4 ms·
Never trust a hollywood adaptation to be remotely historically accurate or honest.
by ProAm 9y ago
Never trust a hollywood adaptation to be remotely historically accurate or honest.
- gozur88 9y agoThat's why they say "based on a true story" instead of "this is a true story". They can change whatever they want and call it artistic license.
- ramzyo 9y agoYup, totally agree. Probably also because there’s no written record of what was actually said or done in the majority of micro-events that help to define personalities and setup plot lines (eg the opening bar scene at Thirsty Scholar in The Social Network between Mark Zuckerberg and his love interest).
- ramzyo 9y agoHmm, well clearly in this case I was wrong about these guys, but I have to disagree on your comment about never trusting Hollywood adaptations to be remotely historically accurate or honest. Personally I think Hollywood adaptations generally get the broad points correct, so they are generally accurate and honest (eg Howard Hughes was a reclusive hermit toward the end of his life, as portrayed by Leo DiCaprio in The Aviator).
- lamarpye 9y agoThat is one movie, Hollywood often portrays Jessie James as a Robin Hood-like figure, taking from the rich and giving to the poor. In reality, he was murderous bandit.
- ramzyo 9y agoTrue, and yet those are also only several movies of many tens of thousands. I don't think this debate would be resolved back and forth example for example. Instead, replace the OP's use of the word never with "only sometimes", "don't usually", or even "more often than not don't", and the comment would be more reflective of its underlying nature: opinion, absent hard data.