PDA

View Full Version : Copperhead, The Movie | "The neocons will throw a fit" - Thomas DiLorenzo




FrankRep
07-06-2013, 05:56 PM
Thomas DiLorenzo, February 10, 2013: (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?404148-Thomas-DiLorenzo-A-Must-See-Movie-Coming-This-June)


Ron Maxwell of "Gettysburg" fame has a new movie coming out entitled "Copperhead: The War at Home." A friend who has seen an advance screening says "it is terrific."
...

The neocons will throw a fit and behave like knaves, jerks, and pompous asses, as usual, whereas their compatriots in the left-wing media will make a few smarmy remarks about the film and then ignore it.
...


http://i49.tinypic.com/2l9jg8z.jpg (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/movies/item/15730-movie-review-copperhead)



What happened when a Northerner vociferously protested against war with the South? This movie by the director of Gods and Generals and Gettysburg answers that question.


Movie Review: Copperhead (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/movies/item/15730-movie-review-copperhead)


The New American (http://www.thenewamerican.com/)
27 June 2013


Grand armies with spectacular battle scenes and heroic acts filled the screen in director Ron Maxwell’s epic motion pictures Gettysburg and Gods and Generals, but similar scenes of martial valor are missing from his latest Civil War movie, Copperhead.

Instead, Maxwell explores another aspect of the War Between the States: the impact of the conflict on civilians far from the battlefields. His motion picture centers on a dairy farmer in upstate New York. Abner Beech (played by Billy Campbell, known best for his role in the ABC drama Once and Again) opposes President Lincoln’s invasion of the seceded Southern states, earning him the epithet of “Copperhead” from many of his neighbors, who support the war.

Of course, a copperhead is a venomous snake, and ardent supporters of Lincoln’s war to “save the Union” applied it as an insult on those Northerners, the “peace Democrats,” who opposed Lincoln’s war. Some Copperheads actively encouraged desertion and resistance to the draft, but most, like the movie’s Abner Beech, simply opposed the war through peaceful means, such as stating his opposition publicly and voting for Democrat candidates who would stop the conflict. Even these limited actions were considered unpatriotic, and even treasonous by the war’s supporters.

The movie opens in the spring of 1862, with Beech’s adopted son, Jimmy, lamenting that “the war came home and nothing was ever the same again.” Beech’s natural son, Thomas Jefferson (“Jeff”) Beech, has taken a liking to a young schoolteacher, Esther Hagadorn (performed by Lucy Boynton, who played the young Beatrix Potter in Miss Potter). She reciprocates his affections, but detests his name, Jeff, a given name he shares with the man whom she calls the president of the “Rebellion.” In this, she is parroting the views of her pro-war father, Jee Hagadorn (played by Angus MacFayden, a Scottish actor who performed in Braveheart). At Esther’s urging, young Jeff (or Tom, as he now calls himself to please the pretty Esther) enlists in the Union army.

This greatly distresses Jeff’s father, Abner Beech, who believes his son will be attacking those who had done him “no harm.” A masterful screenplay by writer Bill Kauffman enables Beech to deliver articulate opposition to the war, without subjecting the movie audience to didactic speeches. Beech rails against Lincoln’s multiple violations of the Constitution, including the closing of hundreds of anti-war newspapers and the imprisonment of thousands of war opponents. While he clearly opposes slavery, Beech contends that it is not any of the business of New York State what the South does.

“We don’t want our Constitution dying, and we don’t want our boys dying with it,” Beech declares in one scene. In another part of the movie, his neighbor Avery, played by Peter Fonda, asks Beech, “Doesn’t the Union mean anything to you?” Beech said that, yes, the Union “means something. It means more than something.” But, the Constitution, New York State, his farm, and his own family “mean more.” He adds to Avery, “Even though we disagree, Avery, you mean more to me than the Union.” Even Beech’s minister uses the pulpit to compare Democrat politicians such as former President James Buchanan to the “blasphemous names” on the head of the biblical Great Beast of Revelation. On his way out of the church, Beech asks the preacher if “Blessed are the peace makers” is still in the Bible.

