Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Movie makers interested in Hannah Duston story
Eagle-Tribune ^ | August 23, 2006 | Shawn Regan

Posted on 08/24/2006 3:02:10 PM PDT by Pharmboy

HAVERHILL - Several independent movie makers and script writers are interested in bringing controversial Colonial heroine Hannah Duston to the big screen. Scott Baron, CEO of Los Angeles-based Dynamo Entertainment, a new film-making company that seeks to produce as many as five low- to mid-budget movies per year, said his writers have already started developing a script about Duston "to see if we can do her story justice while creating a moving and exciting film."

Duston made history March 15, 1697, when she was kidnapped by Abenaki Indians, who killed her infant daughter by bashing the baby's head against a tree. Two weeks later on March 30, Duston escaped with her nursemaid and a young boy from an island in the middle of the Merrimack River near present-day Concord, N.H., by killing and scalping as many as 10 of her captors.

"The Colonial time and locale of the story really caught my eye," said Baron, stepson of prolific movie producer Art Levinson. "There seems to be such a reliance on weaponry, gadgets and explosions these days. But Hannah Duston's story is compelling without relying on such devices.

"This is a story not only with a strong female lead but also a solid tale of triumph over adversity and overwhelming odds," Baron said.

Hollywood has served up such recent movies based in Colonial Massachusetts as "Amistad," "The Crucible" and "The Scarlet Letter."

Benjamin Jackendoff, another Los Angeles film producer who recently worked with director Larry Cohen on "Phone Booth," is also intrigued by Duston's story, which he said he read about as a college literature student and recently in a newspaper account of her re-emergence as a controversial figure in Haverhill.

"Her story is every parent's worst nightmare," Jackendoff said. "She's a strong, complex and ambiguous character. That lends itself to a narrative that combines the very different versions of her story from Cotton Mather and the Abenaki. After working with Larry Cohen, you can't help but see the commercial potential for a thriller in a story like that."

In a version of the story by the Abenaki tribe, Duston is more blood-thirsty murderess and less victim. In the Abenaki account, she befriended members of the tribe, got several of them drunk and then slaughtered them with a hatchet as they slept.

In the Colonial version, Duston returned home to Haverhill in a canoe, and the government rewarded her with 50 pounds sterling and other gifts. In 1879, she became the first woman in America to be immortalized with a statue, and her story was told in accounts by Nathaniel Hawthorne, Cotton Mather and Henry David Thoreau. Although she is the heroine of several books, she has yet to be portrayed in a movie.

Interest in Duston's story and her past were rekindled recently when she was made official ambassador of this Saturday's battle of the bands organized by Team Haverhill and the city. Posters of Duston holding an electric guitar, in place of the axe she wields in her Main Street statue, have been hung throughout the city.

Media accounts of Duston and Haverhill have appeared in newspapers across the country since The Eagle-Tribune published a story Friday about the city's use of Duston as a symbol of its downtown revival.

"It's the ultimate feminist story," said Rebecca Day, a Massachusetts native and freelance writer who has done script development for Hallmark Entertainment and Lifetime Television. "It has all the qualities of a hot Lifetime movie. I would pitch it as 'Ransom' meets 'The Crucible.'"

Day said she is particularly intrigued by Duston's psychological makeup.

"What interests me is exploring what made her tick," Day said. "I think the story perfectly illustrates what happens when one's world turns into chaos. A person really has to go into survival mode, regardless of what role society thinks he or she is supposed to play. Although women at this time were considered second-class citizens, I think it's funny how many men so easily became her followers and admirers."

Constantine Valhouli, principal of a Bradford company that specializes in revitalizing historic urban centers and who is helping to promote the music festival, said he has spoken to representatives from New York and Los Angeles production houses about Duston.

"Hannah's story would make a good film for the same reason she makes a great symbol for Haverhill," Valhouli said. "Her story of courage and conflict is timeless. Change the details slightly and it is still happening around the world."

Day, the Los Angeles producer, said he believes Duston's story could be produced on a reasonable budget and still connect with audiences.

