Daniel Day Lewis Archives

The Legacy of Bridget Bishop and the “Witches” of Salem

On June 10, 1692, Bridget Bishop became the first person hanged in Salem, Massachusetts after being accused of being a witch. By the end of the year, a total of nineteen innocent men and women had been hanged –and one man had been pressed to death — as a result of the Salem witch trials.

Hysteria around accusations of witchcraft were not unique to Salem and occurred around the world. But the Salem executions remain prominent in America’s history. There are various theories about the conditions and rivalries that led to the accusations of witchcraft and the government’s condoning of the executions.

The Crucible

Although the U.S. does not hang people for being witches today, the Salem witch trials are still invoked for modern day forms of hysteria. Playwright Arthur Miller used a dramatic interpretation of the Salem witch trials to comment on the witch-hunting of his own time. His play The Crucible opened in 1953. This fictionalized version of the Salem witch trials provided a commentary on the American government’s hunt for communists during Miller’s time.

Director Nicholas Hytner turned Miller’s play into a movie in 1996. The film version of The Crucible stars Daniel Day-Lewis, Winona Ryder, Paul Scofield, and Joan Allen.

At the time of the movie’s release, Miller wrote an essay in The New Yorker, “Why I Wrote ‘The Crucible.'” In the article, he explained that when he wrote the play over the course of a year, he also thought of other recent events of national insanity, like the Nazis in Germany. He also noted that the play continued to be relevant to later events in Joseph Stalin’s Russia, Mao Zedong’s China, and Augusto Pinochet’s Chile.

In his essay, Miller further explained, “below its concerns with justice the play evokes a lethal brew of illicit sexuality, fear of the supernatural, and political manipulation.” The play remains relevant as a reminder to stand up against hysteria and tyranny.

The West Memphis 3

A few years before the release of the film version of The Crucible, similar concerns about justice, illicit sexuality, fear of the supernatural, and political manipulation arose in the prosecution of the West Memphis 3. That case involved three young men convicted of the 1993 murders of three boys in West Memphis, Arkansas.

In the case, where some evoked parallels with the Salem with trials, the three accused eventually were released. Documentaries had helped create supporters for the three young men.

One of the three young men in the West Memphis 3 case, Damien Echols, was sentenced to death. Echols dressed and believed differently than others in the Arkansas community. Many believed his differences contributed to the reason he was prosecuted and sentenced to death.

After Echols was released from prison, he moved to Salem, Massachusetts. He explained, “Due to its history, Salem’s like a mecca for people in any form of alternative spirituality.”

A recent movie, Devil’s Knot (2013), tells the story of the West Memphis 3 in a dramatic retelling. That film, by chance or intent, was released on DVD in 2014 on the June 10 Salem anniversary.

Devil’s Knot, which stars Colin Firth and Reese Withspoon, is a decent introduction to the West Memphis 3 case and features a strong performance by Witherspoon. But the movie may try to do too much. And it is hard to beat the outstanding Paradise Lost documentaries.

The three documentaries are worth seeking out (the first of which currently is on YouTube). But viewers should be prepared that the films evoke strong emotions in recounting the horrible murders and problematic justice system. Similarly, the 1996 movie version of The Crucible features fine acting and remains a powerful reminder that injustice is not confined to one time period.

The Legacy of Salem

Bridget Bishop was around sixty years old when she went to the gallows. But we do not know what she thought as the executioner put a noose around her neck this week in 1692.

Perhaps the residents of Salem failed to stop the execution because of their own fears. Perhaps they would not risk their own lives for someone who was “different” because she had been married three times, frequented taverns, and did not dress like other Puritans.

But I wish Ms. Bishop could have known that she and the other condemned “witches” would not be forgotten. And I wish they could know that they continue to challenge us and make us question our beliefs more than three hundred years later.

Bridget Bishop picture via public domain. Leave your two cents in the comments.

Buy from Amazon

Paradise Lost: West Memphis 3 Released

The Heroic Death of Folksinger Victor Jara

Searching for Lin Zhao’s Soul (Documentary of the Day)

Chronicling the Struggle for Justice in “True Justice: Bryan Stevenson’s Fight for Equality”

New Song from Randy Newman: “Putin”

Where is Tank Man?

(Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

Steven Spielberg’s New Film with “Daniel Day-Lewis” as Obama

At the recent annual White House Correspondents’ Dinner M.C.’d by Conan O’Brien, one of the highlights was this short film where director Steven Spielberg announced that after Lincoln (2012), he decided the logical choice for his next movie is Obama, about our current President Barack Obama. In the video Spielberg explains why “Daniel Day-Lewis” was the natural choice for the lead. Pres. Obama shows a good sense of humor here, too, even poking fun at his ears. Check it out.

