John Adams on the silver screen

First, I'm glad that Tom Hanks made this film. In general, it seemed to be quite honest in its portrayal of the Continental Congress. I think we sometimes forget how much internal struggle existed before the colonies finally united. Of course, there's only so much we can realistically recreate, be it in a film or in a novel, because the documents that still exist aren't of a descriptive nature – they don't say things like, "The air in the Congressional hall hung heavy with tension," – nor do they contain personal details like, "John and Abigail shared a tender moment sitting on the edge of their nuptial bed." So the artist has to take some liberties and experiment. I thought Hanks did a great job of capturing his audience's attention but keeping the film historically accurate.

Second, I absolutely loved the Ben Franklin character. He was hysterically funny, yet had wise insights into the politics of the Congress. If Ben was anything like that in real life, I want to be friends with him in the life to come.

Third, I wondered why Hanks chose to include the scenes of the children’s inoculation. It’s scientifically interesting from a medical-historical perspective, but it doesn’t seem to fit clearly into the central story, at least not explicitly. I wonder if perhaps Hanks included to stand as a sort of metaphor for the colonies’ decision to break ties with England.

For example, the doctor warns Abigail Adams of the dangers associated with inoculation – illness, even death, potentially. Yet she decides the risk of inoculation is worth it to protect her children. This is similar to the risk the colonies took in seceding from Britain and declaring their independence. They faced extreme risks. In spite of Thomas Paine’s optimism for America’s political and economic stability, the colonies stepped out onto a political and financial ‘limb’ by challenging Britain, a major world power.

Similarly, the American colonies were still in their ‘childhood’ – they didn’t have centuries upon centuries of independent history like Great Britain did. They described their relationship with Britain in terms of ‘mother’ country and ‘child.’

Further, in seceding, the American colonies weakened themselves, just as Abigail’s daughter succumbed to an infection from her inoculation. Yet America emerged stronger from her period of challenge and testing.

The film interpreted this time in John Adams life as a time of great growth of character for him personally. By showing Adams under the tutelage of Ben Franklin, the film creates an arc of the development of Adam’s own life. He moves from being almost violently outspoken and alienating his political rivals at the beginning of the film, to understand the ‘politics’ of politics, or being able to reconcile differences in opinion and unite political rivals in order to accomplish the good of the people.

More than the portrayal of John Adams, I loved the portrayal of his wife as strong, independent, and unafraid to express her true feelings to her husband. She was a ‘republican mother’ – she taught her children to love the new America, as in the scene where she and her children read the Declaration of Independence. Most telling to me was the line where she says that women would cut through all the ‘politics’ (in the sense of verbose speeches and stagnancy) and get things done quickly and efficiently. More power to that woman!