電影訊息
勇者無懼 [美]--Amistad

勇者无惧/勇者无惧/断锁怒潮

7.3 / 82,837人    155分鐘

導演: 史蒂芬史匹柏
編劇: David H. Franzoni
演員: 摩根費里曼 尼格霍宋 安東尼霍普金斯 吉蒙韓蘇 馬修麥康納
電影評論更多影評

unendliche

2014-11-03 08:00:02

Who we are is who we were


我不是一個淚點高的人。
看這部片子,我哭了兩次。

第一次,是在法庭上,一個黑人站了起來,斷斷續續地說,被阻止了以後繼續說,
"Give us free...Give us free!"

第二次,是在Supreme Court上,John Quincy Adams為Cinque辯護。
我重看了那一段,現在摘錄下來:
Your Honors, I derive much consolation from the fact that my colleague, Mr. Baldwin, here, has argued the case in so able and so complete a manner as to leave me scarcely anything to say.

However, why are we here? How is it that a simple, plain property issue should now find itself so ennobled as to be argued before the Supreme Court of the United States of America? I mean, do we fear the lower courts, which found for us easily, somehow missed the truth? Is that it? Or is it, rather, our great and consuming fear of civil war that has allowed us to heap symbolism upon a simple case that never asked for it and now would have us disregard truth, even as it stands before us, tall and proud as a mountain? The truth, in truth, has been driven from this case like a slave, flogged from court to court, wretched and destitute. And not by any great legal acumen on the part of the opposition, I might add, but through the long, powerful arm of the Executive Office.

Yea, this is no mere property case, gentlemen. I put it to you thus: This is the most important case ever to come before this court. Because what it, in fact, concerns is the very nature of man.

These are transcriptions of letters written between our Secretary of State, John Forsyth, and the Queen of Spain, Isabella the Second. Now, I ask that you accept their perusal as part of your deliberations.

Thank you, sir. [to court officer]

I would not touch on them now except to notice a curious phrase which is much repeated. The queen again and again refers to our incompetent courts. Now what, I wonder, would be more to her liking? Huh? A court that finds against the Africans? Well, I think not. And here is the fine point of it: What her majesty wants is a court that behaves just like her courts, the courts this eleven year-old child plays with in her magical kingdom called Spain, a court that will do what it is told, a court that can be toyed with like a doll, a court -- as it happens -- of which our own President, 馬丁 Van Buren, would be most proud.

Thank you. [takes document from Baldwin]

This is a publication of the Office of the President. It's called the Executive Review, and I'm sure you all read it. At least I'm sure the President hopes you all read it. This is a recent issue, and there's an article in here written by a "keen mind of the South," who is my former Vice President, John Calhoun, perhaps -- Could it be? -- who asserts that:

"There has never existed a civilized society in which one segment did not thrive upon the labor of another. As far back as one chooses to look -- to ancient times, to biblical times -- history bears this out. In Eden, where only two were created, even there one was pronounced subordinate to the other. Slavery has always been with us and is neither sinful nor immoral. Rather, as war and antagonism are the natural states of man, so, too, slavery, as natural as it is inevitable."

Now, gentlemen, I must say I differ with the keen minds of the South, and with our president, who apparently shares their views, offering that the natural state of mankind is instead -- and I know this is a controversial idea -- is freedom. Is freedom. And the proof is the length to which a man, woman, or child will go to regain it, once taken. He will break loose his chains, He will decimate his enemies. He will try and try and try against all odds, against all prejudices, to get home.

Cinque, would you stand up, if you would, so everyone can see you. This man is black. We can all see that. But can we also see as easily that which is equally true -- that he is the only true hero in this room.

Now, if he were white, he wouldn't be standing before this court fighting for his life. If he were white and his enslavers were British, he wouldn't be able to stand, so heavy the weight of the medals and honors we would bestow upon him. Songs would be written about him. The great authors of our times would fill books about him. His story would be told and retold in our classrooms. Our children, because we would make sure of it, would know his name as well as they know Patrick Henry's.

Yet, if the South is right, what are we to do with that embarrassing, annoying document, "The Declaration of Independence?" What of its conceits? "All men...created equal," "inalienable rights," "life," "liberty," and so on and so forth? What on earth are we to do with this?

I have a modest suggestion. [tears up a facsimile of the Declaration]

The other night I was talking with my friend, Cinque. He was over at my place, and we were out in the greenhouse together. And he was explaining to me how when a member of the Mende -- that's his people -- how when a member of the Mende encounters a situation where there appears no hope at all, he invokes his ancestors. It's a tradition. See, the Mende believe that if one can summon the spirits of one's ancestors, then they have never left, and the wisdom and strength they fathered and inspired will come to his aid.

詹姆士 Madison, Alexander Hamilton, Benjamin Franklin, 湯瑪士 Jefferson, George 華盛頓, John Adams: We've long resisted asking you for guidance. Perhaps we have feared in doing so we might acknowledge that our individuality which we so, so revere is not entirely our own. Perhaps we've feared an appeal to you might be taken for weakness. But, we've come to understand, finally, that this is not so. We understand now, we've been made to understand, and to embrace the understanding that who we are is who we were.

We desperately need your strength and wisdom to triumph over our fears, our prejudices, our-selves. Give us the courage to do what is right. And if it means civil war, then let it come. And when it does, may it be, finally, the last battle of the American Revolution.

That's all I have to say.

JQA走過那一排石膏像,停在John Adams的旁邊,伸出手摸了一下。然後說出了那段讓我眼淚一下子出來的話。
長久以來,我們不願尋求你們的幫助。也許我們是害怕,這麼做就是在承認,我們所尊崇所保持的個性並不完全是我們自己的。也許我們是害怕,求助會被當作軟弱。但我們終於覺悟,事實並非如此。現在我們明白了,我們一直被指引著去覺悟,去明白,我們的祖先是誰,我們就是誰。

突然想到在烏布的時候,愛倫對我說,有一天晚上照鏡子,她看到了她祖母的臉。原來她就是她的祖母。"They are in us. We are a part of them. "

我相信,God dwells in us.
現在我相信,Ancestors dwell in us.
這是好事,也不是好事。但我必須承認,who we are is who we were.
評論