Lately I have been seeing films and theatrical works that are based on history and current events. Without spending hours reading reliable published works about various historical figures and their actions, it is a matter of using blind faith in judging their accuracy, or simply allowing for dramatic license.
During a recent trip to London, I resaw Hamilton. Anyone who has seen this musical knows that Lin Manuel Miranda is blending history with imagination. He has turned many of our founding fathers into caricatures. Hamilton is a brilliant, creative work; most who have seen it are delighted by it. Enough said.
Another hit musical that I enjoyed, Come From Away, deals with a village of Newfoundlanders who unexpectedly needed to welcome, feed, and house, the passengers of more than 4,000 planes that were required to land at the nearest airport on 9/11. The website for Come From Away stresses the research that the creators did in order to come up with their story. The characters are based on real people. Of course, they didn’t sing and dance their way through the ordeal, but there is an amount of truth underlying the musical.
Then I saw a straight play called Two Ladies. It is a new drama by Nancy Harris and directed by Nicholas Hytner that focuses on the first lady of the United States, based very closely on Melania Trump, and the first lady of France, based very closely on Brigitte Macron. The two women are stuck together in a room while their husbands are in conference. We soon learn that the U.S. first lady carries poison in a Chanel perfume bottle. Later we hear a tirade from the French first lady about her husband’s infidelities. The audience, I among them, were at first startled by the ridiculous dialog. At the end, with a particularly absurd resolution, the audience shook its heads collectively and then exited. Taking such liberties with highly recognizable, living public figures is unfair.
Recently, I saw the new movie Harriet, which is playing theatrically. It a powerful motion picture about Harriet Tubman, seen first as a slave in 1849, then as a brave, unstoppable woman who helped slaves escape to freedom on the underground railroad. In Harriet, Cynthia Erivo, known for her Tony-winning performance on Broadway in The Color Purple, embodies Tubman. This acting task becomes difficult when Tubman repeatedly pauses life-threatening journeys through the South to commune with god. At first, it’s dumbfounding. Then the viewers get more used to it. Because Erivo is so persuasive in the role, I didn’t lose my belief in the story. Later I learned that Tubman really did talk to god in ways shown on screen.
Kasi Lemmons wrote and directed Harriet. This may be a breakout film project for her because I predict there will be one or more Oscars awarded to this relatively small production. Reportedly, it was made for $17,000,000.00, and it is making back this investment within its first month of release.
The spiritualism of Harriet Tubman occasionally turns the screenplay into a religious tract. She is portrayed as a Joan of Arc. Yet, if Tubman was like Joan of Arc, that’s how she should be portrayed.
For years there has been a campaign to release the $20 bill featuring Harriet Tubman’s portrait. It appears we will have to wait several more years, according to the current administration. At least the American public will have this compelling, based-on-fact, screen drama to celebrate Harriet Tubman.
Audrey Kupferberg is a film and video archivist and appraiser. She is lecturer emeritus and the former director of Film Studies at the University at Albany and co-authored several entertainment biographies with her husband and creative partner, Rob Edelman.
The views expressed by commentators are solely those of the authors. They do not necessarily reflect the views of this station or its management.