Comparing the book Mutiny on the Amistad: The Saga of a Slave Revolt and Its Impact on Abolition, Law and Diplomacy Americans and the movie Amistad, we are able to discover the advantages and disadvantages of each person. These two mediums have strengths and weaknesses in different areas and the uniqueness of each medium can be seen when both have been experienced thoroughly. Although both mediums do exceptional work in different areas, the Steven Spielberg-directed film seems to be severely lacking in detail, realism, and accuracy when explored on its own. The combination of the images and some visual scenes from the film should be used to amplify the detailed story told by the book instead of an independent source when analyzing historical details. This medium should only be used as a means to supplement and reinforce the understanding of the facts in the book, as it does not truly tell the whole story. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on “Why Violent Video Games Should Not Be Banned”? Get the original essay In the scenes of the slave ship and the experiences of the Middle Passage, a strong and powerful wave of emotion is felt from the images. The fear, torment, pain, and cruelty experienced by the slaves aboard the ship are truly felt when watching the scenes aboard the ship. We can see the horrible conditions and treatment the slaves were exposed to. Chained and crowded together, far worse than the way the livestock are treated and desperately begging for food rations that have been beaten to mush. This scene gives much more insight and realism to the description established in the book and creates compelling emotions about the real suffering experienced in relation to slavery (Jones, 1987, p. 47). In another scene on the ship, we see a large bag of stones thrown into the sea, dragging down and drowning several slaves. The fear and desperation of the slaves clinging to anything possible to survive is an emotion that words alone cannot describe as well as the scene did. To top it all off, slave captors threw those struggling to survive into the water while they were chained, ending any shred of hope they had for survival. It was a powerful depiction of how slaves were treated as inferior to other humans. Finally, another powerful scene to note is the preparation and auction of the slaves when the ship finally docks in Cuba. Here we can really see a new perspective on how the book refers to slaves becoming Spanish property once sold at auction. The scene here shows that slaves were considered mere property and the value of their lives was as insignificant as property. The scene truly depicts the slave trading system and how their value as humans was completely ignored. Slaves were treated like draft animals and sold at auction through a system of pure greed and evil. A true business and profit mentality was shown in this scene and it showed the main goal of the slave trade. The book's depiction of Cuban slave owners worried about losing their profits (Jones, 1987, p. 19) does not represent money-motivated greed as much as the film's visual depictions. While the book may touch on some of these topics, it never really amped up the emotions and gravity compared to watching the actual scenes. Reading more than 200 pages can becomeboring and generate a loss of interest. The horror and excellent acting give us a perspective on the subject that the book could not. Visuals create a strong emotional connection, interest and historical appreciation that is very difficult to achieve with words alone. When comparing the historical accuracy of the two media, it is evident that Amistad is a Hollywood production and therefore not all content is entirely accurate. The mediums share key stages of these events, such as the ship crossing the Middle Passage and the mutiny, but the events in the film are definitely inaccurate. Hollywood films are meant to entertain their viewers and instead of depicting all the historical facts, we will definitely see fictional montages. This was one of the major flaws of the medium, being that only certain parts of the film can be considered accurate while the majority of the film's content is questionable. This is extremely evident when it comes to legal proceedings and the justice system. The relationship between the court and slavery was greatly understated. What might appear to be an extremely long, grueling and tiring process has been described as a one-man solution. What I mean by that has to do with the final scene where President Adams gives his speech. The majority of the time spent at the Supreme Court was devoted to President Adams' speech. The film was very biased in that it focused on Adams giving a victory speech that resulted in the abolition of slavery when in reality it's not even close to the historical truth. The legal process lasted much longer than depicted in the film and required far more effort than one man's speech (Jones, 1987, pp. 52-59). This takes away from the meaningful collective efforts and milestones of the journey and focuses all the glory on a speech that provoked questionable reactions in court. Another example of inaccuracy in the film is that of Joseph Cinque during the scene of his battle with the captain of the ship. In the film, the focus is on Cinque and it is obvious that he is overly portrayed as the hero. Although he was the leader of the mutiny, he was not the sole influence in the cause of the mutiny and it did not revolve around him as shown in the film. We see a glorified Cinque and heroic depiction when he kills the captain, stabbing him to death. Hollywood wanted to give the impression that Cinque, the hero, killed the evil captor and overcame a tedious obstacle when in reality, in the book, he only overthrew the captain (Jones, 1987, p. 25) . This is another inaccurate portrayal of one man's effort having undue impact and undermining the efforts of others and time invested as a collective group. In the book, the detailed interactions and descriptiveness of events allowed for historical accuracy. There was no need for cinematic magic and there is no time constraint on a book like there is on a film. The book is based on countless research, experts, records and facts, not scripts, actors and Steven Spielberg. The records and data compiled by experts in the field are reliable and tell the story as it was. Because the film lacks the precise details of the book, it takes away from a historical picture. For example, in the movie after the speech, it seemed like a happily ever after ending. This is just an illusion because things weren't that simplistic. The lack of details and information diminishes the complexity of the problem, the duration of the struggle and its impact on all parties involved. In the book, this question was not.