|
Amistad | 
 enlarge | Director: Steven Spielberg
Actors: Djimon Hounsou, Matthew Mcconaughey, Anthony Hopkins, Morgan Freeman, Nigel Hawthorne
Studio: Dreamworks Video
Category: DVD
List Price: $9.98
Buy New: $4.03
You Save: $5.95 (60%)
New (59) Used (32) Collectible (3) from $3.86
Avg. Customer Rating:  144 reviews
Sales Rank: 4065
Format: Anamorphic, Closed-captioned, Color, Dolby, Dvd-video, Widescreen, Ntsc
Languages: English (Original Language), English (Subtitled)
Rating: R (Restricted)
Number Of Items: 1
Running Time: 152
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
DVD Layers: 2
DVD Sides: 1
Picture Format: Anamorphic Widescreen
Shipping Weight (lbs): 0.2
Dimensions (in): 7.5 x 5.7 x 0.7
MPN: MCAD84162D
ISBN: 0783231202
UPC: 667068416220
EAN: 9780783231204
ASIN: 0783231202
Theatrical Release Date: December 10, 1997
Release Date: May 4, 1999
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Brand New and Factory Sealed Item Fast Shipping
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
An epic journey of one mans fight for his life and his freedom. This story of courage and determination is presented by a director whose vision goes to the heart of the story and the soul of its characters. Once again steven spielberg has created a film event that will never be forgotten. Studio: Paramount Home Video Release Date: 02/13/2007 Starring: Morgan Freeman Djimon Hounsou Run time: 155 minutes Rating: R Director: Steven Spielberg
Amazon.com
Steven Spielberg's most simplistic, sanitized history lesson, Amistad, explores the symbolic 1840s trials of 53 West Africans following their bloody rebellion aboard a slave ship. For most of Schindler's List (and, later, Saving Private Ryan) Spielberg restrains himself from the sweeping narrative and technical flourishes that make him one of our most entertaining and manipulative directors. Here, he doesn't even bother trying, succumbing to his driving need to entertain with beautiful images and contrived emotion. He cheapens his grandiose motives and simplifies slavery, treating it as cut- and-dry genre piece. Characters are easy Hollywood stereotypes--"villains" like the Spanish sailors or zealous abolitionists are drawn one-dimensionally and sneered upon. And Spielberg can't suppress his gifted eye, undercutting normally ugly sequences, such as the terrifying slave passage, which is shot as a gorgeous, well-lit composition. At its core, Amistad is a traditional courtroom drama, centered by a tired, clichéd narrative: a struggling, idealistic young lawyer (Matthew McConaughey) fighting the crooked political system and saving helpless victims. Worse yet, Spielberg actually takes the underlying premise of his childhood fantasy, E.T. and repackages it for slavery. Cinque (Djimon Hounsou), the leader of the West African rebellion, is presented much like the adorable alien: lost, lacking a common language, and trying to find his way home. McConaughey is a grown-up Elliot who tries communicating complicated ideas such as geography by drawing pictures in the sand or language by having Cinque mimic his facial expressions. Such stuff was effective for a sci-fi fantasy about the communication barriers between a boy and a lost alien; here, it seems like a naive view of real, complex history. --Dave McCoy
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 139 more reviews...
 Educational and Entertaining! June 27, 2008
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
The film brings to the screen the 1839 Amistad incident when a slave ship experiencing a rebellion was seized by the U.S. Navy and towed into an American port. Subsequently, a trial will commence with the Cuban slavers, the Spanish government, and U.S. naval officers all vying for custody of the slaves while pitted at the same time against those supporting their release and safe return to Africa. The film provides for a very good description of the pre-Civil War era along with people and events slowly tearing at American society and by extension the country as whole.
In contrast to Amazon.com's narrow minded reviewer, Dave McCoy and his failed, off-the-target review, the movie actually does an excellent job of transporting the viewer to 19th Century United States and presenting important people like J.C. Calhoun, Martin Van Buren, and John Quincy Adams, groups like the abolitionists, institutions like slavery outside the USA as well the more "humane" American version of slavery, notions like Sectionalism, international law/treaties, international relations, the American judicial system, the American political system and much more.
Anthony Hopkins, Morgan Freeman, Matthew McConaughey, Djimon Hounsou, and the rest of the cast, have carried out their performances very well
Steven Spielberg's Amistad is very well written and very well presented allowing for a thought-provoking movie that will provide food for thought well after it is over as it offers valuable insight into a very important period of American History.
More of a personal experience, than a review April 18, 2008
3 out of 4 found this review helpful
Historically accurate this in your ganeckdagazoink. It is like the intellectuals who pan 'Troy', either 1. because its not accurate historically,or 2. because it was a travesty to have Brad Pitt play the greatest warrior ever. That is neither here nor there, however magic comes sometimes when you least expect it. I believe firmly, that in the movie industry it is hardly ever about how talented you are, you can always, for the most part, hone the craft, but more about luck, as most professional actors (or struggling ones for that matter) will tell you. The right place, the right time, the right look, the exact moment you make a gesture in the hallway waiting for your 3 minutes to read two lines for a Dial Soap commercial and the casting director just happens to see your brow go up a certain distinct way, and Monday morning your agent calls you and you have the gig. Luck, hmmm it came crawling my way one brutal winter in New England.
It was around five months after my return from film school in Manhattan, a good one too, I was arriving at 4:25 in the morning in my town I had lived in for 2 some-ard years, for make-up. Of all the movies I could have been in, of all the places I could have been that year, (I travel a lot), of all the names I would have loved to have graced the screen with, and of every director I would have love to have sat in awe and watched, I, (and it could have been eternal bliss from there if it were the last), was going to be in a Speilberg film. Cliché? Eh? Well I certainly hope so.
It is very hard to detail to words the feeling on my skin, the way my shirt felt against my chest that day, the way my heart would actually sing as it beat inside my cocoon, walking up the long spiral staircase in the old city hall building which was made into a court house, knowing that on top of that building, somewhere in the oogles of background extras and the crew, lights and stands and sticks and gaffers and goffers and the like, I was in my element. I didnt tell anyone I went to film school, and that I had my DVD collection at home alphabatized by directors last name (lol), what did it matter, it didnt. But I Knew them all. Janusz Kaminski was on set, (Schindlers List, Saving Private Ryan cinematographer), Kate Capeshaw (Indiana Jones) Speilbergs wife was there, Debbie Allen, and her husband Norm Nixon, of course Matt McConaughey (who was unbelievably professional, it was stunning, as I was watching him in character prepare before entering for a movement take; wow it was as if he had left the physical and whoosh to another place al together, now that is preparing), Morgan Freeman (who was utterly rude to EVERYONE including the poor make up girl), David Paymer (Searching for Bobby Fischer) Stellan Skarsgard, and of course, mostly standing on the ledge overlooking Newport Harbor with a cig swinging from his fingers, was the elegantly voiced, Pete Postlethwaite. Oh Pete, I thought to myself, my shining star, that wonderful bliss that I was so young routing for you at the Oscars for In The Name of the Father, how much I was passionate about his craft.
I will never forget one scene, and if you are familiar with the movie you can relate, when Jjimon Hounsou, the leader of the Africans slaves aboard La Amistad, has to rise above the orderly law and back and forth rebutalls, to say in English, I'm free, I'm free. We must have did that take 30 or 40 times, probably five or six hours, and the mood in the courthouse was so intense, so amazing that everyone was simply stunned by the power of a few words, and when he had all the camera angles he needed and Djimon finally nailed it, Kate was in tears as was Debbie Allen and Speilberg, in a room filled with a silent hush that seemed to last for days, was the solitary word of wow.
As a principle extra for two months, not only in RI but also in CT, there was one moment in particular I would like to share with you, when the AD jetted all the non principals out of the courthouse, I somehow remained behind. My beard was designed in a pork chop way, where I sort of lingered behind with the principles and no one shoed me anywhere, and while Janusz and his crew reset the lighting for the next take, Matthew walked over to him in a poster size rolled tube, and he opened it slowly from the top, placed the white top cylinder on the old courthouse table, and opened a fairly large print of Empire of the Sun. I almost gasped aloud. That too, was my favorite film of all time, that too ss what set me west young man, go west, and eventually to waiting tables and studying the craft at night waiting for the big break back in NY. He handed Steven a black sharpee and he signed away on the top left corner. I wonder all these years later, nearly 10 years plus, if it sits atop his mantle in his home in the hills or somewhere in the country. I was there that day, I was with some of the most brilliant minds in the film industry. I too, wonder if Matthew was inspired to be an actor from Empire. The Speilberg haters (which is the most ludicrous bunch of whack-jobs imaginable) can have their spew and vitriol, but being part of something tangible like that, and having someone like Steven as a mentor, albeit unknowing my whole life, made it something I will never forget for the rest of my life.
