Daniels was nominated for an Oscar - but as Best Supporting Actor. He felt he was the lead and so declined the nomination.

@baronvonnembles whoops! Thanks for the correction!

Absolutely agree. One of the finest historical films ever made- it seems secondary that it's a musical- although a wonderful open at that. All American conservatives should be forced to watch this, until they finally realize that conservativism was and always has been supremely un-American. We are a nation forged by radical, erudite, well-spoken, and highly educated LIBTARDS. Those were the days...

Nonsense. These were not 'libtards' like today. These were classical Liberals in the European sense. Freedom, liberty, and dignity for the entrepreneur, small farmer and average man (however imperfectly implemented for years) was what they believed. Today's "libtards" as you call Leftists believe in none of those things and only their ridiculous bigger and bigger governments.

Da Silva what an actor

He also knew the real work was about to begin.

It's one of my favorite movie lines of all the movies I've seen. Every time I have set a long-term, meaningful goal and accomplished it, I find myself referring to this line.

No cheers indeed. At the same time, they all just signed their death warrant. It's a feeling captured fantastically in this classic movie

Ben Franklin is an ancestor of mine! 6th great grandfather

Awesome

That's so cool!

I Say, Ye! Dr. Josiah Bartlett !

@@Gablesman888 Who played you on The West Wing?

Franklin was actually being witty; he says "If we do not hang together, we shall most assuredly all hang separately."

You somehow managed to misquote both. "We must all hang together, or else we shall all hang separately." -Benjamin Franklin "(And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence), we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor." -Rev. John Dickenson (last sentence of the Declaration of Independence)

Every man had their flaws, but they all had qualities to be admired too. John was believing in the values that would keep a society happy and healthy, he valued respect.

Dickenson was an interesting man. He would joke later in life about not signing the declaration. He was also a key figure in creating the Constitution

And Dickinson acknowledging in his own way how he cared for America and it's well being bas much as Adams. So a mutual respect at the very end. And Dickinson was right . England and America would be reconciled and be the most important of allies in the coming centuries especially with world war 1 and 2

Dickinson was also a key instigator of the rebellion, actually. Hos "Letters from a Farmer" made clear what the colonists' issues were. He's presented here as a sort of Tory, but actually everyone in Congress was in rebellion against the Crown.

Same here.

“No pressure or anything bud.” 😂🤣🤣

Outstanding line!

I do too. ❤️

Ditto

Me too! Love it. 🙂

And the threat of execution for treason

Too bad present Congress has no sacred honour

@@ktkat1949 no matter which way you spell it, present congress would be clue less

Technically, the DOL wasn't signed until Aug. 2, 1776.

I'm a handicapped person, a son of man fought in Vietnam as a Marine. Lead the way for the Tanks in Desert Storm as a US Army Combat Engineer. If i had to i die on the line to keep country free. We have issues now, But this country still has promise.

Compare these men to the Congress w have today. Liars, thieves and perverts all; with a supporting cast of unelected overseers.

We do!

@@sharonmahoney9333As do I 1:33

I saw the show on Broadway, and, at that moment, you could have heard the proverbial pin drop.

Yes. It was as if the weight of what they had just done was settling upon them.

It certainly wasn't a cheerful moment, considering there was a war ahead of them that appeared hopeless and that they also just signed their own death warrants.

Yeah, the slow wheels of congress, which is an intentional check on the federal government ranks very low on the complaints people have on our modern congress. Today we are worried about corruption, undue influence, constitutionality, and pure political interest. Not that there wasn’t some of this back in the day, but very little of it was the issue during THIS congress. The slow wheels here were for the most part a matter of life and death for their nations as well for them as individuals. Very different from our modern congress.

And now, not only are we on the verge of throwing it all away, but we're also potentially embracing something even worse than what they declared independence from.

When I was in Middle School this movie had just about come out. Our teacher got us out of school for the morning to go to the local theater to watch it for class. It was an awesome experience (and not just because we got out of school for the morning).

My band teacher (was probably in his mid-70s) showed us this movie in my 8th grade year of middle school, 2014-2015. Sadly he retired at the end of that year but I had a tremendous amount of respect for him and he taught me and others a lot of valuable life lessons.

there were fine men working hard to eradicate it before our country was even a country. but always a few fought it; and thus in the end came the civil war

20 years after this event.