Beech begins to pay a price beyond challenging questions from a neighbor, or unpleasant sermons. Shop owners and others stop buying his milk and his timber, breaking their agreements with him. Beech compares this to the national situation, lamenting that this is what one can expect when you “tear up the Constitution.” If the great national contract is not honored, breach of a simple business contract is not surprising.

Jee Hagadorn takes a contrary view. He is a strong supporter of the war, increasingly so when Lincoln announces the Emancipation Proclamation, which “freed” the slaves in those areas of the country “in rebellion” against the federal government. Hagadorn’s intensity in favor of the war and abolition is such that he refuses to express a shred of concern when his grief-stricken daughter tearfully informs him that her beloved Tom (Jeff) has gone missing in action after the bloody Battle of Antietam. “What should I care?” is his callous response, adding that he would be willing for 10,000 Toms to “perish” if that would end the scourge of slavery.

Hagadorn tells his own son Ni (played by Augustus Prew) that Ni’s refusal to join the Union army has shamed him. Ni responds that he did not know that killing was the Lord’s work, and challenges his father’s comparison of Beech to a snake. “Maybe I don’t share his notions, maybe he’s wrong, but he’s a man, not a snake.” Later, Ni asks what happened to the biblical injunction to “love thy neighbor.”

Beech and his hired hand, Irish immigrant Timothy Joseph Hurley, are forced into a fight with some belligerent pro-war Republicans at a polling place in the 1862 elections, when Hurley attempts to hand in his Democrat ballot. At first Hurley is denied the right to vote, even though he has proper naturalization papers and has been voting since 1852, boasting that he helped put Democrat Franklin Pierce into the White House. After a brief skirmish, both Hurley and Beech vote the Democrat ticket. The outcome of the election gives Beech and Hurley hope, as the Democrat candidate for governor, Horatio Seymour, narrowly defeated his Republican opponent. They hope that the Democrats will win control of Congress and shut the war down, bringing a swift end to the “houses of mourning” across the country.

To celebrate the Democrat victories of 1862, Beech throws a bonfire celebration, which he calls the “Fire of Liberty.” This enrages some of his pro-war neighbors, and moves the picture to its dramatic and surprising conclusion.

In his first two Civil War movies, director Ron Maxwell told The New American (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/movies/item/15563-interview-with-ron-maxwell-on-his-new-civil-war-movie-copperhead), his desire was to examine both the men in blue and in gray “equally” by “looking into their hearts” to see what motivated them. “I got a lot of flak, because some in the mainstream media don’t want to look upon any man who wore a Confederate uniform as a full human being.”

“The first two movies are a cinematic presentation of why good men choose to fight,” while Copperhead is an effort “to explore cinematically, why good and honorable, ethical, moral men choose not to go to war,” Maxwell said. “Not everybody who hated slavery or loved the U.S. Constitution was willing to send their children off to die or be maimed in a bloody battle against fellow Americans. That fascinating reality is the force driving Copperhead.”

The movie is based upon the late-19th-century work of Harold Frederic, who used real-life events he witnessed in upstate New York during the war in crafting his novel, The Copperhead. “I call him [Frederic] the Charles Dickens of upstate New York,” Maxwell explained. “If you want to know about rural America in upstate New York in the 19th century, he’s the guy.”

Maxwell selected Bill Kauffman to write the screenplay. Kauffman’s book Ain’t My America (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0046LUQGC/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B0046LUQGC&linkCode=as2&tag=libert0f-20) was a history of the anti-war conservative tradition. Kauffman was also the editor of A Story of America First (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0275975126/ref=as_li_ss_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=0275975126&linkCode=as2&tag=libert0f-20), a memoir of the anti-war America First Committee’s congressional liaison, Ruth Sarles.

Since the ancient Greek playwrights, background music has been a standard part of drama. It is no different in Copperhead, with Laurent Eyquem’s musical score properly creating the somber mood the material dictates, without descending into despair. Eyquem made use of instruments common to the time period, such as the fiddle and the wooden flute, “to tie the score to the historic roots of the story.”


