authentic to time of the holocaust. The movie had some splashes of color, that made some scenes stand out. Such as a scene with a little girl with a red jacket, and we follow her in bits of the movie, and at then end you see that red jacket being thrown with the dead bodies.

Schindler’s List was a movie to show the lives of the millions of Jew that were killed because of their religion. I thought that this movie was very close to capturing life and keeping it strong in our hearts.

A huge part of what history is is finding clues and piecing them together. Especially difficult is figuring out pieces of history from hundreds of years ago. There are always hints that lead to another and lead to another before any real important facts are discovered. National Treasure is a historical puzzle because it is several clues that are pieced together to get to the end of a treasure hunt. Ben Gates is a historical analyst who goes on a journey to piece together a mystery that has been passed down throughout his family for hundreds of years.

The overall goal of this movie is to tell the story of a hunt for a treasure that’s worth is inconceivable to even think of. In National Treasure, Ben Gates goes on a quest to find a hidden treasure that was buried somewhere underneath ‘The Charlotte’ by the group the Masons. He pieces together the clues that have been passed down through his family since the 1800’s. The first clue is that “it lies beneath The Charlotte.” They are then brought to a clue that is on the back of the Declaration of Independence, which next brings them to the Liberty Bell in New Jersey. They finally find the large treasure underneath a church in a hidden underground room. To make the search even harder, millionaire Ian Howe is trying to beat them to the treasure to claim as his own, even if it means killing anyone that gets in his way.

The writers of this movie did a great job at twisting our everyday American symbols, (the liberty bell, the Declaration of Independence, American currency), into being clues for the movie. One set of clues I found most interesting was the numbers on the back of the Declaration of Independence that linked with the Silence Dogood letters. The numbers were actually a key to decode a secret message from a group of letters Benjamin Franklin wrote to a newspaper under the name of Silence Dogood. The message, “The vision to see the treasured past, comes as the timely shadow crosses in front of the house of Pass and Stow,” leads them to the Liberty bell.
            The story behind the hidden treasure is very interesting.  The treasure was passed to different nationalities of people, including the Egyptians and Romans, for thousands of years. Its value increased every time it was stolen and taken to a new country. When the Masons got a hold of it, they decided to burry the treasure because they didn’t believe that any man could handle that amount of wealth, not even a king. They left behind a bunch of clues that would lead to the treasure so that it would not be completely forgotten.

 I think that this movie could help kids find history even more fascinating than it already is. If an adult like me found this movie to be mesmerizing, I know a kid would probably find it even better. With its rating of PG and being created by  Disney, I think it was intended for all ages and to be a movie to make anyone spellbound by history like so many of us were in our younger age.

            This movie is very much historical fiction; while there are many real historical facts and symbols, I honestly don’t believe that there is a map made of these symbols that lead to a treasure. Although they bent the truth a lot in different scenes, I think they did it for good reasons which led the viewers to think, “what if this really was true.” I googled some of the “facts” from the movie to see if they were actually true, and some of the facts really were facts. One of the clues was a group of letters written by Silence Dogood, in reality she really was the first pseudonym that Benjamin Franklin created. It was impressive how Gates was able to piece together long forgotten clues to find the treasure that our founding fathers had buried so long ago. It seemed as though this was going to be a never ending puzzle, but in the end was finally solved and like all Disney movies, had a happy ending.

In “Remember the Titians’, an African-American coach named Herman Boone is hired to guide a football team which is integrated but racially polarized. Set in Alexandria, Virginia, in 1971, Boone faces an awkward relationship from the team’s players and the assistant coach Bill Yoast, who is a local white man. Being an assistant coach under an African-American man creates a lot of tension between them. As the two men surpass their differences, they began to work together transforming the football team into a winning team. Seeing the characters going through a serious issue shows us that despite our differences, we can still work together.
The movie’s overall message is that you shouldn’t judge anyone by the color of their skin. Everyone is the same it’s there skin color is different. In the beginning of the movie, it was obvious that there were two sides-black and white. As the characters began to know one another, they slowly began to unite as one side. The process from beginning to the end is not easy and it clearly shows us that anything is possible. The goal was to show us that working together with our differences can happen by, talking to someone of a different skin color and getting to know them. Setting back hundreds of years ago, everyone knows that racism has always been a big issue and for it to be mention in a movie in today’s society is good because it is very important and it will teach us we can work together despite our skin color.

The movie sets back in 1971 where racism was a problem in each individual’s daily life. The way that the African-Americans were treated definitely shows us that people did not care for them and were always mistreated. The choices that the people have made in the movie lets us know that the African-Americans were always the victims. In the movie, you see tension when Herman Boone movies into his new neighbor while everyone is staring at him like he doesn’t belong there. This incident in particular shows us that African-Americans were always the problem and is always targeting the African-American community.

As a citizen, racism still exists in today’s society. Although the movie has a happy ending, it is not always like that. People see this awful situation in films and in real life situations and would think that this needs to stop. The intended audience for this film is for everyone from kids to adults. There is no specific age group because anyone is welcome to watch this film that teaches a strong message about race. This film is for everyone because it states a clear strong message about racism that everyone should know about.

The genre of Remember the Titans is drama and of course, sports. Seeing from an African-American and white persons eye, you see how this becomes a historically big issue.  Racism which is a serious issue is portrayed as if you were living in that time because if you were living at that time period, you will know exactly how the characters felt. The problems that the African-Americans and the whites faced are something that is realistically true. At first, they will not like each other and respect each other. As they do get to know each other, they will slowly become friends. Realistically, in today’s society, it is not easy to get along with someone that has a different skin color. Due to the fact that racism has occurred many years ago, it will take a long time to be someone friend.

This film and the past which did experience racism clearly show that it is stoically factual. For example, there’s a scene where two different colored men becomes friends. Being friends, the white man introduces his girlfriend to his African-American friend. While introducing the African-American friend to his girlfriend, she hesitates and leaves him. Towards the end of the movie, the girlfriend accepts the white man’s friend and actually talks to him. This incident clearly shows that you can see this everywhere in today’s society. This scene in particular shows us that we are first hesitant to meet someone out of our own race but once we get to know someone, we are willing to try to get to know them.

Overall, this film shows us that we are the same person from everyone else. The only difference from each other is our skin color. This serious issue has divided the citizens in the United States. As we begin to move forward we are slowly beginning to undivided the like that has separated us for hundreds of years. Like the film, the beginning clearly shows us that there is hatred within the community but as they get to know each other every passing day, they slowly get along and become great friends despite the color of their skin.

If you were anything more than four or five years old in April of 1970, then you almost certainly remember Apollo 13, America moon mission gone wrong. For everyone else, there the movie Apollo 13, a thoroughly competent if uninspired film that provides a relatively faithful retelling of the gripping story of what happened to the spacecraft some 300,000 kilometers from earth, and how it managed to come home safely. This is movies really showed us how one mission can untied whole country and people will do whatever take to help each other. Even American didn’t complete the mission.
there was one scene right before they are going to shoot the mission all the American were watching TV and some of them were watching on live. I think they really care about this is mission; because they want to mission will fly to moon successful. That shows how American loves their country and care about their country.

All movies on back of list and I choice Apollo 13, because I really like space mission, and always want to know more about out space. This movie really gets me into it, because it didn’t showed lots of space knowledge, but it shows how people can work together as team. Though this movie I can tell people back then were all close together. When Tom hanks said we have problem, all people work so hard try getting them out space. Also all American were supporting their heroes and pray for them. That makes people stay together as one.

There are lots of movies about space mission. However, I think apollo13 was the greatest movie about space mission, because people can really see what happened when people were in space. Also movie want to show how people can solve problem in space. Also this movie is telling us, if we can work together as team, we can fix all problems no matter how hard problem we have. 

Space is unknown place for most people who live on earth, and people really want to know what is going on outside space. This Movie had lots of picture about spacecraft; they really showed how people live in spacecraft and what kind problems they have to fact it.  Apollo 13 movie bring history live again, I think if people want to know what happening in Apollo 13, when they watch this is movie. They will have better understanding how they went though.

