| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| susank2 |
Posted - October 05 2007 : 08:59:10 AM
In the script it says:
"UNCAS: Mohawk field we saw was 5 mile long on the river. Chief Joseph Brandt's field."
Uncas actually says the same thing in the movie.
Joseph Brant was 15 in 1757. Would he have been a chef at such a young age? Would he have had a corn field 5 mile long...at 15??
Unless Joseph Brandt and Joseph Brant are 2 different people, maybe? |
| 11 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Bookworm |
Posted - October 24 2007 : 08:53:09 AM
Welcome, David! We don't have too many members whose backgrounds are as closely related to the events discussed here as are yours and your wife's. I hope you'll post often. And Sergeant Munro, for one, will be delighted to make the acquaintance of someone whose forebears served in the Black Watch! |
| David F. Mathieson |
Posted - October 21 2007 : 6:54:10 PM
Sorry for the misspelling, Uncas
See the "Broken Chain" for a better depiction of Brant. |
| David F. Mathieson |
Posted - October 21 2007 : 6:49:12 PM
Thayendanegea, Brants birth name, never was elegable to become speaker for his people until well after he came back from his schooling in Connecticut and England. At this time he would have had to prove his worthyness to speak for his people and then it would be up to the women's councel to aprove this. Remember this was a matriochal society, the women had a equal say in the governing of tribal affairs. Cooper and the film industry took a lot of liberties as was the case in so many movies that have been made. Another caracter mentioned was Uncus. What the heck is Uncus doing in up state NY. He belonged at Shantock on the Thames River in CT. This was an exciting movie but so very far from the truth.
Wee Davie
|
| winglo |
Posted - October 21 2007 : 12:53:24 PM
Thanks, Rich. |
| richfed |
Posted - October 21 2007 : 09:08:44 AM
quote:
Originally posted by winglo
quote:
Originally posted by richfed
I don't think this was because of poor research [See: Mark Baker's analysis on the site]. It was, as Obi says, Hollywoodized. It was simply a way of mentioning a noted Mohawk.
Rich, where do I go to find mark Baker's analysis? I couldn't find it.
Sorry for the delayed response!!!!
See Mark's stuff here:
The SCRIPT AND THE MATTER OF HISTORICAL ACCURACY
ON THE TRAIL ... WITH MARK A. BAKER |
| Light of the Moon |
Posted - October 07 2007 : 10:31:10 AM
Lol. That is too funny ! I love historians! |
| Hawkeye_Joe |
Posted - October 06 2007 : 8:16:24 PM
They at least knew who Joseph Brandt was. They tried to add a little history into the movie but failed badly with people who know history. |
| winglo |
Posted - October 06 2007 : 12:32:30 PM
quote:
Originally posted by richfed
I don't think this was because of poor research [See: Mark Baker's analysis on the site]. It was, as Obi says, Hollywoodized. It was simply a way of mentioning a noted Mohawk.
Rich, where do I go to find mark Baker's analysis? I couldn't find it. |
| richfed |
Posted - October 06 2007 : 08:01:16 AM
I don't think this was because of poor research [See: Mark Baker's analysis on the site]. It was, as Obi says, Hollywoodized. It was simply a way of mentioning a noted Mohawk. |
| Obediah |
Posted - October 05 2007 : 7:16:37 PM
All historical movies get Hollywoodized somewhere along the line. The historical movie which is closest to actual (that I have seen) is "We Were Soldiers." |
| winglo |
Posted - October 05 2007 : 1:39:47 PM
Hey Susank2, you are an observant woman. I noticed the time discrepancy fairly quickly after watching the movie for the first time. If you go to the LOTM Game thread this problem is briefly mentioned sometime in the last couple of months. There may be other older threads where this comes up, as well (I've only been around since July 07).
Basically it's a mistake due to poor research because there was only one Joseph Brandt and he was too young to own a field. |
![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]")