Related Article:

Interview With Ron Maxwell on His New Civil War Movie "Copperhead" (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/movies/item/15563-interview-with-ron-maxwell-on-his-new-civil-war-movie-copperhead)

WM_in_MO
07-06-2013, 06:11 PM
I'll be seeing this.

kahless
07-06-2013, 06:32 PM
Thanks for the reminder. I think I may watch it tonight, looks like it is on Amazon instant video for $6.99. I thought it would be Netflix but it does not come up.

enhanced_deficit
07-06-2013, 06:57 PM
"The neocons will throw a fit"



Curious why a domestic history movie will make neecons unahppy, does the movie shows neecons bombing and oppression plots against people of Iraq, Palestine in bad light?

georgiaboy
07-06-2013, 06:59 PM
subscribed to this thread. I don't believe I've seen any of these movies. I will now!

CPUd
07-06-2013, 07:50 PM
Curious why a domestic history movie will make neecons unahppy, does the movie shows neecons bombing and oppression plots against people of Iraq, Palestine in bad light?

Exchange Iraq with the Confederacy, and yes. So far, the first half is pretty good. I think it is important that people today see the arguments and rhetoric we have now are very old ones, just with different labels.

Grubb556
07-06-2013, 07:57 PM
I could be wrong, but lots of new weapons were used in the civil war right ? I wonder, how influential was the MIC of the mid 1800s ?

FSP-Rebel
07-06-2013, 08:29 PM
Definitely will have to peep this one for sure.

FSP-Rebel
07-06-2013, 08:38 PM
Here's the trailer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7Zx0ZN80vk

ghengis86
07-06-2013, 08:45 PM
I could be wrong, but lots of new weapons were used in the civil war right ? I wonder, how influential was the MIC of the mid 1800s ?

Probably just learning how profitable war could be

GunnyFreedom
07-06-2013, 08:46 PM
IIRC the movie is about how American society treats principled dissent. It casts people who reject the validity of dissent in a very bad light.

Disclaimer - I haven't seen it yet.

oyarde
07-06-2013, 09:21 PM
I could be wrong, but lots of new weapons were used in the civil war right ? I wonder, how influential was the MIC of the mid 1800s ?

One of my favorites( 1861-1865) , the final production version of the LeMat .36 Cal revolver , with a 16 Ga barrel, invention of Dr Jean Alexandre LeMat of New Orleans, patent 1856 :)

Michael Landon
07-08-2013, 02:20 PM
My wife and I watched this on PPV last night and we thought it was really good. It's a bit slow but still really good.

- ML

Pericles
07-08-2013, 02:25 PM
I'll be seeing this.

Need to check it out.

Aratus
07-09-2013, 05:44 AM
IIRC the movie is about how American society treats principled dissent.
It casts people who reject the validity of dissent in a very bad light.

Disclaimer - I haven't seen it yet.

Gunny... even though it was wonderously filmed up in New Brunswick,
SEE THE MOVIE in a THEATER! each frame is God's total poetry
as expressed via the rustic pace of the 1800s, something we seldom
see today. the movie is well acted, i liked it. i looked at a video.

green73
07-09-2013, 08:21 PM
Tom Woods interviews Bill Kauffman, screenwriter


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRG6UeN8rZY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRG6UeN8rZY

Reason
07-09-2013, 08:23 PM
Saw this last week, slow beginning, but well worth the watch and the money, thinking about giving this to relatives for Christmas this year.

BlackTerrel
07-09-2013, 08:43 PM
This greatly distresses Jeff’s father, Abner Beech, who believes his son will be attacking those who had done him “no harm.” A masterful screenplay by writer Bill Kauffman enables Beech to deliver articulate opposition to the war, without subjecting the movie audience to didactic speeches. Beech rails against Lincoln’s multiple violations of the Constitution, including the closing of hundreds of anti-war newspapers and the imprisonment of thousands of war opponents. While he clearly opposes slavery, Beech contends that it is not any of the business of New York State what the South does.

Serious question here: is that the view of this forum? The same as this guy?

So if Texas passes a law making it illegal for blacks to vote, or illegal for Asians to drive cars or decides to legalize rape - the rest of the US should not intervene? These are states rights issues?