They made this movie to intended young audience and students who really want to know space mission, also this is movie intended people who really like intense and emotional movie.  There is other the most important why people want to watch this movie was they used leading star Tom Hanks, Becon and Paxton. I think Hanks, Bacon and Paxton do a solid job of playing astronauts in this movie. They really show lots of anxiety and intensely in this movie, which brings watcher’s heart up and down. Also the visually was good real, I couldn’t get my eye off TV one second.

The movie itself is really similar to what was really happening. After I watched this movie, I really understand what was really happened to Apollo 13. Because movie director ron howard did really good job in this movie, he really bring to Apollo 13 live again into movie. After I watched Apollo 13 the movie, I know why everyone has been saying the Apollo 13 mission has been called “A Successful Failure”. they didn’t complete this mission land to the moon. However, the astronauts were successfully brought home with everyone helped. The end of movie was so emotionally even they didn’t complete mission, but they got home safety. Everyone was cheering for them not because they complete mission, because they were willing to die for their county.
 

http://science.ksc.nasa.gov/history/apollo/apollo-13/apollo-13.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollo_13

http://www.phys.ncku.edu.tw/~astrolab/mirrors/apod/image/0105/a13module_damage_big.jpg

http://www.movieposter.com/posters/archive/main/38/MPW-19255

          “Cold Mountain” takes place during the Civil War in North Carolina when the men living in this area are rushed to join the Confederate Army.  This movie portrays Ada’s, a woman who falls in love with Inman, perspective on the war while waiting for her love’s return.  She continues writing letters to him while he is fighting, but he doesn’t respond back to her.  Hence, “Cold Mountain” shows a historical sense and makes viewers sympathize for Inman by portraying his heroism, and by showing a struggling love story as he is separated from Ada.
          I feel this movie does not necessarily show which army is the good or bad side.  Although it shows Inman’s heroism, he does not account for the rest of the Confederate army.  Like the previous example, people in the same army found quarrels amongst themselves finding traitors instead of helping each other.  For example, in a particular scene when one of the men who escaped was found, they killed the man’s family and tormented his mom by tying her hands onto a log and stomping on it.  This scene also signifies a historical sense of how people in the same confederate sides could go against each other, so it was hard to trust anyone.  To make us sympathize, there are many brutal clips of innocent men crying in agonizing pain when wounded.  Their rivals in the Union army are not completely shown as horrible people.  In a particular scene when Inman is searching for shelter he is welcomed by a mother who provides him with hospitality.  When the Union army came into the home looking for food, one of the men in the troop raped the mother, but the other man tried to help the baby from being cold. Thus, there is no right or good side portrayed in this movie.  All the people during this time in the Civil War were just struggling to survive, struggling to return back to their families, struggling because of hunger; they were all in the same circumstance.  Traitors were most likely caught and dawned with revenge.
             One of the ways this movie illustrates a historical interpretation is by interpreting the word “masculinity” without agreeing to society’s perspective of men.  In order for men to be “masculine” in society today, the media portrays that men should not be shown vulnerable; they should not show their emotions publicly or they are considered weak.  Inman shows that he is courageous in another way.  He shows emotion and pain when he risks his life trying to save two of his fellow companions fighting in the war.  He gets shot once when he tries to save his friend who had already died.  In this way, Inman is illustrated as a caretaker who is compassionate for others. He is also shown vulnerable when he is alone, homeless and hungry escaping from the war.  He begs for shelter, depicting the role of manhood society stresses.
             Because “Cold Mountain” also illustrates a love story, this movie helps viewers to side with Inman’s survival so that he could return to Ada.  A significant scene is when Ada’s father dies in the rain, and she is left by herself.  Ada’s image changes as very frail and extremely thin.  Her hair isn’t as neatly braided; she is easily frightened, and isolates herself in her house.  There is one scene showing Ada eating like a homeless person that starved many days as she hurriedly gulps the soup her friend made.  Showing this drastic character change in Ada makes viewers hope for Inman’s return back home so that she wouldn’t loose everyone important to her.   
          In conclusion, “Cold Mountain” portrays the time of the Civil War in a historical and realistic sense.  The movie doesn’t stress which side is good because it wants to show the reality of war.  To not twist the facts around it shows that soldiers in the Confederate and Union army have a good and a bad side.  I believe the purpose of this movie was to make it seem as historically accurate as possible; taking a particular side would mean only seeing war through one perspective. “Cold Mountain” illustrates that soldiers can relate to their experience fighting in the war despite what side they fought.  Both sides struggled the same way with traitors, family left behind, hunger, and a constant need for security.   It shows graphical scenes of men constantly fighting in gruesome wars, and families awaiting their loved ones for a safe return back home.  This movie is realistic in that it illustrates the struggle for Inman and Ada; a struggle for a solider forced into the war and a struggle for a woman waiting for his return home.  For instance, she is trying to cope living on her own after her father’s death with Inman gone.  It was interesting how the movie did such a great job in portraying how everyone during this era was bound to suffer.  “Cold Mountain” does a phenomenal job in illustrating that a man can still be honorable even though he shows vulnerability.

            The Hurricane tells a deeply moving story of injustice, racism and struggle. Something all too familiar to many African Americans in the 60’s and 70’s.  Rubin’s ability to mentally overcome his boundaries are truly inspiring and show that anything can be overcome if we put ourselves over those who do us wrong. I say “put ourselves over” because that is exactly what Rubin Carter did, he took his mind and elevated it to a level of understanding and perception, a level of wisdom, that is seldom seen in any individual. He put his mind far out of the reach for any man who wishes to take the one thing he had not lost – his pride.

            When we think of racism, discrimination and corruption in the 60’s and 70’s we often think of the more Southern region of the United States. But for Rubin Carter, a man from New Jersey, racism played an essential role in his life; much of which was spent in and out of prison. The story is told in a dramatic fashion, full of emotion and heart wrenching moments. It comes across as movingly artistic, as if the whole film were an epic story of one man’s struggle. Norman Jewison, the film’s director, made a movie not just built on the basis of entertainment but on awareness, education and maybe most importantly truth. For many people who choose to turn their cheek on the racist aspects of America this film serves as a rude awakening. The depiction of human suffering is something that leaves an impression on people, it opens their eyes to reality, to what really goes on and to what really does happen. Racism and discrimination are not just things we see in textbooks and movies, it is reality and it is often overlooked. 

            Most of the movie takes place in the late 60’s through the late 80’s, a period fresh off the wake of the civil rights movement. Rubin’s struggle is just one story of both men and women ripped from their lives because of the color of their skin. His fight for freedom is one consistent with history, injustice after injustice after injustice. In the end, as with many cases similar to Rubin’s, the end is simply another display of fallacies in the American judicial system not yet fixed. The film does a good job of putting deception in the direct spotlight and really putting the facts surrounding the case out to the public’s eye.

            To think of a movie critically it is important to weigh the movies historical accuracy, obviously leaving slack for the purpose of entertainment. Attempting to use a movie for a historical source is a risky business, as things are often left out or exaggerated. In this case, I could not find any incorrect historical events or embellished stories but I still ask myself if its really accurate. This particular event deals with one man and the people who chose to “save” his life, the outcome had no great effect on the American judicial system, it did not change any laws or impact people’s physical lives. It did however impact people’s hearts, everyone from inmates to celebrities. Rather than seeing the movie or the event as a significant historical source I would use Rubin and his life as a source for something in relation to psychology or philosophy. His wisdom and view on life were truly insightful, far beyond the understanding of most individuals and I plan on looking further into his writings and his ideas, Rubin “Hurricane” Carter is without a doubt an inspirational figure.

