# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Because When In Doubt, Go With A Scene From The Movie!

# data[].attributes.headline
The Showcase, or the Beginning?: Hollywood vs. History

# data[].attributes.subject
The Showcase, or the Beginning?: Hollywood vs. History

# data[].attributes.body
Costumes, lighting, romance...
I may have complained a little... maybe a lot... about the lack of historical value within this movie. It is true, that this film focuses more on the plot rather than the history, but that doesn't mean the film doesn't carry some historical value. In fact, the costume crew read through tons of books from the 1800s, viewed several pictures and paintings, and scraped up any remains of the socially acceptable clothing "norm" that was during the 1800s and the Civil War. They aimed to create costumes that were on point with the time period and the materials available back then. For example, they kept the colors dull because it was unlikely the women would wear cheerful colors while the men of their family were off fighting. They only introduced the pastels, tightened corsets, and exposed shoulders when the women were trying to charm the wounded soldier. All of this attention to detail from the costume crew resulted in stunning outfits that were well-matched with their historical time period.
The costume crew wasn't the only ones that scoured the history books, the film crew and light technicians also did their research. In the film, Sofia Coppola, the director, and her film and lighting crew push to use natural lighting. They barely use any lighting at all, shooting the film without any lighting modifications. When they do require lighting, the crews employ candlelight, taking care to make sure everything looks as natural as possible. They also weigh in heavily on the mood of the film, creating darker and more natural-looking scenes on the screen. The decision to go all-natural, leaves a looming darkness in the shots, pushing feelings of mystery, loneliness, sadness, despair, and a serious, somber mood.
The romance in this movie embodies the loneliness and isolation of women in the Civil War. Women were left alone to fend for themselves and their families, while their husbands, brothers, sons, and fathers were off serving in the war. The women in this movie find this man, and they all fall for his charms, whether it be because he is a smooth talker, or because he's simply the only new person or man in the house. The women needed a change in scenery, and McBurney happened to be just that.
Those are just a few things that give this movie the historical value it clings onto. The set is wonderful, but the lack of information we are given about the events happening around the characters is minimal. This was just a preview of the comparison to come. Enjoy my take on "The Beguiled", Hollywood vs History.

https://ew.com/movies/2017/10/04/the-beguiled-sofia-coppola-costume-design/

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/richard-brody/the-beguiled-sofia-coppolas-dubiously-abstract-vision-of-the-civil-war

https://blog.pond5.com/15708-beguiled-cinematographer-create-mood-film/

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Scene From The Beguiled: Because It's TOTALLY The Woman's Fault 

# data[].attributes.body
At first, I believed this film to purely be your run-of-the-mill Hallmark movie, but then I did some digging on this wonderful thing called the "internet". I found that this movie was exactly what I thought it to be, a romantic tragedy in a historical setting... However, this romantic tragedy does carry subliminal (feminist!)  themes under its afore-decided stereotype.
The first main idea/theme I came across came from Audrey Ruppert of severnaparkvoice.com, who tells us that the movie embodies the effects of a "libertine" man on lone women who all fit different archetypes. They show us that the movie is expressing that the woman isn't always at fault for the erratic and immoral actions and behaviors of a male.
The second is female desire (romantically), and, again, the libertine man. As stated above, each woman is meant to fit their own archetype. So, they must also have their own desires and thoughts when it comes to a partner, more specifically, a man. Each woman sees their "dream man" differently, and how he ought to be. This movie also explores the sexual desires of women within a world where men are virtually nonexistent, this ties into romantic desires. This wounded Corporeal, really is hot metal, morphing into whatever mold is laid before him to meet these women's desires. He's a sleazy snake slithering into whatever gets him what he wants.
The third main theme or idea I came across was the beguiling of both parties; the woman and the man. Befitting of the title, I know. McBurney beguiles the women by telling and falsely showing them that he can be what they desire, so he can be hopeful of an outcome in his favor. In turn, the women, when they discover they've been beguiled, poison his dumb ass with mushrooms and he dies at the end of the film.
The themes and main ideas explored above all relate cohesively and tie this film together into the masterpiece it is.

