Amistad

Amistad (1997)

Director: Steven Spielberg

Cast: Djimon Hounsou, Matthew McConaughey, Anthony Hopkins, Morgan Freeman, Stellan Skarsgård, Pete Postlethwaite, Chiwetel Ejiofor, David Paymer

Writers: David Franzoni

Synopsis:

In 1839 a group of African slaves led by Cinque (Hounsou) escape and kill the crew of the Amistad, the ship transporting them from Cuba to the U.S. They are soon captured by the U.S. Navy and imprisoned as runaway slaves in Connecticut. The local abolitionist movement led by Mr. Tappan (Skarsgård) and Theodore Joadson (Freeman) enlist the help of a real estate lawyer, Roger Baldwin (McConaughey) to find a legal way to set the slaves free. Baldwin is successful in showing hat Cinque and his kin were not born on a plantation and, thus illegally acquired. However, in an effort to preserve a treaty with Spain and prevent a Civil War, John Forsyth (Paymer), the Secretary of State to President Martin Van Buren, takes the case to the Supreme Court. Baldwin is left to seek the aid of former President John Quincey Adams (Hopkins) to argue the matter before the highest court in the land.

First Impressions:

I missed this movie in the theaters but caught it soon after its release on VHS. I saw it with a group of friends, which was probably a mistake because this is not really the type of movie that appeals to most teenage boys. As a result, I didn't really get to experience the movie the way I'd normally like but I remember liking what I saw. I mean, it is Spielberg after all. I didn't see it again until I purchased it on DVD nearly 20 years later. Upon second viewing, I was really quite impressed. It's been several years since I last watched it, so I was excited to see how one of Spielberg's lesser known efforts holds up after so long.

Story/Direction:

"Give us the courage to do what is right. And if it means civil war? Then let it come. And when it does, may it be, finally, the last battle of the American Revolution."

This movie tackles a lot of heavy subjects, from the morality of slavery to political tensions between the Northern and Southern U.S. during the middle of the 19th century. The story moves along at a pretty good pace, which surprised me a bit since I always viewed it as a courtroom drama and those types of films have a tendency to plod at times. Speaking of courtroom dramas, this film spent a lot less time in the actual courtroom that I remembered. Of course, most of the Amistad's key dramatic moments take place in a court of law but much of the story exists elsewhere. Those moments in the courtroom, though are well handled. Instead of dwelling on the processes and procedures of a 19th century courtroom, Spielberg opts to focus mainly on one or two great speeches rather than spending too much time on the trials themselves. That's not to say that there isn't any objections, cross-examinations or anything else like that in the film, they're just not the focus.

Due to its subject matter, this isn't a film with much grey area and its very easy to identify the good guys and the bad guys. There were a number of parties that had a vested interest in ensuring that the Amistad slaves did not go free but the film don't spend too much time on most of them. The only antagonist that was explored in any great detail was the U.S. government and I noticed a few disturbing parallels with today's current political climate. In the film, the government's position was that the Amistad slaves were property and should be returned in order to uphold its treaty with Spain. However, the treaty was merely window dressing and Van Buren's primary concern was losing Southern votes in the upcoming election if he did not oppose the freeing of the slaves. It's nice to see that not much has changed in the world of politics over the last 200+ years.

The film isn't all heavy subject matter though and there are a few lighthearted moments. The film gets a few solid laughs from the Africans' growing frustration with not understanding or being understood by the English-speaking Americans. Through the use of subtitles, Spielberg lets us see how Cinque and his fellow slaves try to interpret what is being said to them, which often times was fairly amusing. Overall, though, the humor is fairly limited and well p[laced, so as not to interfere with the story's serious tone.

Acting:

This film has what you would call a stellar cast and all of the actors involve give top-notch performances. In breaking down some of the key performances, I think I need to start with Djimon Housou's turn as Cinque. Amistad was Hounsou's first major film role and he acquitted himself very well. Housnou had a difficult task because the majority of his lines were spoken in another language, meaning that the film's intended audience could only understand what he was saying with the assistance of subtitles or another character translating. Given that limitation, Hounsou does a great job conveying the rage, despair and confusion that Cinque must have felt during the whole ordeal.

The next performance to highlight would have to be the great Anthony Hopkins. Even 22 years ago, Hopkins was already a living legend in the cinema for some fantastic and award-winning performances. When we meet John Quincy Adams, he's nearing the end of a very long political career and Hopkins portrays him as an crotchety old man looking to run out the clock before he's put to pasture. Essentially, he's a man who thinks that his country has no further need of him and he really just wants to go home and spend time in his garden. It's not until he's asked by the abolitionist movement to assist with the Amistad case (which he initially refuses) does he regain his enthusiasm. It all culminates in a fantastic speech before the Supreme Court (part of which is quoted above) which will give all but the most jaded denizens of the internet chills.

Finally, let's turn our eye to a fresh-faced Matthew McConaughey as the young real estate lawyer Roger Baldwin. This was right at the beginning of McConaughey's career and he was still mostly known more for his looks than his acting ability. He does a fine job in Amistad but I always found that his thick Texas drawl seemed out of place in 19th century Connecticut. I don't know if Roger Baldwin was a real person or not but it seems unlikely that he was from the deep south considering the tensions that existed at the time in the U.S. I'm not usually one to harp on bad accents in movies, in fact I'm usually pretty forgiving of them, but for some reason this one just took me out of the movie. Other than that though, McConaughey did a very solid job in the role.

Visual/Special Effects:

There aren't really any special or visual effects in this movie to speak of. There aren't even really a lot of practical effects to discuss, it's just not that kind of movie. The film's production design, however, was top-notch and they did a great job making the film look like 19th century America. Costume design was also well done, which gave the film a very authentic feel. Other than that, there really isn't a lot to say about the visuals of the film.

Score/Music:

I can't believe that this is my 20th review and this is the first time I get to talk about the great John Williams. In my opinion, John Williams is the greatest movie composer of all time and he's arguably contributed more to modern movie-making than most acclaimed actors and directors. The score he did for this film is not among his more famous ones. In fact, you'll not likely hear it even mentioned when discussing his body of work. That's a shame because I think the score in this movie ranks up among Mr. Williams' best works. It's one of those scores that sits in the background quietly until its needed to underscore a particularly noteworthy moment. Of course it also passed my personal test of a good movie score, in that I found myself absently humming it days after viewing.

Action:

There's very little action in this movie, save for the first sequence of the film in which the Amistad slaves orchestrate their escape from bondage. It's shot at very low angles against the backdrop of a violent thunderstorm. It's a terribly effective and visceral scene of brutal violence but it works very well and it also showed that Spielberg, who at the time was known mainly for fun popcorn flicks could shoot a serious action scene. Other than that, though, there really wasn't any action in this movie to speak of but, again, it's not really that kind of movie.

Final Verdict:

This is still a great film that certainly holds up after 22 years and themes it discusses are still very relevant today. It's definitely one of the hidden gems in Spielberg's filmography.