As we have seen in class, purely historical representations of events can be boring and unemotional while highly dramatized representations can be overly biased and smudge the truth. Tora! Tora! Tora! Is a film that proves historical representation can be engaging and eye-opening, while Pearl Harbor is a perfect example of dramatized bias.
Tora!Tora!Tora!(Tora) Was released in 1970 and was nominated for five academy awards, winning in the Best Effects category. This film is unique, because it is essentially two sets of the same story. One English and one Japanese using a different film crew for each. In using two different film crews this film provides a very balanced, and unbiased view of the Pearl Harbor attack and the events that led to it. The intended audience for this film was the American public, in order to educate them about the complexities of what happened regarding the Pearl Harbor attack. This is shown through the various segments in which the Americans are shown overlooking something, and also in the Japanese scenes, showing the internal power struggles within their regime.
Pearl Harbor was released in 2001 and was nominated for four academy awards, winning the Sound Editing category. This film is an intentionally biased account of the events before, during, and after the Pearl Harbor attack. The purpose of this film is for entertainment and to promote a sense of patriotism through the dramatic story of four characters. The intended audience of this film is the stereotypical American moviegoer. This is shown through numerous extraneous fighting sequences which have nothing to do with the Pearl Harbor attack, and also through the complicated love triangle romance which is the main focus of the movie.
There are many stark differences between the interpretation expressed by each film. One such difference was the way in which the United States military was portrayed. In Pearl Harbor, the military was pictured as very intense, and coordinated. On the day of the attack it pictured everyone at their stations in Washington D.C. as ready and intense as ever, when in fact it was on a Sunday, and most of the personnel was off of work at the time. Tora, on the other hand, portrays the military in a much more realistic, human way. The split is shown between the different divisions of the military and is exemplified by the Air Force not being on the list to receive secret information. Tora also shows the concerns of some of the officers about precautions which could have been taken that were just brushed off. For instance, one soldier remarks that putting all of the planes in the center of the field would make an air attack crippling to the fleet. Tora more importantly shows that the United States had many chances to prepare to defend from the Japanese that were just shirked off. For instance, the radar of the planes flying in which were just thought to be American B-17’s.
An interesting point to be made about Tora is the fact that neither the President of the United States or the Emperor of Japan are shown at all. This shows the true nature of power in the time of World War II, with the president and emperor not being much more than figureheads. Also in Tora, the president is shown to be taken off of the secret intelligence list temporarily. If the president was a more prominent power, it would be certain that he would be shown in that movie. In Pearl Harbor however, the president is shown numerous times at poignant moments in order to instill a sort of patriotism in the audience, because F.D.R. is a much respected character whom the audience would be familiar with.
Another major difference between the two movies is where they draw the drama from. In Pearl Harbor, four fictional characters are used as personal connections with the audiences, and most of the movie focuses on their stories. The two pilots are characterized as “good ol’ American boys”, the nurse is a strong female character, and the chef on the ship is a proud tough fighter. In addition, three of these characters fall into a love triangle which further dramatizes the film. These characters are used in order for the audience to connect with the movie on a personal level, and to instill further patriotism by showing them in such a positive light. The way Tora accomplishes its drama is usually the pitfall of historical movies making them boring. Tora uses the actual real people who were involved in the incident, and uses their stories to drive the drama of the plot. This is on both the American and Japanese sides. Instead of being boring, this movie uses the real characters to show the implicit complexities surrounding the event. It showed that on both sides there were problems with power balance within their military systems.
One major bias that occurs in Pearl Harbor is that the Japanese are shown as cruel and evil. The first major instance of this is that one of the head of commands of the Japanese forces looks at children playing, and in spite of this is unaffected and says that the Japanese must secretly attack Pearl Harbor. In Tora it is shown though, that the decision to do so came over a very long period of time with much dissent among even the head of the navy. The Emperor also did not want war, but the “hotheads” in the army still pushed their way and got the attack to happen. Pearl Harbor also does not show the Japanese doing anything human. It just shows the Japanese talking about the attack or the Japanese stoically attacking Pearl Harbor. In Tora though, it shows in great detail the human qualities that the Japanese possessed. In Pearl Harbor it shows the Japanese not sending out a second wave of attackers, because of purely cold, logistical reasons, while in Tora it is shown that withdrawing was very much out of mercy.
When looking critically at both movies, Tora!Tora!Tora! Has about 2 hours worth of historical fact while Pearl Harbor has only about twenty and is treated solely as backing material for the main love story. Also, one of the first scenes in Pearl Harbor is supposed to take place on Long Island and there are mountains shown in the background. This discredits the movie from the start, because there are no mountains in Long Island.
If one is looking for a factually based historical movie, but with an engaging, eye-opening aura around it, Tora!Tora!Tora!, should be the movie for you. If you are looking though, for a patriotic romance, with extraneous action built in, then Pearl Harbor is the way to go.

Amistad is a courtroom drama that was considered a controversy since before it ever came on the movie. There were lawsuits that this movie was taken from an even older script, but the lawsuits were later dropped. Everyone knew it was going to be a big hit and everyone wanted a part of it. Directed by Steven Spielberg, it had a considerable amount of recognized actors, including Matthew McConaughey, Anthony Hopkins, and Morgan Freeman. It’s about a rebellion by Africans in 1839 that were headed toward U.S. for slavery. It starts off with an African who releases himself and his group from chains and takes over a ship and slaughtered the white crew. They are then captured and put to trial in Connecticut. There are major Dilemmas about who claimed them and whether or not to free them. It was a sensitive subject that revolved around many issues including slavery, politics, and the shift of the American society in a very sensitive time between the Declaration of the Independence and the American Civil War in American history.
Slavery had always been an issue in American history, but never at the level when Amistad took place. The north and south had different views and ideas about many topics and slavery was a major issue. Civil War was about to break out at any moment and no solution had been made. So you can imagine how intense this trial must’ve been with everyone engaged and influencing the outcome and fate of the captured Africans. Throughout the movie they explain to us what happened to them, and how they were dragged out of their homes then taken to this ship where they were tortured and treated horribly (Speilburg seems not to hold anything back with the gruesome images), and now had to deal with the American legal system which now considered them slaves. To represent the Africans abolitionist Theodore Joadson (Morgan Freeman) and a lawyer named Roger Baldwin (Mathew McConaughey). They have trouble at first communicating with Cinque (Djimon Hounsou), the African leader who is frustrated at the whole situation, but as the movie goes on Spielberg does a great job at getting the two lawyers and us, the viewers, to sympathize with Cinque who seemed so unusual at the beginning.

The importance of the case caused politic to play a major role in this situation. Because the outcome of the decision will have a key effect on the outbreak of the civil war top politicians had a voice in the courtroom, such as President Martin Van Buren played by Nigel Hawthorne, and Former President John Quincy Adams played by Anthony Hopkins. President Van Buren wanted to please his allies in the southern states, because re-election was near, and also to try and prevent the idea of a civil war breaking out. So in order to do as planned he had to manipulate the courts arrangements. To try and even things out Joadson went to John Quicy Adams and asked if he could speak at the courtroom, because his support would have a great impact. Adams didn’t want to get in the middle of things so at first he decided not to say anything. After thinking over his thoughts and feeling he decided he had to do the right things. He then went to the supreme court and said, “This man is black. We can all see that. But, can we also see as easily, that which is equally true? That he is the only true hero in this room. Now, if he were white, he wouldn’t be standing before this court fighting for his life. If he were white and his enslavers were British, he wouldn’t be standing, so heavy the weight of the medals and honors we would bestow upon him. Songs would be written about him. The great authors of our times would fill books about him. His story would be told and retold in our classrooms. Our children, because we would make sure of it, would know his name as well as they know Patrick Henry’s. Yet, if the South is right, what are we to do with that embarrassing, annoying document, The Declaration of Independence? What of its conceits? “All men created equal,” “inalienable rights,” “life, liberty.” This quote is what changed the outcome of the case.   

Amistad was a movie that was well written and directed. Each actor played the right part and each had significance to the story. It was entertaining and even though the details aren’t known, through research, I found that the ship carrying slave during the same period had the same story as Amistad. It showed us the transition in the idea of slavery in the American society during pre-Civil War era. It showed us the horror of the slave trade and how it impacted our society. 

Amistad

Amistad is a courtroom drama that was considered a controversy since before it ever came on the movie. There were lawsuits that this movie was taken from an even older script, but the lawsuits were later dropped. Everyone knew it was going to be a big hit and everyone wanted a part of it. Directed by Steven Spielberg, it had a considerable amount of recognized actors, including Matthew McConaughey, Anthony Hopkins, and Morgan Freeman. It’s about a rebellion by Africans in 1839 that were headed toward U.S. for slavery. It starts off with an African who releases himself and his group from chains and takes over a ship and slaughtered the white crew. They are then captured and put to trial in Connecticut. There are major Dilemmas about who claimed them and whether or not to free them. It was a sensitive subject that revolved around many issues including slavery, politics, and the shift of the American society in a very sensitive time between the Declaration of the Independence and the American Civil War in American history.

Slavery had always been an issue in American history, but never at the level when Amistad took place. The north and south had different views and ideas about many topics and slavery was a major issue. Civil War was about to break out at any moment and no solution had been made. So you can imagine how intense this trial must’ve been with everyone engaged and influencing the outcome and fate of the captured Africans. Throughout the movie they explain to us what happened to them, and how they were dragged out of their homes then taken to this ship where they were tortured and treated horribly (Speilburg seems not to hold anything back with the gruesome images), and now had to deal with the American legal system which now considered them slaves. To represent the Africans abolitionist Theodore Joadson (Morgan Freeman) and a lawyer named Roger Baldwin (Mathew McConaughey). They have trouble at first communicating with Cinque (Djimon Hounsou), the African leader who is frustrated at the whole situation, but as the movie goes on Spielberg does a great job at getting the two lawyers and us, the viewers, to sympathize with Cinque who seemed so unusual at the beginning.

The importance of the case caused politic to play a major role in this situation. Because the outcome of the decision will have a key effect on the outbreak of the civil war top politicians had a voice in the courtroom, such as President Martin Van Buren played by Nigel Hawthorne, and Former President John Quincy Adams played by Anthony Hopkins. President Van Buren wanted to please his allies in the southern states, because re-election was near, and also to try and prevent the idea of a civil war breaking out. So in order to do as planned he had to manipulate the courts arrangements. To try and even things out Joadson went to John Quicy Adams and asked if he could speak at the courtroom, because his support would have a great impact. Adams didn’t want to get in the middle of things so at first he decided not to say anything. After thinking over his thoughts and feeling he decided he had to do the right things. He then went to the supreme court and said, “This man is black. We can all see that. But, can we also see as easily, that which is equally true? That he is the only true hero in this room. Now, if he were white, he wouldn’t be standing before this court fighting for his life. If he were white and his enslavers were British, he wouldn’t be standing, so heavy the weight of the medals and honors we would bestow upon him. Songs would be written about him. The great authors of our times would fill books about him. His story would be told and retold in our classrooms. Our children, because we would make sure of it, would know his name as well as they know Patrick Henry’s. Yet, if the South is right, what are we to do with that embarrassing, annoying document, The Declaration of Independence? What of its conceits? “All men created equal,” “inalienable rights,” “life, liberty.” This quote is what changed the outcome of the case.   

Amistad was a movie that was well written and directed. Each actor played the right part and each had significance to the story. It was entertaining and even though the details aren’t known, through research, I found that the ship carrying slave during the same period had the same story as Amistad. It showed us the transition in the idea of slavery in the American society during pre-Civil War era. It showed us the horror of the slave trade and how it impacted our society. 

In the movie “To Kill A Mockingbird,” there are many issues that are brought up, including the very prominant issue of race and prejudice. The movie takes place in Maycomb, a small town in Southern Alabama in the 1930s. This coming of age tale follows the life of Scout and Jem Finch, as they grow up in a small southern town during the Depression, amidst clear racism and prejudice against those in different social classes. In this paper, I intend to show that The Finch family, among other characters in the movie, rise above the current time of racism and the Depression, simply by living out their lives in respectable, positive manner. Although every character in the movie is faced with these hardships, they come together as a family and also as a community to survive.

Because the movie is set in a small town in Alabama, the mind automatically assumes that everyone there is racist, and that black people are not going to be treated with any respect. This is no the case with the Finch family. Although the father, Atticus Finch, is middle-aged white attorney, he shows clear respect for members of the black community. When Atticus believes that Tom Robinson, a young black male, as been falsey accused of rapping a white woman, he takes the case and becomes Tom’s lawyer. The fact that they lose the case shows not that Atticus is bad lawyer or did not try his best to win the case, but that the town they live in is still overwhelming racist that all they saw was a black man raping a white woman, Mayelle Ewell, even if they evidence says otherwise. The amoung of people there to support Tom Robinson was overwhelming larger than the group there to support Mayella. Although all of the people there for Tom were shoved high up in what was designated the “colored balcony” you could see the love and support that held strong through their community in times of need. Clearly they knew that Mr. Robinson was being falsely accused of this rape because he was black, not because they had enough actual evidence to actually prove that he had commited a crime. Even Atticus’s children, Jem and Scout, sat in the “colored balcony” to watch the trial.

Although Atticus lost the case, a large portion of his town were simply upset that he took the case to begin with. Bob Ewell, the father of the alleged rape victim, was livid with Atticus for taking the case. He felt betrayed because he truly believed that Tom Robinson did not deserve a good defense because he was black. Even after Atticus lost the case, Bob Ewell attacked Jem and Scout on their way home from a school play one night, almost killing the son, Jem. Boo Radley, a man the children had long been terrified of and had heard many stories about his past, was the one to come to their rescue and save Jem’s life. He proved himself to be a kind, remarkable man, not this picture of evil and insanity the children had always thought him to be.

Physical dangers were not the only threats in the lives of the people of Maycomb, but the threats of the Depression also played a role in threatening their everyday lives. Many people in the town had barely any money and were forced to pay for goods with other goods that they grew or made themselves. The father of a boy the Scout and Jem went to school with, Walter Cunningham, was poor and thought of as white trash. When his father needed to pay Atticus for some legal work he had done for him, he had no money to pay him, and so he paid Atticus in the only way he could, with a large sack of nuts. Atticus graciously accepted, and thought nothing of it that he was receiving payment not in the form of money, but in food. Because Atticus seemed not to be bothered by this, it was clear that his was a common practice during this time, seeing as people had so little money, they simply paid any way that they could.

I found it very interesting to compare what was considered to be the norm and O.K. then, to what we are used to today. Today, in order for someone to be convicted of a crime, especially such a serious crime as rape, there has to be lots of difinitive evidence, such as DNA evidence, fingerprints, and multiple eye witnesses. That was clearly not the case during the time period of this movie. Today nobody would let you pay them in vegetables or hazelnuts if you did some legal work for them, but then that was the only way a lot of people had to pay, and it was perfectly fine and accepted. The stark contrast between the norms of then and today are very clear, though the idea of compassion and morality is something I hope is still present today, as it was back then.

The Finch family defies every stereotype of a white family in southern Alabama in the 1930s would have. Atticus himself was a kind, caring man who did not see just black and white, and also taught his children to think the same way. Through his actions, he made is clear that not every white man was racist, and also showed that many white people were prejudice against the black community for no good reason at all. The lessons he taught his children, and the lessons his children learned not only from him, but form his community, shaped them into the wonderful people we would want them to be. Though it was clear that living in the south during the Depression and amidst such strong racism was not an easy thing, the Finch family rises above it to show that not everyone must be defeated by such negative thoughts, and equality and peace of mind were not that far away.

The American Civil War was one of the most significant events that have happened in American history. Many films have been made to portray the Civil War battles and lifestyles. However, the movie that sticks in my head on the topic of the Civil War is Glory. This movie is a very historical movie that depicts the 54th Massachusetts Volunteer Regiment during the American Civil War. Glory shows the unfair treatment of African Americans in the U.S. Army while fighting in the Civil War through the depiction of Col. Robert Gould Shaw’s 54^th regiment.