Summary:
This story takes place within the household of a confederate girl's boarding school under the name of "Farnsworths". Miss Martha is an uptight, tough-loving motherly figure who cares for and educates the girls who live with her, and she runs "Farnsworths". One day Miss Martha sends young Amy (one of the girls housed at the school) out to collect mushrooms in the forest near the school. Instead of mushrooms, she finds a wounded "bluebelly" (a union soldier) named Corporal John McBurney. As Amy is on the side of the confederacy during the war, she explains to him that if he returns home with her, he will most likely be taken off by Confederate soldiers. He obliges to the accompaniment of Amy to the school, and there the women and girls decide that it isn't very "Christian" of them to turn him over without proper hospitality and care for his wounds. They then go on to let him stay at the school with them where he causes all sorts of trouble among the women. The soldier tangles himself in a complicated knot of lies and drama between the women. He tells one he loves her and then sleeps with another. The woman he lied to walked in on him sleeping with another girl. After that, the jealous girl pushes McBurney down a flight of stairs, which worsens his healing wound. Miss Martha feels she has no choice but to lop off the Corporeal le because there's no hope for its healing after the fall. McBurney wakes up some days later with a missing leg, and the women lock him in his room because he wreaks havoc blaming the women for the entire situation as well as the loss of his leg. One of the younger girls falls for his charm and lets him out of the locked room by providing the key, and the soldier causes harm to all the women and girls. The women all feel betrayed, beguiled even, and the man is threatening them and forcefully attempting to hold them hostage and "take charge", so they slip mushrooms into his dinner and kill him, betraying and beguiling him in the end.

https://www.severnaparkvoice.com/stories/the-beguiled-tackles-timeless-themes-as-a-period-piece,11673?#:~:text=The%20most%20brilliant%20part%20of,is%20clearly%20the%20guilty%20party.

https://whythebookwins.com/the-beguiled-book-vs-movie-original-vs-remake/

https://time.com/4828086/the-beguiled-sofia-coppola/

https://wherever-i-look.com/movies/the-beguiled-summary-review-with-spoilers

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Random Amazon Review I Thought Was Funny

# data[].attributes.body
I wrote two movie reviews because the first watch-through without any fellow audience insight proved to be ungodly boring and felt like it had no substance. However, after some research, while completing this assignment, and then a second viewing, I have completely changed my mind. Another person's insight and perspective can make you think and enjoy something seemingly bland way more than you thought you initially did.

Initial Movie Review: To say the least, this movie is bland. The story is easy to follow, very simple and there's really no audience appeal. Maybe if there was more historical value and accuracy, it would be more pleasurable to watch. We are provided the bare minimum in both entertainment value and historical value. There's no character development outside of Corporeal Burney's downward spiral into a one-legged, insane, track star. (He can apparently run insanely fast on crutches with a freshly amputated leg). It's really a bad sign when you find more enjoyment in ridiculing and picking at a movie rather than watching it. At the bottom of this post, you can see I've rated it 3 stars, though properly it should be 2.5 stars. Thank you for your time, and hopefully, you choose to lay your eyes on a more developed, dramatic, and historically accurate movie.

Final Movie Review:
After some additional research, I've found that I have a high affinity for this film's complex story and the high levels of artistry employed to create literal eye candy. The movie is a fantastic watch on the eyes, to say the least. The movie may have been a little dryer than I would have liked, with a bit of a hard-to-follow plot, but it all pays off after a full watch. My only complaint is the lack of historical value it brings to the table in comparison to the excellent entertainment value.

# data[].attributes.body
This movie is a piece of historical fiction, however, it's less historical, and more fiction... Most of my "Civil War enlightenment" wasn't drawn from the movie, but rather my further research into the movie and the events that were taking place within its historical setting. Although the movie was virtually useless for factual information, it was my gateway to (as stated above) further research on topics, happenings, and issues within the Civil War.
The movie sets the scene in the exposition by providing us  text on the screen stating, "1864 Virginia, three years into the Civil War". This given information provides us a rough location as well as a rough date to base further given pieces of information along the way. For example, after we are provided the sort of "time stamp", we meet John McBurney who tells us he was a soldier in the "Sixty-Sixth". With further research I found out that he was referring to the "Sixty-Sixth" Infantry Regiment out of New York City, New York. The Infantry Regiment was "mustered in" November 4, 1861, and "mustered out" August 30, 1863. The dates of the existence for this Regiment almost line up with the film's time frame, only being off by less than a year. It's highly possible our fictional McBurney served in the Sixty- Sixth Infantry Regiment. My only quarrel is what was he doing after the Infantry disbanded? Why was he in Virginia?
Of course, I learned more through research fostered by the film, and you'll get to examine that in later posts here on my Padlet. This is just one example to show the movie improved my knowledge of the Civil War.

https://museum.dmna.ny.gov/unit-history/infantry-1/66th-infantry-regiment

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Harper's Weekly: Union General William T. Sherman

# data[].attributes.headline
Primary Source #1- Harper's Weekly Newspaper 

# data[].attributes.subject
Primary Source #1- Harper's Weekly Newspaper 

# data[].attributes.body
"The Beguiled" opens in 1864 Virginia, 3 years into the Civil war, and it happens to take place in the exact year as General Sherman's March to the Sea meets its end. This "March" was a military campaign organized by Union General William T. Sherman to scare the citizens of Georgia into giving up on the Confederacy. In the movie, one of the girls explains that her family sent her away to Virginia because "General Sherman" was making his way to Atlanta. The statement proves to be partially accurate, as the movie seems to take place in the months before December, based on the scenery shown. December was the month that the campaign ended, so the movie had to be set during the time of Sherman's March. Above, General Sherman is pictured on his high horse in the December 17th, 1864 issue of "Harpers Weekly". In the December 24th, 1864 issue, the March is addressed in the columns. These "Harper's Weekly" issues help to establish a proper setting within the civil war era in which this historical piece of fiction takes place.

