0 votes

A question for the "history buffs".

There was a recent mini series about John Adams. Has anyone seen it? Is it historically accurate or is it propaganda?

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

If you want to get the best

If you want to get the best impression of who John Adams was read My Dearest Friend: Letters of Abigail and John Adams.


I believe McCullough's account is as accurate as anyone is ever likely to get, though. His book was based on the letters of John and Abigail, as well as Jefferson, Rush, Jay, Franklin, Washington and others. It is sourced and quoted very well.

If we were...

Alive then, and actually knew John Adams we could tell you, but unfortunately none of us were born then. By some of the books written, I would say that the movie/mini-series is about the closest you will get to the truth. Unfortunately, most of our history has been re-written to what our governement wants you to believe, the only way to know the truth is to hope that a family member from that time period recorded this information, and passed it on through the generations. I do not believe most of the stuff I read about our history in America, most of it has been distorted.

not sure how accurate it

not sure how accurate it was, but they didnt have Patrick Henry in it...I loved the show though, the cinematography was great, Paul Giomatti was fantastic....his best role is still "Veal chop" in Safemen...im sure noone else saw that.

Here is a twenty minute video..........

of the making of John Adams H.B.O series


"Observe the masses,and do the opposite."

"Observe the masses,and do the opposite."

John Adams was a Hamiltonian

And the John Adams series is just Hamiltonian propaganda. There's your history lesson. They worship Lincoln, too.

Sedition act, corporate welfare, crony capitalism, central banking, and all the ills that go with "constitutional law" and "implied powers", much like we have today.

Read anything by Tom DiLorenzo, especially "Hamilton's Curse", to get a good insight into the differences between Hamiltonian and Jeffersonian thinking. Reading it now, holy cow.

Hint: We're the Jeffersonians.

...In Liberty


Actually they did a pretty

Actually they did a pretty good job showing the struggle between Adams and Jefferson regarding central banking. Adams comes off as pompous and Jefferson speaks very eloquently.

That is usually how it goes...

I can't bare to watch Revolutionary period, or Civil War era stuff for that matter, because they are always thick with "MODERN" history propaganda.

They don't say "Money is the root of all evil" for nothing.

It seems like the old debate has revived, and the Jeffersonians in that time were dealing with the same problems that we have today. It all stems from central banking and it's all been seen before.

...In Liberty


Without question history seems to repeat itself.

I whole heatedly agree with you. Hopefully in the coming future there will be enough of us to finally route their advancement.


Poor acting- Adams can't speak loud enough to be heard.

Poor video

Should never have been made.

Thank you to everyone who posted

an answer to my question. You've been very helpful and I truly appreciate the time you took to respond!

A Little of Both

The series (and the book it is based on) is fairly historically accurate, but McCullough brings a rather large bias to his subject. Not only does he work hard to make John Adams look better than he really was, he also takes pains to make Thomas Jefferson look like just another conniving politician. This leads a person to draw the wrong conclusions, not only about these two men, but about history in general.

First of all, lets look at the facts. John Adams was only a one term president who was extremely unpopular during his own time (both within and without his party), he did not help to write the constitution (although he did draft his state's constitution), and he spent a huge chunk of the formative years of this nation overseas. He thought too highly of European nations and their more authoritarian forms of government and was a Federalist who wanted to empower the executive branch beyond what was originally intended in the Constitution. McCullough also tries to make the Alien and Sedition Acts seem less serious than they were in an attempt to gloss over this ugly aspect of Adams' makeup and political beliefs.

You need to understand that between its conception and the Civil War, the nation was in a struggle between two views of what the country should look like - Hamiltonian vs Jeffersonian. Adams came down more on the Hamiltonian side. This is the type of government we have been stuck with ever since the Civil War. This is the type of government which has brought us bigger and bigger government, lobbying, corporatism (or mercantilism as they used to call it), a more powerful executive branch, etc. This is largely what Adams stood for (although he wasn't quite as bad as Hamilton).

So, why all the hype over this unpopular, one-term president who spent so much time living in Europe? I believe it is mostly an attempt to discredit Jefferson and his ideas (which ultimately have proven to be right) and to glorify everything the Federalists wanted to, and ultimately did, bring about. In this respect, the John Adams hype is largely propaganda.

You put that very well.

More classroom time with mamabear is needed around here.

**** four stars

We rented all 3 videos (7 shows in all)
from blockbuster and watched one every night with the whole family.

I personally found it thoroughly enjoyable and educational. I don't know
how accurate it was although there were many references to historical facts and it does account for the life and times of the early days of America.
The sets, costumes, make up and acting was first class and I believe
it was directed by Tom Hanks ( or produced). It was better than most
movies and I highly recommend seeing it.
It gave insight to who the founding fathers were and where they
stood on issues of war, debt, liberty and loyalty. Including early
rifts and beliefs and on which side they stood.
The only draw back was it ended at the death of John Adams
which makes sense because the film was about him, but would of been great if it had kept going to present day. Instead we get useless tv soap operas.

Rent them today you will not be disappointed.

It was good. It was based

It was good. It was based on the biography written by David McCullough. The book is much more accurate and more detailed than the Hollywood depiction, though.

I am always weary of anything that finds its way over

mass media like tv.

Most may be true, but there is always some disinfo slipped in during the presentation. Its a pattern I notice. I have not finished reading my several books on Adams and Washington, that I got over holidays.

I really wish to get my hands on obscure 'old' books preferably written in 19th century. I would trust those over anything written currently in last century for example. I would love to spend time at the library of congress and ivy league universities that house letters from these folks. Love to read from the first source rather than someone else's interpretation.

I heard it it's really good

You are just coming right around Truthy. I am so happy to see you waking up.