Beorn
07-09-2013, 08:48 PM
Tom Woods interviews Bill Kauffman, screenwriter


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRG6UeN8rZY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wRG6UeN8rZY

Thanks for this. I'm a fan of Bill. He's from a nearby small city in upstate ny and he writes for my favorite blog, front porch republic.

cindy25
07-10-2013, 05:22 AM
its up on most torrent and warezsites

cindy25
07-10-2013, 05:25 AM
Serious question here: is that the view of this forum? The same as this guy?

So if Texas passes a law making it illegal for blacks to vote, or illegal for Asians to drive cars or decides to legalize rape - the rest of the US should not intervene? These are states rights issues?

voting, for those over 18 is constitutionally protected; but Texas could lower its voting age to 16
descrimination based on race is constitutionally banned but a state could have different driving ages for men and women (as some do for marriage)

before 1865 slavery was legal in some states, and other than proposing an amendment there was nothing the north should have done.

FrankRep
07-10-2013, 06:33 AM
Serious question here: is that the view of this forum? The same as this guy?

So if Texas passes a law making it illegal for blacks to vote, or illegal for Asians to drive cars or decides to legalize rape - the rest of the US should not intervene? These are states rights issues?
We, the people of Texas, will not allow that to happen, plus the mass media will jump on that not allow Texas to pass such a vote.

Ron Paul, as you know, supports State sovereignty under the 10th amendment. Are you a Ron Paul supporter?

BlackTerrel
07-10-2013, 08:56 PM
Ron Paul, as you know, supports State sovereignty under the 10th amendment. Are you a Ron Paul supporter?

To what degree? If Ron thinks the rest of the US should turn a blind eye if one state wants to make slavery legal, or rape legal..or wants to execute people who smoke marijuana - yes I think the US gov should intervene. If Ron has a different view then yeah I 100% disagree with Ron on that.

Constitutional Paulicy
07-10-2013, 09:28 PM
its up on most torrent and warezsites

Yes it is. I downloaded it and am seeding if anyone is interested.. http://kickass.to/copperhead-2013-webrip-xvid-juggs-t7565385.html

Origanalist
07-10-2013, 09:58 PM
To what degree? If Ron thinks the rest of the US should turn a blind eye if one state wants to make slavery legal, or rape legal..or wants to execute people who smoke marijuana - yes I think the US gov should intervene. If Ron has a different view then yeah I 100% disagree with Ron on that.

Let me ask you a question. If state rights ruled the day, how many people would live in a state as you described? Do you not think it would be shunned into non existence?

oyarde
07-10-2013, 10:28 PM
Slavery is defined as involuntary servitude . Anyone paying Fed tax , most of which goes to UnConstitutional spending is a slave.Congress swears an oath to uphold the law , then passes illegal law to steal , the penalty for such should be death.Just my opinion .....

Occam's Banana
07-10-2013, 10:29 PM
Let me ask you a question. If state rights ruled the day, how many people would live in a state as you described? Do you not think it would be shunned into non existence?

Here's an even more interesting question: why should it be OK for the U.S. federal government to forcibly intervene in Texas but not in Tehran?

Origanalist
07-10-2013, 10:32 PM
Here's an even more interesting question: why should it be OK for the U.S. federal government to forcibly intervene in Texas but not in Tehran?

The US feral gubmint thinks it's OK to intervene wherever they dam well please. (but I get your point)

heavenlyboy34
07-10-2013, 10:55 PM
Here's an even more interesting question: why should it be OK for the U.S. federal government to forcibly intervene in Texas but not in Tehran?
Texas is a vassal territory of the FedGov and Iran is, last I checked, a sovereign State.

oyarde
07-10-2013, 11:11 PM
Texas had the right at statehood to form into several states , still does.

RabbitMan
07-11-2013, 12:12 AM
Apparently the film received pretty lousy reviews across the board, with its single saving grace being a look at a subject not normally covered.

As with that awful Atlas Shrugged film, I'll pass.

Occam's Banana
07-11-2013, 06:46 AM
Texas is a vassal territory of the FedGov and Iran is, last I checked, a sovereign State.