"The biggest issue that films like this will face is that period films are often expensive to produce," he said, noting that the most recent film of the genre, "The New World," was a critical disappointment. On the other hand, "Dances with Wolves" grossed over $424 million, and "Last of the Mohicans" made over $100 million, he said.

Haverhill reporter Shawn Regan may be contacted at 978-373-1000, or sregan@eagletribune.com.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; News/Current Events; US: Massachusetts; US: New Hampshire; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: abenakis; godsgravesglyphs; hannahduston; hollywood; indians; kidnapping; savagery
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-151 last
To: AnotherUnixGeek

"Have you? If not, what qualifies you to judge her conduct as anything other than savage?"

Uhm, no. That's why I didn't judge her. I said that I hadn't been through it so I couldn't say that she was a savage for doing it. It's just interesting to me that someone who didn't live at that time and has no idea what she went through would stand up and say how they are so much better than her.

"The Indians who murdered her child were probably honored by their people at the time as well. So?"

Wow. The point is easily lost on you. I know that public school has tried to instill the idea that all cultures are equally good but it's not true.

The settlers of that time would have had similar values to ours, whereas these Indians would not have. This is seen in a cursory reading of history of that time period. That's why the opinion of the settlers is significant to us and the opinion of the Indians is not. We have much in common with the settlers and not much in common with Indian tribes like this one, although there were other tribes which had values closer to ours.


141 posted on 08/29/2006 2:27:26 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 140 | View Replies]

To: Pharmboy

later


142 posted on 08/29/2006 2:29:09 PM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
Uhm, no. That's why I didn't judge her. I said that I hadn't been through it so I couldn't say that she was a savage for doing it.

By saying so, you've made a judgement excusing her actions by saying that circumstances could arise in which the sadistic mutilation of human beings is justified and that hers may have been such a circumstance.

Wow. The point is easily lost on you.

I'm afraid I'd have to say the point has rather been lost by you, since you don't address it.

The settlers of that time would have had similar values to ours, whereas these Indians would not have.

If the values of the settlers of that time included approval of deliberate, unnecessary mutilation of enemies, the settlers were as savage as the Indians. Such values are not similar to mine, nor to those of most other people. It can be argued that it took a level of savagery and uncivilized behavior to tame this continent, and I won't argue with that. Attempting to portray such acts as somehow better than that of the Indians is illogical and ethically weak, however.
143 posted on 08/29/2006 2:52:02 PM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 141 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek

"By saying so, you've made a judgement excusing her actions by saying that circumstances could arise in which the sadistic mutilation of human beings is justified and that hers may have been such a circumstance."

Nope, I just said that I would leave it up to her contemporaries (and obviously, to God) to judge her, not me. Just because I don't know that I would do it doesn't automatically mean it is wrong, which is the opposite of what you are saying.

"I'm afraid I'd have to say the point has rather been lost by you, since you don't address it."

It's been addressed more than once, you just don't agree with the answer.

"Such values are not similar to mine, nor to those of most other people. It can be argued that it took a level of savagery and uncivilized behavior to tame this continent, and I won't argue with that. "

Read some history. The settlers didn't delight in the tortures like the Indians did. There is definitely a huge difference between the two groups if you take the time to find out.

"Attempting to portray such acts as somehow better than that of the Indians is illogical and ethically weak, however."

Anyone who claims to be on a higher moral plane based on a story like this is the one who is being illogical and ethically weak. Read some history from that time period, it might surprise you what they did to lawbreakers, much less savages, back then. You will find yourself even more at odds with the settlers and especially the founders of this country.


144 posted on 08/29/2006 5:00:16 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 143 | View Replies]

To: metesky
Metesky, Hanna my type of woman, I drive by her statue a couple of times a day.

During King Phillips war 40% of the population, English, were murdered by the peaceful, nature loving Indians and the frogs. I will admit that even as low a creature as a frog was disgusted by the native americans treatment of their captives.

Old Hanna reminds me of my Grand Mother who could nail a rabbit at 20 yards with a .22 at 73. She lost family during the Indian wars in the 1870's and didn't think well of them, or what was left of certain members of her family.

What ever happened to that Italian fellow, the Faux Indian, who shed a tear.