How it would have worked is that they would have all been simply trundled onto a British military ship and shipped off to England never to be seen again

We must all hang together...or we will all hang separately.,

South Carolina has always been the problem child of America. It took ninety years, but we eventually solved the horror of slavery.

@@Madison-iw8ix Not if you listen to some these days.

Apparently Adam's said, "There will be trouble a hundred years hence. Posterity will never forgive us." The writers decided that no one would believe he really said this, so they shortened the line.

And yet Franklin's comments were correct. We wouldn't have been a nation and at that point what would have been the difference?

What are we Demi-gods? No, but they sure get treated as such.

True. Also, the confrontation with Rutledge did not take place during the vote. Adams and Rutledge were close friends but at odds over slavery. It took political wrangling between Rutledge, Adams, Franklin and Jefferson to secure the vote, along the lines of, as Franklin says here, “first things first”. Unfortunately.

This was better depicted in John Adams, the miniseries

Actually he was not there cause he had joined the pensalvina line and Washington

Brent Spiner? Yuck. He soured on me despite the role. But glad you gave more information.

@@whatareyoulookingat908, quite right. Wikipedia lists the historical inaccuracies in the movie & this was one of those.

My kids love it and I watched it in 6th grade in 84. I own it digitally, dvd, and vhs. My friend, it's not yr Jesus but our active participation that will keep the inheritance. Everyone forgets "Of the People". Disagree with something? Get involved. Not violently. Active civic participation. It's not what they can do for us as our government, it's what we are doing for this legacy and responsibility.

@@DeeWeber LOL You think it's going to get better ? Good luck with that.

he played the teacher and later princple on boy meets world.

There are many differences in what really happened, and this musical.

@@christopherbroaddrick7198 that is a cop out

The 1973 film starred just about the entire original Broadway cast (the only exception I think was the part of Martha Jefferson, playing onstage by Betty Buckley and on screen by Blythe Danner), so if you watch that it's pretty close to being a filmed version of the stage show. The stage version isn't produced often because the cast has about 26 male parts but only 2 female parts, so it's difficult for community theaters to put on.

@@SarahB1863 Two very important replacements are Donald Madden as Dickenson (instead of Broadway's Paul Hecht) and John Cullum as Rutledge (instead of Broadway's original Clifford David). Cullum, however, had been the third replacement Rutledge on Broadway and actually played it longer on Broadway in the original production than any other actor. I've always thought the problem of the show having an overwhelmingly male cast could be solved (or at least mitigated) by presenting "1776* in repertory with *Nine" (which is all women with only one male role). Gender blind casting offers another strategy, and as you may know there was a recent revival that featured an all-female cast.

You are correct in that, historically speaking, it has its share of flaws. However none of these inaccuracies change

@@UnderseaPumaKing Yup and event hey admitted not all of it is correct, most of it they went off of letters, and stuff like that the these people wrote. But also there a lot they don't know what happened between the start and the vote so they just added some fun stuff in.

It isn't historically accurate in every respect, but it dramatizes the issues in a compelling way, and can be used as a valuable teaching tool.

I worked in a school as an instructional aide for 3 years and taught this film each year

Yes. Because most scenes take place in a Congressional chamber packed with delegates, the original theatrical widescreen version of this movie is stunningly different from the 4:3 "pan and scan" version shown on TV for decades.

Uh, no. Dickinson favored negotiations and reconciliation, not independence. Thus the reason why he didn't sign the Declaration.

allenjpl True, but he wasn't the intransigent douche as portrayed in this movie - a virtual Tory. He contributed mightily to American independance.

John Dickinson served his country, but he was not a staunch supporter of independence. The day before the vote was rendered, he discoursed on the dangers of independence and democracy, that those who support it "are the promoters of slavery," that "so necessary is monarchy to cement human society together" that all democracy is doomed to end in "a state of confusion and ruin," and lead to conditions which will "annihilate liberty forever." In his last paragraph, he actually predicted the French Revolution quite accurately, give him that.

Philio Phrog & Allenjpl are essentially correct, I don't want to pile on but let us recognize that this musical has it's own creative license. Ultimately what happens here as in any historical piece, is that the authors turn up the volume on characterizations. Hamilton being timely here is a perfect example. These depictions are less rock solid historic accuracy and more along accurate interpretation. And one thing you would have to recognize that at any volume, Dickenson was immediately after and over time viewed as being on the wrong side of the coin from the American perspective. And what you describe is more a counterpoint that this film tries to address with his whole bit about going into service. A good proof of Dickenson being willfully discarded from the national narrative is the fact that there is a perfectly legit case to be made that the congress doesn't even come together without Dickenson's advocacy.