This movie shows us how the U.S. Army during the Civil War unfairly treated the African American soldiers and their struggle against their mistreatment. The film focuses on one of the first formal all African American units, the 54^th Massachusetts Volunteer Regiment. The first evident injustice to the African American soldiers was that they were all placed in the same unit. During the Civil War the units that did allow African Americans had to be segregated from the white units. This made these soldiers feel as though they were not part of the “team” for example and looked down upon. Moreover, these African American units had to be commanded by all white officers. These officers were mostly abolitionists and did not mistreat the soldiers; however, the fact that these soldiers could not command themselves and needed a white officer to command them. This is a very historical fact that did happen at this time. Even though the fight for abolition was one of the main causes of the war and the African Americans wanted to join the fight having considerable motivation, they were not all allowed to serve and only a few African American units were created. Most of the African Americans in the units were depicted as runaway slaves from the South; however this was not the case. The majority of the soldiers were born free in the North. This is one fact that was misrepresented in the film.

This film really portrays the effort set forth by the African American soldiers during the American Civil War despite the unreasonable circumstances the U.S. Army put the soldiers through. In one scene of the movie the colored soldiers refuse pay for their duties simply because it was unequal of those that were white. This unequal treatment caused a great discouraging effect but shows their persistence when they want to fight so desperately for their country despite this injustice.

In all the movie had some historical imperfections but was mostly historical accurate. The African American units were never really given a chance to prove themselves in battle. These units were looked down upon the white units because they felt that they were better trained and that the colored units were simply incapable of leading a major attack. In the end, the 54^th Massachusetts gets to prove themselves in battle fighting together with their white comrades in the attack of Fort Wagner. In the last scenes of the film the 54^th leads the famous attack on the south at Fort Wagner. The regiment loses about half of their men in the fight. Yet records show that the regiment only suffered about one-fifth to fatalities. The attack was the first to be led by an African American unit and proved to the U.S. Army that they were capable of being men and fighting remarkably. Many of the African American soldiers that survived received the Medal of Honor for their notable attack on Fort Wagner. In the last part of the film Col. Shaw was seen being shot and killed right after commanding his troops to move forward against the Confederates, which was based on actual accounts of this battle.

In the final scene the colonel gets buried with the rest of his troops, which is also accurately depicted. This portrayal was meant, at the time of the war, to be an insult but shows the unity within the unit that existed due to the unfair treatment of the African American units by the U.S. Army. This movie truly illustrates the many different conflicts of prejudice within the U.S. Army that continued throughout the Civil War conflict. Glory was one of the best historical films because it takes a topic rarely discussed when discussing the American Civil War and shows how the war was really like in the eyes of an African American soldier in the U.S. Army. This movie is a must see for any true historian.

Violent. Chaotic. Overwhelming. After viewing Saving Private Ryan, these are the three words that immediately come to mind. Yet despite the scenes of war and death, by the end of the movie the viewer is left feeling a sense of hope. A group of soldiers are sent on the task of bringing back one man to the United States, who has unknowingly lost his three brothers already, while incurring many obstacles in their search for this soldier. Saving Private Ryan most easily recognized theme is strewn throughout the movie; when is one life more important than another? Steven Spielberg’s critically acclaimed movie, Saving Private Ryan, provides a look into the sorrows, triumphs, and senselessness death of World War II through the eyes of one infantry on the search for one man.

In the opening of the movie, anyone who is curious as to how violent this film will be is quickly thrown into, in my opinion, the most violent part of the entire film. D-day. This is shown through the eyes of soldiers storming the beaches of Normandy. These scenes continue for a long, gruesome thirty minutes complete with shots of limbs being blown off, bullets cutting threw the bodies of many men, entrails being spewn onto others, and the look of fear in the eyes of many of these men, who have probably never seen battle, let alone so much death around them. Spielberg uses these opening scenes not only to evoke a feeling of sadness and loss, but also to make people understand that the way these men died was horrible and senseless.

Although the film, especially the opening scenes at D-day, hope to make the viewer understand the death and destruction as horrible and overall pointless, the main goal is not to say that the role of the United States in WWII was not needed or important. On the contrary, I believe the main point of the movie is to depict the overall senselessness in war itself. In a movie review about Saving Private Ryan, James Berardinelli states,”Saving Private Ryan quickly and brutally dispels the notion that war is anything but vicious, demoralizing violence that makes a cruel joke out of the human body and spirit.” While the U.S. was needed and, I believe, made the right decision in joining the side of the Allies, it is the immense loss of life that could have been prevented had the disagreements and issues never been allowed to escalate to the point of an all-out war in Europe. Saving Private Ryan takes this idea and puts it into a story of what some would call heroic, some would call ridiculous, idea to save one man.

Another scene which really hits home with the unfair loss of life is a scene in which the group, led by Tom Hanks’ character, is walking through a field, continuing their journey to find Private Ryan. Unfortunately, the come upon a group of German men, presumably left to guard this particular area, and are immediately drawn into battle. After a few minutes of fighting, the U.S. soldiers are successful, but not without the loss of one of their men. In this scene is the main controversy between the remaining six men of the group about what exactly it is they are doing and if it is even important. It is here the viewers cannot help but be torn themselves. Why should this man have to die, and consequently many of the others, just to potentially save another? This is also the first time in the movie the viewer really begins to feel for the characters. Tom Hanks’ character is a school teacher normally, with a wife and children, and many of the other characters share their lives and family stories throughout the movie and as a human, you cannot help but feel extreme sorrow when they are killed one after another.

Finally, after what feels like an eternity, the group finds Private Ryan. Adding insult to injury, Ryan, played by Matt Damon, refuses to leave. He speaks about the duty he has to his fellow soldiers and the duty he has to himself. Also a very powerful quote in the movie, he states, “Tell my mother I stayed here with the only brothers I have left.” Here the viewer cannot help but admire and, at the same time, just simply be angry with him. One of the soldiers displays this emotion by angrily telling off Ryan, explaining those who have died to get to him and all the sacrifices they have made to reach this point. This scene brings about emotions and the conflict that is war. Spielberg purposely wants this to happen so the viewer can feel the conflict and confusion these soldiers felt. While they have essentially completed their task and can finally breathe a sigh of relief, the men are thrown another curve ball and must deal with yet another problem.

While Spielberg uses emotion as a main way to bring about his theme in the movie, there are also many aspects which really give it credibility as well. For instance, the weaponry used throughout the movie is very accurate to what would have been used in the real combat. Also, the shooting was done very well. In the D-Day invasion at the beginning of the movie, they shot a lot of shots with hand held cameras. Berardinelli also makes points about some of the cinematography when he states they used, “hand-held cameras, a slight speeding up of the images, muted colors, and several different kinds of film stock.” All these factors helped to create the realistic scenes in the movie and left the viewers feeling like they could have actually been there.

In the end, Ryan does in fact make it out alive, but not without the cost of many men, among them Tom Hanks character. The viewer is left wondering whether or not it is all worth it.
Overall, Steven Spielberg does a great job capturing the hearts of the audience throughout the movie in many different scenes. As a human being, you cannot help but feel for these characters as they struggle to complete a mission that has proven itself impossible. The question, who is more important, is never really answered and is left up for the viewer to decide. The one thing you are left with at the conclusion however, is a strong sense of remorse that these men died, that so many men died, in something that could have been prevented. War, whether seemingly necessary or not at the time, is not the “right” answer and the deaths of so many prove this in Saving Private Ryan.

http://www.reelviews.net/movies/s/saving.html

http://www.cincinnati.com/freetime/movies/mcgurk/privateryan.html

“Glory” directed by Edward Zwick captures the reality of the Civil War with an amazing cast including Matthew Broderick, Denzel Washington, and Morgan Freeman. Glory is about the 54th Massachusetts regiment which was the first all black regiment to serve in the Civil War. Colonel Robert Gould Shaw (Matthew Broderick) led the regiment and had the challenging task of preparing these untrained voluntary soldiers for war. Shaw also had to put up with criticism from other ranking officials and the impartial attitudes towards the 54th regiment. The 54th regiment was treated unfairly by receiving lower wages and not receiving proper supplies. However, Colonel Shaw and his other ranking officials made a huge statement when they too ripped up their paychecks after the black soldiers did so in defiance of being paid less than white soldiers. The black soldiers argued that we die just like anyone else, and when the officers decided to rip their checks they got respect and loyalty from their soldiers.