Amistad alone tells a story, and one that is very difficult to relate to its audience. The courtroom scenes are tiresome and rough for a lot of movie goers, but if you can look past that for just one moment and see the raw, pinnacle acting that only someone that directs giants could produce and the immaculate word salad at the end of the film, that only Hopkins could achieve. The brutal, opening sequence alone, is enough to set you up for the often jaded slowness the movie can provide, but all in all, there are scenes where life itself can spew forth and invigorate all of us, like it did so many years ago, for myself,
 Great story drowned in syrup April 12, 2008
14 out of 17 found this review helpful
What an opportunity for a great film: the drama, the tragedies, the historical crossroads, the meaning for US history in the state of birth...
I am often opposed to remakes, but this story would deserve a competent serious new version without the cute little Hollywood cliches and without the music that envelops everything in sugar coating.
I am not sure which parts of the tale are historic and which are added by the script writer or Spielberg. I find it hard to believe in John Quincy Hopkins, and if the real man did make this speech, it was a great one and would have deserved to be acted without the horrible sentimental soundtrack. The whole part is such a terrible cliche, it almost does not matter if it is historically correct. The esthetic conventions of inferior Hollywood productions should be banned from serious subjects.
(Was Martin van Buren really this awful as President?)
I would still say, the film is worth watching, but it is so unsatisfactory.
amistad March 26, 2008
dvd came in very short time, in great condition, and played extremely well, with no skips, interruptions.
Hisotical fact over entertainment March 19, 2008
Over the years since this film first came out it has received something of a love hate relationship with viewers. Amazon have provided their own review filled with the sneers and sarcasm that have resulted more from critics knee jerk pandering to the masses than serious critical review. Others have pushed the old "political correct" Motive behind the film (For anyone who doesn't know, political correct roughly translates as "Something I disagree with, usually something I deem to be either left wing regardless of whether it is or not)
What should not be taken for granted however is the level of emotion still felt by many African Americans regarding the trans Atlantic slave trade. I first watched this film at a cinema in the United States and can recall (I assume) a black American walking out during the film with tears in his eyes clearly emotionally distressed at what he was seeing (It was during the scene describing the trans Atlantic journey when many were whipped, beaten and the sick thrown overboard.
I seriously doubt however, that Spielburg under estimated the feelings of black Americans and while this film is certainly not of the quality of Schindler's List it certainly isn't ET. To make that kind of comparison is frankly absurd. My guess is Spielberg went for something based loosely on historical fact similar to Saving Private Ryan.
While the argument that the characters may well be one dimensional I assume a previous reviewer did not bother the watch the film before he reviewed it and declared it "politically correct" because the film clearly shows that Cinque was kidnapped by Africans and sold to Europeans.
Spielberg does try to show the diversity of ethnic groups such as Muslims and Animist, one man seems to be taken by Christianity (a convert no less in such harsh circumstances!) The men speak in different languages and at times are argumentative amongst themselves (A comparison can be made to the imprisonment of Jews during WW2 and the disputes that arose between Jews of various nationalities)
Speilburg tries hard. He shows that the Spanish and Portuguese were the main participants in the slave trade (The British admiral giving evidence and yes, Britian did send out ships to attack Spanish and Portuguese slave traders) The conflict within the United States itself regarding slavery and the divide between north and a south that still relied heavily on a slave work force.
Morgan Freedman provides us with the character of a black man born in the United States with no concept of slavery himself and no direct links with Africa. An abolishinsist non the less.
Yes, the film may be less than accurate in regards to specific events but I believe Speilburg was attempting to provide the viewer with an overview of what slavery was and the struggle against it.
|
|
|
© 2007 saydeals.com. All rights reserved. | |
