Hi all
Although I have not seen the film, it appears that the new film "Amazing Grace" features a character based on Tarleton as an opponent of the movement to abolish slavery. As an MP, Tarleton did support slavery -- his family dealt in the slave trade and of course Liverpool commerce partly owed its wealth to the slave trade and trade in cotton, tobacco, and other commodities. It appears from the Internet Movie Database listing on the film that the character in the film though is "Lord Tarleton" so it can't be a wholly historical portrayal of the real Banastre Tarleton, who was in the House of Commons not the House of Lords. The following is from a Banastre Tarleton mailing list I am on (the URL for the list is above in a prior post of mine if anyone is interesting in joining).
Hello,
This is a moving and emotional movie about M.P. "William Wilberforce" and his jousts with M.P. "Tarleton" over the slave trade in England.
I do not know how accurate the portrayal of "BAN" is in the movie and of course "BAN" is the heavy in the movie. This is the one movie so far this year that I think is a must see; especially for this group.
It is accurate in that it uses the Tarleton name, M.P. representing Liverpool, and includes "BAN's" missing fingers in one scene.
If there are any members who are more knowledgeable about "BAN" please comment about the movie's accuracy.
Mike in California
******
Hello Michael
I have yet to see the movie but I have read a lot about it. The following is from the review of the movie in yesterday's New York Times:
Biographical films are generally tricky, since the on-screen personality rarely matches the real one; they’re even trickier when the subject is shrouded in misty time and debate. In some quarters, “Amazing Grace” will succeed better as a diversion than as a nuanced record of Wilberforce’s life. Historians have been divided on his legacy, with one d*amning him as “the mouthpiece of the party of order and of the business world.” A contemporary asked Wilberforce, after he introduced a law that set back the cause of trade unions, why he paid more attention to African slaves than to Britain’s working poor, whose interests he probably helped obstruct for years. Religious writers, not surprisingly, are more charitably disposed toward him.
It’s equally unsurprising that the filmmakers don’t address these sharper criticisms. The film’s Wilberforce is a fanatic, a true believer, a crusader, a man of action and God, of stirring principle and tireless will. He’s at once pure and seductive, a dashing, romantic figure with a long black coat who talks to God while lying in his garden and keeps rabbits for pets. This matinee idol version might be wildly simplistic, even borderline caricature, but there is also something unfailingly attractive about a film character so wholly devoted to good. The screenplay doesn’t poke into the nature of that good — whether Wilberforce’s fight against slavery was truly selfless or flattered a sense of moral superiority — but it does make you think.
It would be easier to dismiss “Amazing Grace” for its historical elisions if it weren’t also filled with so many great British actors larking about in knee breeches and powdered wigs; . . .
* * * *
The actor who plays Tarleton is mentioned in the review: Ciaran Hinds is mentioned although only his name and with the comment that Tarleton and a son of King George are "on hand for much of the parliamentary proceedings, delivering withering commentary and general amusement as two of Wilberforce’s most powerful foes." It appears from other sources, eg, the Internet Movie Database, that the character he plays is "Lord Tarleton" which is historically incorrect. Tarleton was in the House of Commons not in the House of Lords so that's a distortion right away. Of course all historical films are going to take liberties. "The Patriot" took major liberties with Tarleton. I would like to think that "Amazing Grace" is more truthful to the historical Banastre Tarleton but I wouldn't bank on it.
Chris
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks