Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it's so that movies can stand on their own, as if the book never existed. Many times movies need to simplify plots and cut out characters, because it would get too complicated to present all of it and still be entertaining in 2 hours.
In Funny Girl, both Fanny Brice and Nicky Arstein had previous spouses, but you'd never know it from the movie. Plus Arstein had been in prison both before and after they married.
But I'm ok with that -- if I like a film that's based on someone real, it motivates me to find out more information about their lives.
I do not mind leaving things out ( although I do feel that can leave people confused about what is happening ) but when they actually change things it can really ruin the story.
I also like to learn more about a person in history from watching them in the movie but then if I find out that they were a lot different in real life then depicted in the movie I feel disappointed in the movie and do not like it anymore.
A miniseries often is better then a movie for showing all the meaningful parts of the book's storyline but many would say reading the book is always best for getting the details and full plot. Then the movie is more understandable, but then also if the movie is not true to the book it is also more disappointing .
Watchmen was also a superhero movie (only one, maybe two had real powers though, the rest were street level heroes like say Batman.) I am not sure if there was importance of Nixon as president but alas he was as the term limits was removed. Also after backlash in the 1970's, the heroes were outlawed (they were previously state sponsored.)
Sounds like a cool movie, but is it true to the original comic book story?
I think the term is "Romanticized" or "Poetic License".
The TV series "The Wild Wild West" was heavy on the poetic. Of course, it was fiction but for that matter is any movie, any show about the old West that accurate? Or about any other time? I recall someone once saying would anyone really want to be a swashbuckler when in simple cut could kill you from blood poisoning?
Or as Mom often commented watching modern women fly into the past, "She's not going to find it so great when she experiences the lack of hot and cold running water or no indoor plumbing."
But we want our movies to be enjoyable, for the audience to experience something like, not be dismayed by how it really was.
I would love to see a character's reaction to being without modern conveniences. I remember a cute reality show set in England where they had a family dress in old fashioned clothes and live as if it was a hundred years ago. It was interesting to see how they handled it. A very nice show.
I agree with what you are saying too. Casting is important. I do not mind if they cast someone who does not look exactly like the character as long as they have the same personality and heart of the character but then again if they look radically different then it may be distracting.
Do you think in choosing a black man to play a white character they made a mistake or did he bring to the role the heart and personality it needed in other ways ? Do you think they should have added at least some hint of the prejudice that would have been there at the time to use Mr Freeman in the role? I suppose its okay to change a few things about a character as long as it does not detract from or change the storyline, but at the same time I have to ask myself why with all the actors in hollywood would they choose someone who doesnt really fit the role?
Who do you think would have been the best choice for that role in unforgiven?
Freeman was very good in the part, he is always very good in whatever he is playing. They could have, and should have, tweaked the script to reflect a more realistic treatment of a black man in that era and there would have been no problem.
I agree with what you are saying too. Casting is important. I do not mind if they cast someone who does not look exactly like the character as long as they have the same personality and heart of the character but then again if they look radically different then it may be distracting.
Do you think in choosing a black man to play a white character they made a mistake or did he bring to the role the heart and personality it needed in other ways ? Do you think they should have added at least some hint of the prejudice that would have been there at the time to use Mr Freeman in the role? I suppose its okay to change a few things about a character as long as it does not detract from or change the storyline, but at the same time I have to ask myself why with all the actors in hollywood would they choose someone who doesnt really fit the role?
I honestly think it depends. I watch The Flash on the CW and Iris West is portrayed by a black woman while in comics, animation and a previous version it was a white woman. I don't have a problem with that because to me it is the role and how she does it. This it's why I have no issue (plus with Jesse Martin being her dad, who an I to complain?) Compare that to the Fantastic Four movie for next year where a white Sue Storm is the adoptive sister of a black Johnny Storm so it will be a bit harder to make him over protective (in all other versions they were both white.) I would have had no problem if both were or Ben Grim or Reed Richards were black. I'll see if I want to see it when trailers come out.
As for if they got the role or not, that depends on the portrayal the director and producer want from the film. We have seen source stories changed and altered for years. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz didn't have ruby slippers but they were in the movie. The Joker wasn't the one to kill Bruce Wayne's parents but yet he did it in Tim Burton's Batman. There were several difference in The Last Song as well.
No because as mentioned I understand it is fiction vs. history.....but I was a bit peeved that a particular true life person I think well of was treated very poorly in a film. Hero depicted as a craven coward. Only gnawed at me for a minute but I recall it still. The actual person deserved better treatment.
I have a problem when a movie sets out to purposely mislead the audience about real events and replace them with a false narrative to fit someone's agenda.
In 1999, Denzel Washington starred in a movie called The Hurricane, about a promising middleweight boxer named Rubin "The Hurricane" Carter. In the movie he is convicted of murder by a racist justice system and only after 20 years in prison is he freed after new evidence is found and he is innocent.
That is not what happened in real life. Hurricane Carter likely was guilty of the murders and was , in fact, convicted twice but the prosecutor did err in turning over some evidence and so the conviction was thrown out after 20 years and they decided not to retry Carter, but only because he had already served 20 years for the crime. He likely would have been convicted a third time.
Here is a good write up on the false narrative of the movie. 7 Movies Based on a True Story (That Are Complete Bull****) | Cracked.com
It is especially insidious, because this plays into the worst attitudes among blacks that the system is rigged, only in this case, the guy very likely was a real murderer.
I personally think movies that show people or situations from history should make an effort to be completely accurate in every way and not change anything or I lose interest.
I think any movie based on a true event would always come out better by not changing what actually happened.
Wholeheartedly agree. As a history buff, revisionism in films drives me nuts. Have comments on CD going back years on this topic. Could have added several more films to the inaccurate list at the link. Gibson and Kevin Costner duds lead the additions. Gibson for the mostly wrong portrayal of Francis Marion in "The Patriot." Costner's silly "Robin Hood Prince of Thieves" was only partly saved by Alan Richman's top notch villain's role. Finally, there is the film that, imo, is the worst historical movie ever made, in spite of the fact that it won multiple Oscars. That, of course, is "Dancing With Wolves." Wrong, wrong, wrong, from start to finish.
Last edited by BlackShoe; 11-26-2014 at 07:59 PM..
I'm sure civil war movies come under high scrutiny by civil war buffs. And sailors ripped apart All is Lost (2013). Etc., etc., etc.
Spoiler
where was his EPIRB?
If you are an sme (subject matter expert), or you have good knowledge on a subject, these based on a true story films will pull your chain. Of course, some are better than others.
I honestly think it depends. I watch The Flash on the CW and Iris West is portrayed by a black woman while in comics, animation and a previous version it was a white woman. I don't have a problem with that because to me it is the role and how she does it. This it's why I have no issue (plus with Jesse Martin being her dad, who an I to complain?) Compare that to the Fantastic Four movie for next year where a white Sue Storm is the adoptive sister of a black Johnny Storm so it will be a bit harder to make him over protective (in all other versions they were both white.) I would have had no problem if both were or Ben Grim or Reed Richards were black. I'll see if I want to see it when trailers come out.
As for if they got the role or not, that depends on the portrayal the director and producer want from the film. We have seen source stories changed and altered for years. The Wonderful Wizard of Oz didn't have ruby slippers but they were in the movie. The Joker wasn't the one to kill Bruce Wayne's parents but yet he did it in Tim Burton's Batman. There were several difference in The Last Song as well.
I think the original slippers were silver but they were changed to red to show up more. The storyline in batman changing around from one movie to another does bother me, as does the storyline changing from one x men movie to another.
Sometimes if the casting is really off it is a sign of a bad movie. I would definitely wait and see if a movie with strange casting is worth watching.
Last edited by vanguardisle; 11-27-2014 at 10:59 AM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