The movie’s overall message is about the hardships that black soldiers faced in fighting in the Civil War, and the impact that black people had on the Civil War. The black people fighting for the “54″ wanted to be treated as equal human beings and went to great lengths to prove it by dying for that right. The “54″ also wanted to prove that they were in fact not only capable of fighting in a war but could do it just as well if not better than any other regiment. It showed the courage of black people in a time when slavery was still present. The 54th regiment had no respect from other soldiers at the beginning and really had to earn their respect by fighting and dying for their country like the rest of the soldiers. By the end of the movie it was clear that the 54th regiment was a strong infantry and respect was rightfully given to them. One scene in particular that exemplified this was when one of the soldiers from another unit who had previously degraded the “54″ stood as the “54″ passed preparing to attack a Confederate Fort in Charleston, S.C. and yelled “Give em hell 54″ in a way that said we respect you (one of my favorite parts). Everyone knew the daunting task of attacking the Fort yet no one in the “54″ showed any signs of fear. This movie is a great use of history in teaching people the impact that black people actually had on the Civil War, and surprisingly many people didn’t realize that black people fought and died in this war, and in every war that America has fought for our freedoms.

The movie was designed to be very dramatic and powerful so it’s easy to see that some of the scenes were exaggerated a little bit to increase the drama of the movie. For instance, it was stated that the black units never had to go months without proper boots and uniforms. I also question whether or not they were paid unequally in comparison to white union soldiers, although I could believe this to be true. In this period of time blacks in the union, although freed slaves were still treated unequally in comparison to white soldiers which was accurately stated in the movie. I wondered how the other all-white regiments actually felt about having a black regiment fighting on their side, it seems to me that they would be grateful for the help and very appreciative, but in the beginning of the movie this was not the case and most people took the “54″ as a joke that would never actually engage in real battles.

The musical background of the movie done by composer James Horner is absolutely beautiful. The musical theme is played throughout the movie and had such an emotional impact on me when watching it. The music is just as powerful as the screenplay and is definitely a key ingredient in making Glory so profound. This in my mind is one of the most poignant musical themes in any movie I’ve ever seen

Hotel Rwanda-The Mass Genocide

                Imagine if our country went through the equivalent of 266 World Trade Center bombings in 100 days. Also imagine, instead of terrorists perpetrating these acts, it was a militia comprised of neighbors, family, and friends. In 1994, a war began when Hutu extremists waged war on the minority Tutsis initiating a terrible campaign of genocide that killed over 800,000 people and displaced and entire nation. “Hotel Rwanda”, a film by Terry George, is the true story of the four star Les Milles Collines Hotel in Kigali, Rwanda during a time of turmoil. As the world ignored the people of Rwanda, this hotel gave refuge to over 1,000 people seeking safety in the center of a civil war. Hotel Rwanda gives life to the 1994 mass genocide by telling the terrible story of Rwanda through one man and his struggle to keep his family alive.
            In Rwanda, over 800,000 were slaughtered as the Tutsi and Hutu tribes struggled over control of the country. Encouraged by bigotry, racist Hutu radio and the assassination of the country’s president, Juvenal Habyarimana, the Hutu started annihilating the Tutsis as mob rule prevailed. But unlike so many cases of genocide, where there are clear religious or racial differences, the Tutsi and Hutu are nearly identical, only differentiated by the previous colonial government, which taught one group to hate the other.  As friends attacked friends, neighbors kill neighbors and children become the target for the Hutu who seek to kill the next generation of the Tutsi, Paul Rusesabagina  realizes that his home, as he knew it, was gone forever. Rusesabagina is the manager of an elite resort in Rwanda, where the tourists come for vacation, and where the country’s elites come for a free drink and good conversation. Once the slaughter starts, his hotel quickly becomes an island in a sea of destruction. Within days, United Nations peacekeepers have set up camp outside his front door, hundreds of desperate Tutsis rush to him looking for shelter and safety, and he soon finds his family, as well as 1,200 Rwandans under his care as they hide from the hell that exists only miles away. Hotel Rwanda is really the story of this struggle as seen through Rusesabagina’s eyes.
                Hotel Rwanda  is meant to touch the people that were sheltered from this story. Much of the media in the western world ignored Rwanda’s cry for help as hundreds of thousands were being massacred. The governments and the United Nations ignored cries for help from Rwandans they called friends.  In the movie, Colonel Oliver, a UN official, talked to Paul Rusesabagina and shed light to how he thought the western world felt about Rwanda. 
                You’re dirt, we think your dirt.
                Who is we.
                The west, all the super powers, everything you believe in Paul, they think your dirt. They think your dung. You’re worthless.
                I’m afraid I do not understand what you are saying sir.
                Come on, don’t bullshit me Paul. You’re the smartest man here. You got them all eating out of your hands. You could own this freaking hotel except for one thing, you’re black. You’re not even a nigger. You’re an African.
                This quote struck a nerve in me that I believe affected the entire audience. When the tragedy in Rwanda occurred I was only 9 years old. As I recall, I do not remember hearing about the crisis in Rwanda or anything about it as the years have gone on.  I may have been sheltered from it but as far as the audience goes, I believe we were all highly disengaged in the happenings of Rwanda.  This tragedy was not decades ago, it was in the age of high speed communication. Any country would have been suitable to go in and protect the civilians against the renegade, yet no one stepped up.  
                Paul Rusesbagina’s story was told to bring a heroic storyline to a gruesome genocide. His version is meant to tell the whole country’s account beyond the facts and figures that we could see on the news. He brought life to what occurred in Rwanda, with few things changed in the movie.  Rusesbagina’s courage to keep his family alive was just one illustration of the many different stories and accounts that people reported after the war. Not intervening in the war was a bad and forgotten move by the entire world. Hotel Rwanda gives light to a story forgotten or unheard of by many, and lived by many more.

Hotel Rwanda, Wikipedia

Jaw-dropping, uplifting, intense, a tear-jerker. This movie was spectacular. It is not “old history,” yet, but to our generation it is a real life experience. We all talk about it and can share our stories from that day. I remember it very clearly. I was a freshman in high school and was sitting in religion class when Mr. Hamer came in and whispered something to my teacher. She turned on the television and we all just starred. I was confused, just like the people in the movie were. I thought that the plane had just lost control and it was merely an accident. When the police officers in the movie saw it on their television, they thought the same thing. They said things like maybe the pilot “…ran out of gas” or it was a small plane and the man did not know how to operate his craft. September 11, 2001 was a very chaotic day. “World Trade Center” was created to show us a personal encounter of what such an evil act can commit, what human beings are capable of and to bring out the goodness of people.
The movie “World Trade Center” is a story based on the lives of two actual survivors, John McLoughlin and Will Jimeno, New York City Port Authority Policemen, and what their families went through. The movie gets to the point right away, within ten minutes the first plane struck the building. However, they did not show the plane actually hit, all that was pictured was the shadow of a plane very close to the ground and a policeman looking up at it. Perhaps this was because the sight of the plane striking the building is too much for certain people who were personally affected by the incident to see it happen. Or it just leads for you to picture it yourself. In a way it is more mysterious not to see it, because one just knows how horrible it really was. There were many graphic images throughout the movie too. For example, when all the citizens were watching the towers burn, you see a lady jump from one of the buildings and fall screaming. It may not be graphic to the point of blood and gore, but emotionally graphic.
The movie was shot through the eyes of the police officers. Everything was so chaotic that even they did not know what was going on. Sergeant McLoughlin was not even aware that a second plane had struck tower two. He was getting his team ready to go up into the first tower when it came crashing down on them. Only three from the fourteen survived the disastrous collapse and eventually one died after having a chunk of the tower crush his lower half, leaving only McLoughlin and Jimeno. The two men were trapped under rubble and smashed from the waist down. There was no way for them to get out from under the heavy slabs of concrete.
Jimeno has a four year old daughter and a pregnant wife, while McLoughlin has four children at home and a wife. What kept these men alive are the thoughts of home and the love they have for their families. The emotion of the families and wives especially was very intense. It had you cheering the men on to live and to not give up. Having the movie focus on the lives of these two men make the event more “heavy.” Instead of just thinking that thousands of lives were lost, you get to see the emotional strain and feelings, concerns, and fears of the men trapped as well as their families. It makes you feel it more and relate to it, could that happen to my husband? The director, Oliver Stone, chose to shoot it this way, instead of just showing a broad view of a general person’s perspective so that you can see how this evil act could tear a family apart. Jimeno’s wife, Allison, asked her father, “How do I tell Bianca her father is dead?”
Anyone can relate to this and think of their father, mother, children, and it pulls at your heart. The intended audience for this film is everyone. This act affected the world. It changed the way people act towards each other, and it changed the way we go about our daily lives. Who doesn’t think a terrifying thought when they first get on the metro? Or see a plane close to the ground? The events that happened on September 11, 2001 will never be forgotten. They taught us a new and better way to live. We need to help one another. In the film, a retired Marine found his sense of patriotism again and left his life behind to go find survivors. He was out there with one other man after all the others had gone home for the night searching for people. He found the two men. If it wasn’t for him they would have died. He knew his calling was to help people and he put them first. He told them, “You are my mission.” John McLoughlin said it best at the end, “Nine Eleven showed us what human beings are capable of…It also brought out the goodness we forgot could exist. People taking care of each other for no other reason that it was the right thing to do…It is important for us to remember.”
Historical facts provided from the movie are seen at the end. Some powerful facts include: 2,749 people died at the World Trade Center, including people from 87 different countries, only twenty people were pulled out alive; Will Jimeno and John McLoughlin were numbers eighteen and nineteen.