In reality, Dickenson did not oppose independence.

Also of note: James Noble (Rev. John Witherspoon, the lead delegate from NJ) starred on _Benson,_ and John Cullum (Edward Rutledge, the SC delegate) was on _Northern Exposure._

​@@ThreePointOneFou Rutledge also started on Broadway in "Shenandoah" this Anderson Land

Civil war was inevitable, but at that time they had to unite against the British threat

From what I've read on it it probably wouldn't have ended till after the war and being part of the constitution.

That would have killed their economy.

@@humansvd3269 there's such thing as transitioning or hiring their slaves back as field hands and paying them a wage.

Rutledge, in an earlier scene, was letting Jefferson have it for his oblique reference to slavery, both defending the practice as a "peculiar Southern tradition" and calling out both Jefferson and the Northerners as hypocrites (Jefferson as a slave owner, Adams' Massachusetts as a slave-trading hub). Adams tried to belittle Rutledge on the issue, prompting Rutledge to rub it in their faces (the "Molasses to Rum to Slaves" song) before leading the Carolinas and Georgia to walk out. Franklin subsequently reminded Adams that, for all their disagreements, the other delegates were still deserving of respect, and that Adams should start showing it to them.

I had SUCH a crush on Thomas Jefferson thanks to this movie!

Thomas Jefferson was REALLY cute! 😳

@@SarahB1863 he was a HOTTIE 😍

*the French Canadien settlers living under the yoke of British imperialism at Fort Detroit… “Michigan says YEAY!” 😂🤣

They LIVED it. I would say yes.

The actor was named Howard Da Silva. He was blacklisted from movies in the late 40’s for being a dirty red. Ben Franklin would have been appalled having such a despicable character playing him .

The first time I watched the movie, I thought he was in the Massachusetts delegation. I got so confused when he voted with Pennsylvania! 😂

Florida was not acquired by the United States from Spain until 1819, it was not an English colony.

Good question but I don't think Franklin or Dickinson would have agreed to doing that. Franklin wanted it to pass and Dickinspon was just as determined to take it down. I also don't think they could if the resolution required a unanimous vote, i think that means every colony had to support it.

No every colony didn't have to support it. New York (according to the movie) originally abstained. But I think abstaining has to be a consensus itself within the colony. Since there were 3 of them there would be a majority. It had to be Judge Wilson's decision, one way or the other.

@@InAHearbeat it's a running joke thru the play and the film: the delegate from New York could not get any instructions from the NY Legislature. So he abstained, courteously. At the time of the signing, he has a line: "To Hell with New York!" , and signs...

Yes, at the time of signing. Not at the time of voting. The point was it didn't have to have all yay votes. It only couldn't have any nays because originally NY abstained and it still passed.

Actually, there was a little dramatic license here. Caesar Rodney, the lead delegate from Delaware, would go on to die of cancer, but at the time of the Second Continental Congress he wa 37 and in good health.

I was wondering about that.

It was the next day, Johnny tore the calendar page and everything. Not his name here but I will never not see him as Johnny the shoeshine guy from Police Squad. “Word on the street is that they’ll strike the slavery passage so the Carolinas will vote in favor.” :hands over $20:

No, and nor did Salieri poison Mozart. But if Shakespeare taught us anything, it's not to let historical accuracy stand in the way of writing a good play.

I don’t think the film presents him as that at all. While not exactly historically accurate, it presents him as a man of conviction who supports what he believes is best, and when he is overruled he lends himself to the fight. Pretty noble imho

Howard Da Silva had a distinct voice.

You can also see a much younger Howard DaSilva in the great 1940 film Abe Lincoln in Illinois (he was Lincoln's early rival in Salem who wrestled with Lincoln). He was great in that supporting role also.

@@davidahlstrom7533 And he played Ben Marino, the political wheeler-dealer, in "Fiorello!" on Broadway. Here he is, re-creating one of the signature songs from that musical, in which with his fellow cardplayers he acts out the testimony in the Tammany Hall trials in NYC. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jth6gNGAs8vXYqs.htmlsi=RhwvK1w9qu1ncm8z