What is your favorite part of “Obama”? Leave your two cents in the comments.

Pres. Obama Sings With B.B. King

“Lincoln” As Both Icon and Human Being (Short Review)

Daniel Day-Lewis and the Voice of “Lincoln”

Pres. Obama Slow Jams the News with Jimmy Fallon

What Tarantino’s “Star Trek” Might Look Like

The Springsteen Song Rejected By the Harry Potter Films

(Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

“Lincoln” As Both Icon and Human Being (Short Review)

I recall hearing a story how after Director John Ford approached Henry Fonda to play Abraham Lincoln in Young Mr. Lincoln (1939), Fonda declined the role because he could not imagine filling the shoes of the great president. But Ford explained that he was not asking Fonda to play the Great Emancipator, he was asking him to play a young country lawyer. With that assurance, Fonda agreed to the part.

Director Steven Spielberg could not make such an assurance to Daniel Day-Lewis, who also was reluctant to take on the part of one of America’s biggest icons, because Spielberg’s film focuses on Lincoln during a key moment of his presidency as the president pushed for Congress to pass the Thirteenth Amendment banning slavery. Although Spielberg’s Lincoln (2012) follows the president as a war leader and politician, Day-Lewis, like Henry Fonda, found in the character’s core the country lawyer with a great mind and great compassion.

In a screenplay by Tony Kushner based in part on a book by Doris Kearns Goodwin, Lincoln focuses on a short time period in Lincoln’s life, allowing Day-Lewis and Spielberg to delve into the man’s character and tell a story while avoiding the pitfalls of some historical dramas that suffer by trying to cover too much. One might argue Lincoln falls into this trap at the end when it speeds forward to show us the end of the Civil War and Lincoln’s death, but I doubt the movie could have ended earlier when audiences already know the end of the story and want to see the resolution.

Lincoln is a glorious film with a great story, great drama, and great acting. Day-Lewis chose to portray the president in a voice that probably sounded more like Lincoln than the traditional deep-voiced portrayals. The choice to use the high pitched twangy voice, similar to what was used by Lincoln co-star Hal Holbrook in his own 1974 portrayal of the president, seems to have freed him to search for the human qualities of the icon as the character relays his humorous tales to anyone who will listen. I suspect that the voice of Lincoln in Lincoln will forever change our perception of how Lincoln is portrayed in future films.

While the movie cannot completely escape Lincoln-as-bigger-than-life, Spielberg probably does the best one could do by choosing a lesser known story from Lincoln’s presidency. Additionally, audiences may be able to feel some human connection to Lincoln’s struggles with Congress if they think of current political struggles in Washington in our own time.

The acting is uniformly good with several excellent actors appearing in the film. Sally Field, who had to convince Spielberg she was right for the part despite her age, humanizes Mary Todd Lincoln, helping show the good qualities and the faults of both the First Lady and her husband. David Strathairn is great as William Seward. Tommy Lee Jones plays the abolitionist Thaddeus Stevens, who is faced with a difficult choice. James Spader adds some comic relief as someone working behind the scenes to help Lincoln get the Congressional votes he needs. Jackie Earle Haley, who always makes me recall Breaking Away (1979), is perfect as Confederate Vice-President Alexander Stephens. And the list goes on.

Conclusion? There is something enjoyable about spending a few hours with one of the greatest figures in American history, and Spielberg and Day-Lewis do an excellent job of bringing Abraham Lincoln alive. Although Lincoln is 149 minutes long, it did not seem long and I hated for the film to end. If you do not mind that the film focuses on political negotiating and is not a war film, you will find Lincoln completely engaging.

Bonus Reviews Because Why Should You Trust Me?: Rotten Tomatoes currently gives Lincoln a 90% critics rating and an 83% audience rating, perhaps reflecting some audience disappointment that the film is about politics. Kimberley Jones of The Austin Chronicle loved the film, writing, “Master shape-shifter Daniel Day-Lewis delivers a monumental portrayal of a man so firmly monumented in our nation’s history.” Austin Kennedy at Film Geek Central was disappointed, noting, “I expect spectacular things from Spielberg, so when he delivers something that’s just average, it’s a bit of a letdown.”

What did you think of “Lincoln”? Leave your two cents in the comments.

Buy from Amazon

Daniel Day-Lewis and the Voice of “Lincoln”

The Sound of “Lincoln”

Tommy Lee Jones and “The Homesman” (Missed Movies)

Godzilla Versus Ida (Short Reviews)

Steven Spielberg’s New Film with “Daniel Day-Lewis” as Obama

Lincoln & Liberty Too!

(Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

Paul Thomas Anderson’s Epic Poem on an American Cult: “The Master” (Short Review)

Writer and Director Paul Thomas Anderson‘s latest film, The Master (2012), stars Joaquin Phoenix as a troubled man who finds a home for awhile with the leader of a movement played by Philip Seymour Hoffman. The navy veteran played by Phoenix bounces around aimlessly, apparently haunted by some mental illness, until he attaches himself to Hoffman’s character, an author who developed “The Cause” as a method he claims will help people live their lives.

Although the film is fictional, many have pointed out a number of similarities between Hoffman’s character and Scientology founder and author L. Ron Hubbard, which adds an interesting layer to the film.

It is a challenging film in a number of ways, highlighted by vignettes more than a narrative story — although the movie is not without plot. Yet, as in Anderson’s There Will Be Blood (2007) that starred Daniel Day-Lewis, what one may remember most from the movie is the fine acting combined with haunting images throughout.

As happens after I watch a Stanley Kubrick film, after watching The Master I keep reconstructing and re-imagining certain scenes and the way the director laid them out. Scenes like one of Phoenix stretched out on a ship above his shipmates or of Hoffman riding a motorcycle in a desert convey a certain haunting feeling that cannot be described in mere words.

Because of those images and others like them, perhaps the movie will hold up well on repeated viewings. But on my first viewing, I did find the movie watching experience a pleasant one even as I admired the film.

The weakness in the movie is that pretty much all of the characters, including the Master’s wife played by Amy Adams, are not very likeable. A movie can be enjoyable and about unlikeable characters, but I might have liked the movie more with a little more information about why the characters were like they were, although there were hints that Phoenix’s character’s troubles resulted from the war. Yet, as it was, I spent 2 hours and 18 minutes with unlikeable characters, whose oddities were emphasized with a musical score of dissonant chords.

I found a similar weakness in There Will Be Blood, and missed a heart that appeared in some of Anderson’s great earlier works like Boogie Nights (1997). Of course, in The Master, Anderson is trying to say something about 1950s America that would have been lost had he included likeable characters. So, I get it.

Conclusion? The Master is a very good and challenging film but not for everyone. If you are looking for a conventional story with sympathetic characters, you might want to skip this one. But if it is worth it for you to ponder scenes of chilling beauty, make sure to see this one on the big screen.

Other Reviews Because Why Should You Listen to Me?: Andrew O’Hehir at Salon has an excellent discussion of the film, praising its genius as a tale about L. Ron Hubbard’s America while thoughtfully considering its weaknesses too. Lisa Kennedy at The Denver Post says the film is both “confounding” and “magnificent.” By contrast, Cole Smiley claims “the audience is left to decide if the movie is some kind of bad joke, or an artistic project gone horribly astray.” Rotten Tomatoes gives the film an 84% critic rating and a 62% audience rating, and that disparity is not surprising considering how the challenging aspects of the film may endear critics more than most general filmgoers.

Laugh of the Day: Shining Trailer Parody

The 25 Best Films of 2010-2014

Pres. Kennedy Advises U.S. to Start Digging

The Unfinished Films of Stanley Kubrick

The Legacy of Bridget Bishop and the “Witches” of Salem

Critics Really Love “Her” (Short Review)

(Some related Chimesfreedom posts.)

Google Saves the Planet By Adding “Bacon Number” Function

Finally, the folks at Google have solved a worldwide problem by making it easy to find the “Bacon Number” for any actor, past or present. Google apparently was concerned that people were spending too much time thinking when they played “Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon,” so they added a function where you can find the number easily on Google.

Here is how: (1) In the Google search box, type “Bacon Number,” followed by an actor’s name; (2) Then hit “search.” That’s it. That actor’s “Bacon Number” will come up on the screen, along with an explanation of the steps.

Considering actor’s mentioned in recent Chimesfreedom posts, it is easy to find that Daniel Day-Lewis’s Bacon Number is two. Casey Affleck’s Bacon Number is one because he appeared with Kevin Bacon in Lemon Sky (1988). Bob Dylan’s Bacon Number is two. . .

“Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon” was inspired by the play and film, Six Degrees of Separation (1993), which popularized a theory by author Frigyes Karinthy that everyone is on average only six introductions away from any other person on earth. The theory eventually developed into the theory that Kevin Bacon has been in so many films that one may connect him to any actor through six films or less. Up to now, one had to think to figure out the steps, but no longer.

New York Magazine found some flaws with the program. And, since “bacon” made me think of Miss Piggy, I discovered that Google has no Bacon Number for her. But it does have a lot of actors.

So, fire up Google and go at it. The world’s biggest problem is solved. Oh wait, you mean The Oracle of Bacon had already solved the problem (as well as knowing that Miss Piggy’s Bacon Number is two)?

2024 UPDATE: Unfortunately, Google no longer offers the Bacon Number function.

Whose Bacon Number did you check? Leave your two cents in the comments.