          “Cold Mountain” takes place during the Civil War in North Carolina when the men living in this area are rushed to join the Confederate Army. This movie portrays Ada’s, a woman who falls in love with Inman, perspective on the war while waiting for her love’s return. She continues writing letters to him while he is fighting, but he doesn’t respond back to her. “Cold Mountain” shows a great historical interpretation of the Civil War because it illustrates the struggle and terror the civilians had to overcome to survive by portraying Inman as a man of strength and heroism.

          One of the ways this movie illustrates a historical interpretation is by interpreting the word “masculinity” without agreeing with society’s perspective on men. In other words, unlike most movies where men need to be shown masculine in order to be perceived as powerful or worthy, Inman is shown to be courageous because he struggles to survive. Inman shows heroism twice in this movie when he risks his life trying to save two of his fellow companions fighting in the war. He gets shot once when he tries to save his friend who had already died. In this way, Inman is illustrated as a caretaker who is compassionate for others. He is shown vulnerable because he is alone, homeless and hungry. He begs for shelter, depicting the role of manhood society stresses.

          Because “Cold Mountain” also illustrates a love story, this movie helps viewers to side with Inman’s survival so that he could return to Ada. Inman’s humble personality to care for others makes the audience believe that the confederates are unfortunate people in an unfortunate circumstance seeing they have no choice. Furthermore, the movie shows run-aways as traitors so their families are put to suffering. For example, in a particular scene when one of the men who escaped was found, they killed the man’s family and tormented his mom by tying her hands onto a log and stomping on it. Scenes such as these make the audience feel great sympathy for those dragged into the war. This scene also signifies a historical sense of how people in the same confederate sides could go against each other, so it was hard to trust anyone.

          I feel this movie does not necessarily show which army is the good or bad side. Although it shows Inman’s heroism, he does not account for the rest of the Confederate army. Like the previous example, people in the same army found quarrels amongst themselves finding traitors instead of helping each other. The people in Cold Mountain who are forced into this battle are shown with the most struggles, therefore viewers will sympathize for them. To make us sympathize, there are many brutal clips of these innocent men crying in agonizing pain when wounded. Their rivals in the Union army are not completely shown as horrible people. In a particular scene when Inman is searching for shelter he is welcomed by a mother who provides him with hospitality. When the Union army came into the home looking for food, one of the men in the troop raped the mother, but the other man tried to help the baby from being cold. This scene is shown to prove how not all people fighting for the Union army were horrible people. Thus, there is no right or good side portrayed in this movie. All the people during this time in the Civil War were just struggling to survive, struggling to return back to their families, struggling because of hunger; they were all in the same circumstance. Traitors were most likely caught and dawned with revenge.

          In conclusion, “Cold Mountain” portrays the time of the Civil War in a historical and realistic sense. It shows graphical scenes of men constantly fighting in gruesome wars, and families awaiting their loved ones for a safe return back home. This movie is realistic in that it shows the struggle for Inman and Ada; a struggle for a solider forced into the war and a struggle for a women at home. For instance, she is trying to cope living on her own after her father’s death with Inman gone. It was interesting how the movie did such a great job in portraying how everyone during this era was bound to suffer. The truth didn’t seem “bent” at all, I do not believe this movie is particularly stressing which side was good or bad, nor making any dramatic adjustments to what really happened during this time. “Cold Mountain” does a phenomenal job in illustrating that a man can still be honorable even though he shows vulnerability.

     The movie Malcolm X does an excellent job of portraying the story of Malcolm X, also known as El Hajj Malik El Shabbaz, during one of the most turbulent times in America’s history. The movie is based upon the true events surrounding the life of Malcolm X. During his lifetime, Malcolm went through many drastic changes in the way he thought and what he preached, going from one extreme to a more moderate view. He was raised in a society that hated people of a darker color. He was a bright student who aspired to become a lawyer, but had his dreams shot down by a teacher who said his color would be a big obstacle for him to overcome. Malcolm’s life spun into turmoil and trips to jail became normal for him. While in jail, Malcolm was introduced to a new movement taking shape in the African American society. This movement was called The Nation of Islam. It preached black supremacy and an extreme hatred for the white man. Malcolm got involved in the Nation of Islam and rose in their ranks. He became an advocate for The Nation of Islam, but eventually found corruption in it and broke from the organization. After a pilgrimage to the city of Mecca, Malcolm’s views changed to Orthodox Islam. He began to preach tolerance for peoples of all races and did not fear for his own life. He knew that many people wanted him dead due to his outlook. Malcolm was assassinated at the hands of the Nation of Islam, having lived only a handful of years.

     The movie’s overall purpose is to portray a very accurate description of the story of a controversial character of history. It follows Malcolm’s life from childhood to his death and does an excellent job of getting the story across. The movie also serves the purpose of educating the public of the chaotic times America lived through. This movie helps in showing what certain beliefs and ideas can lead to. It shows how a people who were looked down upon, ridiculed and killed were feeling and how racism can lead to an equal amount of hatred and tension. This time of history should never be lived through again be any people no matter where they are in the world. Using the story of a famous historical figure that lived through this time and had a great impact on society is much more effective than using a fictional character. Audiences can relate or understand history much better when it is seen through the eyes of someone who actually lived through it.

     The director, Spike Lee, portrays the life of Malcolm as accurately as possible. He does an excellent job of cramming 39 years of anxiety and confusion into three short hours. The point of view used is as if you yourself were there. An example of this would be the assassination scene at the end of the movie. The view and angles make you feel as if you are experiencing the assassination in front of your eyes. The reaction of the people and his wife are very realistic and impressive. The director wanted to make it realistic so that the audience would be able to understand and comprehend who Malcolm X really was and the great impact he made in American history. He wanted to portray what Malcolm X stood for, what his ideas were, and he wanted to show for what reasons this great man was assasinated so that the American public can appreciate who he was.

     At the end of the movie, the narrator claims that Malcolm was not afraid to die because he loved his people, however after reading Malcolm’s letter he wrote back home while in Mecca proves other wise. Spike Lee seems to be implying at the end that Malcolm is still supporting the Black Nationalist movement, however in his letter he says, “But on this pilgrimage, what I have seen, and experienced, has forced me to re-arrange much of my thought patterns previously held, and to toss aside some of my previous conclusions.” He also says, “I have never before seen sincere and true brotherhood practiced by all colors together, irrespective of their color.” These two quotes show that Malcolm became an advocate for Islam during the last years of his life, he tossed aside his pervious conclusions. You can see that he is advocating Islam in another quote from the letter, “if white Americans could accept the Oneness of God, then perhaps, too, they could accept in reality the Oneness of Man…”

     This movie seems to be aimed at a variety of audiences. It can be intended for youth who are going through hard times in their life, due to the fact that Malcolm went through many turbulent times in his life, which even led him to jail. The movie also seemed to be aimed at generations who lived through this time and would like to see an accurate description of what happened. This movie could also be aimed at Muslim people because Malcolm X became a famous caller to the true message of Islam and thus he became someone who the Muslims should learn and know about. He became a part of Islamic history in a way because of his beliefs as a true Muslim who wanted to spread the message of Islam to all people. Since he became a part of the history of Muslims, then Muslims should want to learn about his life. Non-Muslims could also learn a lot from this film, they could learn the trials and tribulations that Malcolm X faced in his life and how at the end he came out on top by accepting the pure message of Islam. People who disliked Malcolm X might dislike him due to misleading and false facts about him. But if they were to watch this film then they could really understand Malcolm’s life and clear up their misunderstandings.