Which does not answer the question.

Occam's Banana
07-11-2013, 06:53 AM
Apparently the film received pretty lousy reviews across the board, with its single saving grace being a look at a subject not normally covered.

As with that awful Atlas Shrugged film, I'll pass.

I don't get it. If you passed on Atlas Shrugged, how do you know it was awful?

I've seen both. Atlas Shrugged sucked. Copperhead most definitely does not.

But by all means, if you are content to think about Copperhead what other people have told you to think about it, then don't watch it.

Origanalist
07-11-2013, 07:01 AM
I don't get it. If you passed on Atlas Shrugged, how do you know it was awful?

I've seen both. Atlas Shrugged sucked. Copperhead most definitely does not.

But by all means, if you are content to think about Copperhead what other people have told you to think about it, then don't watch it.

This, I don't go by what teh "critics" say. Especially about a subject such as this that makes them "uncomfortable".

Beorn
07-11-2013, 07:34 AM
I watched it last night.

The critics don't do it justice.

Definately worth seeing.

Southron
07-11-2013, 07:49 AM
Apparently the film received pretty lousy reviews across the board, with its single saving grace being a look at a subject not normally covered.

As with that awful Atlas Shrugged film, I'll pass.

It is better than Atlas Shrugged.

Aratus
07-11-2013, 03:41 PM
Lewis Cass is grandly namedropped in the novel, and perhaps
ole Millard Fillmore was not the brightest politician of the era...
It paces along with a high respect for the old late 1800s novel.

Aratus
07-11-2013, 03:42 PM
i'm placing COPPERHEAD (2013) as easily equal to if not greater than GODS AND GENERALS!
like his first film GETTYSBURG or even GONE WITH THE WIND, or even THE CONSPIRATOR
that Robert Redford directed, some thought went into the script. it is more accurate than
DJANGO UNCHAINED, and as fictionally historic as is LINCOLN (2013) or RAINTREE COUNTY!
the DVD COPPERHEAD from 2008 is literally about the famous reptile that does literally slither!

BlackTerrel
07-11-2013, 10:06 PM
Let me ask you a question. If state rights ruled the day, how many people would live in a state as you described? Do you not think it would be shunned into non existence?

An April 2011 poll of Mississippi Republican primary voters asked "Do you think interracial marriage should be legal or illegal?". The responses were "Legal" 40%, "Illegal" 46%, and "Not Sure" 14%.[8][9]

So yeah I think people in America should be free to marry any race they want - and if a state makes it illegal the fed gov should step in.

If "all men are created equal" why can't the fed gov uphold it if certain states think it's ok to own other people?

BlackTerrel
07-11-2013, 10:07 PM
Slavery is defined as involuntary servitude . Anyone paying Fed tax , most of which goes to UnConstitutional spending is a slave.Congress swears an oath to uphold the law , then passes illegal law to steal , the penalty for such should be death.Just my opinion .....

So if they make us pay taxes they should be killed. But if they outright own other people it was wrong to intervene and the US gov should have allowed it to continue?

Makes sense.

FrankRep
07-11-2013, 10:54 PM
Apparently the film received pretty lousy reviews across the board, with its single saving grace being a look at a subject not normally covered.

As with that awful Atlas Shrugged film, I'll pass.

I've heard excellent reviews. Where are you getting your reviews?

FrankRep
07-11-2013, 10:56 PM
An April 2011 poll of Mississippi Republican primary voters asked "Do you think interracial marriage should be legal or illegal?". The responses were "Legal" 40%, "Illegal" 46%, and "Not Sure" 14%.[8][9]

So yeah I think people in America should be free to marry any race they want - and if a state makes it illegal the fed gov should step in.

If "all men are created equal" why can't the fed gov uphold it if certain states think it's ok to own other people?

Do you realize we're under far worse tyranny under the Super powerful Federal Government?

J_White
07-12-2013, 12:25 AM
Here's the trailer

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7Zx0ZN80vk

sh*t ! centuries have passed and nothing has changed !

Matt Collins
09-14-2013, 06:28 PM
http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/civil-war-comes-home/