Talk:John Adams (TV miniseries)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Film Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Films. This project is a central gathering of editors working to build comprehensive and detailed articles for film topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the priority scale.
Editing Guidelines Please remember these guidelines when editing a film article: If a non-film article already exists with the name of the film that you are trying to create an article for, disambiguate and use (film) in the title: Film Title (film) For more information see: Wikipedia:Naming conventions (films) When writing an article about a particular film, the general format should be a concise lead section, followed by a plot summary of no more than 900 words, production details, a cast list, a reception section, and references. Create an Infobox that tells all pertinent information about the film.
Additional Information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no

Contents 1 Question on the music 2 Episode Plot Summaries? 3 Spoiler Warning 4 Infobox elements missing 5 Historical accuracy

[edit] Question on the music

This is purely OR... but while watching the first episode, I suddenly had the idea that I had heard the theme music before. I wracked my brain and then realized it sounded very very similar to the theme from The Last of the Mohicans (1992 film). Does anyone know if there is a connection? Blueboar (talk) 04:00, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

No connection, I believe. Last of the Mohicans was scored by Randy Edelman and the only thing in common is a very catchy fiddle tune. Auror (talk) 16:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Episode Plot Summaries?

Do we really need detailed plot summaries for each episode? I can understand including a brief wiki-linked list of the events covered during each episode, but anyone who wishes to know the details of what occured in during these events can find them better explained in other articles. Blueboar (talk) 13:06, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Really wish these hadn't been deleted. I haven't been able to find these detailed summaries in any "other articles" while searching around the net. Joinks (talk) 00:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Try the article on John Adams, which deals well with these events. Blueboar (talk) 02:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

The deleted summaries were actually taken from the HBO webpage for the miniseries. They were, word for word, the episode summaries for the episodes. Drunken Savior (talk) 04:14, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Spoiler Warning

Yes, I know this is based on History and we all know "who wins" and all, but maybe there should still be a spoiler alert ahead of the episode summaries? Cowicide (talk) 19:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

No... for several reasons: First, Wikipedia seriously frowns on "spoiler alerts", even for works of fiction. If someone doesn't want to have their enjoyment of a book, film or TV show, they don't have to read the summary. Second, the current "summary" does not really give the "plot" away... it simply lists the historical events covered by each episode. Third, as you say... this miniseries dramatizes historical events. It is rediculous to put a "spoiler alert" on something like this... the "plot" is covered in every grade school American History text book. We might as well put a "spoiler alert" on the main John Adams article? After all, that article essentially gives away the entire plot of the miniseries. Blueboar (talk) 19:22, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Uh, no matter how well-versed in History you may be, you may still not want to know what's going to happen in a specific episode before seeing it because there IS this thing called "editing" at work here in this series. Anyway, a simple link would have been sufficient. Smarmy attitude aside, I see your point that Wikipedia now doesn't allow spoiler alerts. So, being moot and all, I'll just ignore the rest of your insulting, redundant, long-winded rant on the matter. Cowicide (talk) 00:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Infobox elements missing

Does anyone know why some of the infobox elements such as cinematographer, editor and distributor not appearing in the actual infobox? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Timberlax (talk • contribs) 02:44, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

I took a look at it but I can't figure it out. I'm going to bring it to the help desk.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 11:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Historical accuracy

I imagine there should be a section on historical accuracy in this article. I cannot imagine that the miniseries depicts all events with 100% accuracy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.45.80.206 (talk) 01:01, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

This is true, I for one noticed the incorrect results of the Boston Massacre trial in the first episode.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 03:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I agree that we should include such a secton. I note that most of the "errors" are essentially just omissions (ie the production skips over some things... for example, the program omits Adams's first trip to Paris, and his roll in negotiating the Peace of Paris). I am interested about the last comment... What was incorrect about the trial results? Blueboar (talk) 14:20, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

To my knowledge, as I watched the first episode again just yesterday, they portrayed all of the verdicts as not guilty but in actuality two of the soldiers were convicted of manslaughter. Also, in the series it is either an error or omission that Abigail is alone when she visits Paris. Adams' oldest daughter accompanied her mother to Paris at John's request. There's also the issue of the tar and feathering scene in the first episode. There's no historical evidence to suggest that John Hancock or Sam Adams were present for, or encouraged tarring and feathering during the seizure of the Liberty. In fact historical evidence suggests that they wouldn't have endorsed such an action at that time and if they were present for those events it would have been covered in the press, as all parties were of importance to local politics of the time. If we're to assume the man who was tarred was supposed to be George Gailer, there are court documents showing that he sued a number of sailors for his tarring, but did not make mention of Hancock or the Liberty in any of his statements. He was defended in court by John Adams. This is just off the top of my head, I'm sure that we can put together some nice bullet points. If we make a section we might want to avoid the headings of "Inaccuracies and Omissions" I think both of those are too strong.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 19:46, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

You know... I am having second thoughts about including such a section (at least for now). We run the risk of preforming Original Research, unless we can cite to sources that point out the various errors or omissions we want to include. While such sources may eventually be written, I doubt they are written yet (correct me if I am wrong on this). Blueboar (talk) 20:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

They exist [1] you just need to find them. It's a fun scavenger hunt.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 22:24, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

I don't think a sourced list of historic inaccuracies would constitute original research, even if the specific inaccuracies haven't been previously reported elsewhere. While comparing the level of inaccuracy to other similar tv/film/literature would perhaps be OR, merely citing historic facts shouldn't be a policy violation. --NEMT (talk) 22:03, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

OK... here is a good example of the problems we will face with this section. Currently the following is posted as an inaccuracy: "During a reception in France in 1777, Franklin and Adams are shown handing out American flags, however, the version of the flag shown in the scene was not adopted until 2 years later in 1779"

But is it actually an inaccuracy? First, the miniseries truncates events somewhat. Events that took place several years apart are depicted as being close together in time. So how do we know that the reception being depicted was supposed to take place in 1777... Could it not be depicting something that supposedly took place in 1779? Second, we need to establish that the version of the flag was indeed adopted in 1779 and not earlier. We need a citation of some sort to establish this.

In other words... we need to better establish that an inaccuracy is in fact inaccurate. Blueboar (talk) 14:36, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

I've verified that the flag shown was authentic. It had 13 stars, 13 stripes. Although the "Betsy Ross flag" is popularly depicted as the official flag, many varieties of star configurations within the jack were used at the time (1777). Darana (talk) 17:45, 20 April 2008 (UTC)

On the other hand... there is another inaccuracy that can be cited (to David McCullough's book if not a better source): The miniseries makes a big to do over Charles Adams' resentment over his Father's absence while he was growing up... in fact, John Adams took both John Quincy and Charles with him on his second voyage to France. Charles was with him in Paris and during his time in the Netherlands (returning to America when Adams returned to Paris after Yorktown.) Blueboar (talk) 15:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)