     Of course, this movie would also be enjoyed by history buffs, who would want to compare the movie to the reality of the situation at the time. This film is a mix of two genres. It is a drama but at the same time it is a documentary of sorts. Spike Lee tries very hard to capture the feeling and passion of the life of Malcolm X. This movie does not talk about Malcolm’s personal issues and problems and much as it displays Malcolm’s role in the society. The character is portrayed very well by Denzel Washington. His acting is exceptional and he follows through with the part beautifully. Therefore, the movie Malcolm X, directed by Spike Lee, does a good job of portraying events that took place that brought Malcolm to his final conclusion.

I saw the movie Jarhead and it was a movie about a marine who goes through extensive training and then is shipped out to the first Gulf war to protect the oil from the Iraqis.  History is always interpreted differently by everyone while using the author’s views where he/she could leave out some parts. 
This movie has a classical example of how the author, but in this case the producer only focused on his views about the situation.  While watching the movie I was only able to see American soldiers through out the movie.  As stated in history there were twelve other countries that sent out forces to Kuwait to protect the oil.  This piece of history was not shown in the movie and they could have had many reasons, one that I think is that the producer wanted to focus on the American troops only. 
By doing this the producer Sam Mendes does a fantastic job by only focusing on the Americans, so this way there is no confusion and he could go in-depth with the troop members.  While talking about the American troops he focuses on Jamie Foxx’s troops so this way there are only a few characters to focus on while staying on the bigger picture of war.  By telling us stories about each soldier, it plays a huge impact on the viewer’s emotions and feelings.  While doing this he does cut out the part where shooting and death occurred in the war but this was cut out because the few soldiers that he focused on never experienced any of those situations.  This is a yet another example of how the producer only shot scenes from his point of view.
Another reason the producer puts only certain scenes in the movie while producing the movie is because of box office numbers.  This also brings up another point about who the movie was made for in other words the audience.  In this case the movies ratings came out to “R” this is because of pervasive language, some violent images and strong sexual content.  This automatically only admits 18+ unless their parents buy the tickets.  Violence made this movie R rated and may be the language that was used in the movie makes it R.  So the audiences were picked right since little kids don’t have any interest in those sorts of movies about war and violence.  The producer keeps his promise about violence because there is one scene which was really moving for the audience.  This was when Jake was walking around in the desert and finds a huge spot where there had been a biochemical attack and everything was burned down to the ground.  The scene had a huge impact on me and the producer put a little spin to get more emotions out when Jake threw up because of what he saw.  Another scene was where it rained oil and how the troops had to sleep through it. 
This was a drama movie since it talked about a war and it always kept the audience on their feet because it could be the last time that soldier was breathing.  This was an excellent movie since it had history facts and a story to follow it.  This is all because of the producer, who only put his views into the movie because if it was only history facts it would have been classified as a boring movie and not done really well in the box office.
 
 

History is studded with tales of great men who have achieved their enviable status. Some of these leaders have been excellent military leaders who have led their armies to the great victories. However, the total personality and distinctive behavioral traits of such men are not covered by historians  in some cases. One such military leader is Alexander of Macedonia. Historians have depicted Alexander’s life, relationship, and achievement as he conquered most parts of the civilized world before he died. The film “Alexander” sought to unveil the “real Alexander,” one who was not an immortal legend, but a normal human being who was subject to human desires, temptations and influences of others. 

The film began with a line borrowed from ‘The Aeneid’: “Fortune favors the bold.” The bold was exactly what “Alexander” turned out to be. The film took a bold and unheard of look at the life, relationships and achievements of one of history’s most charismatic leaders. “Alexander” can be classified as a drama, and more specifically as a biographical epic. The film aimed at a modern, civilized audience who will understand and appreciate an insight into the life of a great man in his ancient world habitat, its cities, people, armies and culture. Judging from the achievement of the film, the film had appealed to an international audience. “Alexander” did a commendable job capturing the entire life history of Alexander, from his youth to his obscure death, from his confusing relationship with his parents, and his jealous mother Olympias, to the enthusiastic bonds with his closest companions and his huge army. The historian Ptolemy narrated details of Alexander’s life that were not filmed, while Aristotle related the chronology of events.

“Alexander” attained the greatest level of historical accuracy by creating thousands of historically accurate dress and recreating the ancient world of Alexander. Also, armor specialist forged a huge collection of shields, helmets, swords, lances, bows and arrows. Especially, Alexander’s  double-plumed lion’s head helmet was impressive. Moreover, realism was instilled in the battle scenes drenched in bloodthirsty pomp. Graphic footage used in film depicted reality, too. Examples are the breathtaking aerial shot of the battle of Gaugamela between Alexander’s army and Persian troops, and the final vicious battle between Alexander’s army and Indian soldiers.

In keeping with movie’s premier aim to give audience a new insight into Alexander’s personality, the film dared to “bend” history in several places. The most important is Alexander being depicted as bisexual. Largely due to the advice of his father, Alexander perceived women as only required for the childbearing function. Obsessed with the ancient Greek warrior Achilles and his male lover Patroclus, Alexander preferred the after-hours company of men, particularly Hephaistion. The film depicted Alexander’s homoerotic love for Hephaistion. He professed his love to the extent of confessing, “I’m nothing without you.” There was no scene they actually kissed. However, their nuzzling head, chaste bear hugs, and soulful looks all served to point their love. Their sexual relationship was teased throughout the film.

The second “history bending” instance is the depiction of Alexander. Very unlike an expected stern hero who can do no wrong, Alexander was often moist-eyed and confused by events, especially those caused by his parents who use their son as leverage against the other. Philip warned his son that all women are evil, while Olympias insisted that Alexander was actually the son of God Zeus and not the Philip. Alexander witnessed Philip raping Olympias when he was a child. It made Alexander acted in similar vein. He raped his feisty Barbarian wife Roxane. Alexander was totally dominated by his adoring and ambitious mother. Much of his lust for power was credited to mother’s influence. She manipulated her son’s psychic strings, motivating and monitoring his activities even when hundreds of miles distant. Her influence even dictated Alexander’s wife choice.

The last “history-bending” consists of adding scenes that are not contained in Alexander’s historical records. These include Alexander’s athletic love foreplay with a naked Roxane, the rape scenes, and the homoerotic interchanges between Alexander and Hephaistion.

When compared to recorded historical event, the film raised many controversies. Iranian historians claimed many parts are historically incorrect. Firstly, Persians soldiers were shown undisciplined and not wearing uniforms in the movie, but in fact, they were very organized. Secondly, Alexander was shown defeating the Persian in a single battle, but in fact, he had to fight several battles before overcoming the Persian army. Scenes involving India too, such as the portrayal of Indian dresses, culture and idiosyncrasies, were totally inaccurate. Moreover, Muslim religious influences were shown in the movie was inaccurate. Islam had not yet been born at that time. The last controversy involves Alexander’s bisexuality - something most Greeks bitterly resent.

While Alexander’s legendary exploits have reverberated through history, he now re-lives in the film “Alexander.” Alexander is not only as a complex and charismatic leader who nearly conquered the whole world, but also as a realistic, much more understandable human being. By doing this, the film enables viewers to develop a deeper understanding into the personality of this legendary hero.

· “Alexander (film).” Wikipedia. 2007. 26 Feb. 2007.   http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_(film)>