"Harper's Weekly" December 24th, 1864 issue: http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/civil-war/1864/december/sherman-georgia.htm

"Harper's Weekly" December 17th, 1864 issue: http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/civil-war/1864/december/general-sherman-horseback.htm

# data[].attributes.body
In the exposition of this film, we learn that the story takes place in Virginia, "1864, 3 years into the Civil War." Being south and all, Virginia supported the Confederacy during the war, just as the characters in this universe. Finding out the women were of confederate standing in the war was actually sort of a mini-plot twist in the beginning, as Amy finds the Union soldier and has to explain to him that he might not receive the best treatment if she takes him home with her. I've included a map of Civil War Virginia for the study of battles, land, and if you'd like to look further, architecture and changes through time.

https://www.loc.gov/resource/g3881s.cw0509400/

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
Scene From The Beguiled: A "Scholarly" Picture 

# data[].attributes.headline
Secondary Source #1- "Scholarly History"

# data[].attributes.subject
Secondary Source #1- "Scholarly History"

# data[].attributes.body
McBurney both directly and indirectly tells us he's an Irishman through his delivered lines as well as his apparent accent throughout the film. Irishmen were very prevalent during the Civil War, traveling to the United States due to religious conflicts, a poor economy, as well as political conflicts. "Over 150,000 Irishmen" most of whom were newly immigrated or even not yet U.S citizens, served in the Civil War. They served for many different reasons, but most served out of "loyalty to their new country" and they also served in hopes of dissipating the discriminatory behaviors toward the Irish. The Irish believed if they showed their goodwill and served in a war that technically didn't involve them, they could end Irish discrimination. Sadly, the derogatory treatment of the Irish by the white Americans continued, even after the war.
Knowing that McBurney is of Irish descent, an Irish immigrant, opens a gateway to his possible background as well as his people's background during the Civil War. Additional research, for example, this "scholarly" newsletter written by a "scholar", can help the audience to better understand John McBurney and his place in "The Beguiled". Not necessarily his place as a character in the story, but how and why he's in Virginia in the first place. It helps the audience to understand more about the historical setting, even if the movie doesn't carry much historical value.

The Irish in the Civil War
W Dennis Keating: https://engagedscholarship.csuohio.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1495&context=fac_articles

https://www.history.com/topics/american-civil-war/the-irish-brigade#:~:text=More%20than%20150%2C000%20Irishmen%2C%20most,stop%20to%20anti%2DIrish%20discrimination.

https://www.nps.gov/articles/irish-soldiers-in-the-union-army.htm

# data[].attributes.body
I have been WAITING for this one... and dreading it. Waiting for it, because I have AMAZING feedback. Dreading it, because there's only ONE complaint... WHY DID YOU SET THIS MODERN TALE IN A HISTORICAL SETTING AND THEN JUST UNDERAPPRECIATE THE SETTING AND HISTORICAL VALUE THE ENTIRE TIME?!
Don't get me wrong, it's hard to do, mesh the modern-day feminist agenda with the way back then. Not to say feminism wasn't present throughout the decades, because it CERTAINTLY has been. Otherwise, the women of today would not be where they are, well, today. It's just that back then, feminism was unheard of, women were getting their start, but they had to keep it quiet for fear of being further oppressed. This story is about how women aren't always the beguilers, and that women can also be beguiled by abusive and manipulative men. It is very well-written and performed, once you understand what you are watching, but the historical setting is almost irrelevant to this wonderful story. The plot would be better off performed in a more modern-day setting because it's a more modern story to tell in the first place. So, I can't really be as disappointed as I am about the underdeveloped setting. I just feel like the story and the setting didn't fit together as well as they could have because they aren't very compatible. However, I'd really like to hear others' opinions because I might be looking at it through a single, fixed window, rather than an open field of view. I really do wish that the director valued the historical aspects a little more informationally. It doesn't have to be a whole documentary, I'd just have liked to know more about what was going on around the characters and more about their roles in history.

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
The Beguiled by Thomas Cullinan 1966 (Thrift Books is Superior!)

# data[].attributes.body
This is the novel that started it all. It fathered the 1971 Clint Eastwood film that begged the 2017 remake by Sofia Coppola. The book has a different take on the story just as both movie adaptions do. If you would like a good read and you'd like to examine different interpretations of the story of "The Beguiled", I highly recommend the novel to you. As well as the Clint Eastwood film, even though it's trash.

https://www.thriftbooks.com/w/the-beguiled/7459344/#edition=19397346&idiq=42031934

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beguiled_(1971_film)