145 posted on 08/29/2006 5:28:23 PM PDT by Little Bill (A 37%'r, a Red Spot on a Blue State, rats are evil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
Nope, I just said that I would leave it up to her contemporaries (and obviously, to God) to judge her, not me.

I won't. Similarly, I won't leave it up to contemporaries of Genghis Khan or Napoleon or any other historical figure to judge their actions - judging the actions of figures from the past is one of the reasons for the study of history.

There is definitely a huge difference between the two groups if you take the time to find out.

Approval of scalping was obviously not one of these differences.

Read some history from that time period, it might surprise you what they did to lawbreakers, much less savages, back then. You will find yourself even more at odds with the settlers and especially the founders of this country.

Oh, no doubt. I'm already at odds with their decision to allow the enslavement of fellow human beings.
146 posted on 08/29/2006 5:44:17 PM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 144 | View Replies]

To: IYAAYAS; Little Bill
I grew up on the banks of the Merrimac river near the Methuen line. There is a monument at the spot where she came ashore after escaping that was erected in the early 1800's. The monument is about 100yds south of the rest area hidden by dense undergrowth on the river bank.

I'm trying to remember the place name for your section of town, IYAAYAS, and can't for the life of me. Seems to me it was the name of a stream that entered the Merrimac right around there.

I'm a Riverside lad myself, part of the notorious Tilton's Corner crew from the fifties and sixties. Tilton's Corner is the intersection where the Riverside Memorial Church and Hannah's Market are on Groveland Street. We were quite the "gang" what with our baseball and football teams, pimples, hot rods and teenage angst.

Sometimes I think I'm related to half the population of Riverside.

147 posted on 08/30/2006 3:18:30 AM PDT by metesky ("Brethren, leave us go amongst them." Rev. Capt. Samuel Johnston Clayton - Ward Bond- The Searchers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek

"I won't. Similarly, I won't leave it up to contemporaries of Genghis Khan or Napoleon or any other historical figure to judge their actions - judging the actions of figures from the past is one of the reasons for the study of history."

You crack me up. You forgot to compare her to Hitler, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Mao, et. al. The list is long and distinguished and you wouldn't want to leave anyone out.


148 posted on 08/30/2006 8:40:20 AM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 146 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
You forgot to compare her to Hitler, Pol Pot, Saddam Hussein, Mao, et. al. The list is long and distinguished and you wouldn't want to leave anyone out.

I didn't compare her to anyone. You did. I was simply pointing out that your scalping heroine is an historical figure and her actions can and should be judged by anyone interested in her history, as should those of any historical figure. Your "see-no-evil" views certainly don't apply to the Indians who murdered her baby - you have plenty of problems with them. You just choose not to see the problem with a woman who needlessly mutilated fellow human beings, and that would crack me up if it weren't so morally and ethically sad.
149 posted on 08/30/2006 8:58:47 AM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 148 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek

"You just choose not to see the problem with a woman who needlessly mutilated fellow human beings"

I thought she mutilated dead bodies, not "fellow human beings". She killed them (which was justifiable IMO but you may disagree with that, too) and then she scalped them. Presumably she scalpled them for a purpose as was mentioned in one of the stories about it, she didn't scalp them just for fun and sport like the savages did.

And, yes, I see a vast difference between what she did and what they did to her baby. Perhaps you should judge the difference between those two acts.


150 posted on 08/30/2006 5:01:39 PM PDT by webstersII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: webstersII
I thought she mutilated dead bodies, not "fellow human beings".

The article that started this thread doesn't make that clear - in one account, she befriended several of the Indians, got them drunk and then killed them. It's not clear if the scalping took place during the killings.

She killed them (which was justifiable IMO but you may disagree with that, too)

No, don't disagree - she probably had to kill them to escape.

and then she scalped them. Presumably she scalpled them for a purpose as was mentioned in one of the stories about it, she didn't scalp them just for fun and sport like the savages did.

What was this purpose?

And, yes, I see a vast difference between what she did and what they did to her baby.

I see a difference as well. That still doesn't make what she did any less savage.
151 posted on 08/30/2006 5:40:23 PM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 150 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140141-151 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson