4 ms·

Okay? Some WW2 veterans couldn't watch the Normandy invasion scene in Saving Private Ryan because it was too realistic. My dad said Apocalypse Now had its momen

by Klinky 4y ago

Okay? Some WW2 veterans couldn't watch the Normandy invasion scene in Saving Private Ryan because it was too realistic. My dad said Apocalypse Now had its moments of accuracy regarding Vietnam. I don't know why you keep repeating this incorrect notion that fiction cannot depict things in a historically accurate manner. Some fiction is trash. Some documentaries are also very misleading and have their own narrative. One should reference multiple sources when possible.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
WalterBright 4y ago
> this incorrect notion that fiction cannot depict things in a historically accurate manner This is a misunderstanding of what I wrote. I didn't say that fiction cannot do this. I said it is wrong to cite it as the truth. If you've got evidence of the truth, cite the evidence.
- Klinky 4y ago
  No it's not a misunderstanding of what you wrote. > He said the documentary nailed what it was actually like. The hollywood version, nope. Here you are comparing a fictional film with a documentary and dismissing the ability for fictional film to accurately portray the experience. This is not the case with all fictional films, and not all documentaries are actually superior or free from fiction/embellishment themselves.
  - WalterBright 4y ago
    Except you won't know if the fictional film is accurate or not because they don't cite sources.
    - Klinky 4y ago
      You cannot ask your dad or my dad or WW2 vets if it's an accurate depiction? People shouldn't assume fiction is fact, but that doesn't mean fiction cannot contain facts. I don't think anyone is saying you should cite fiction alone, but it can be used to spur interest in a topic.
      - WalterBright 4y ago
        > that doesn't mean fiction cannot contain facts I never said "cannot contain facts". You're arguing with your strawman. > I don't think anyone is saying you should cite fiction alone Just about everyone arguing with me is trying to justify citing "The Jungle" as valid source all by itself. It's a work of fiction.
        Klinky 4y ago
        > I never said "cannot contain facts". You're arguing with your strawman. Then I don't get the point of your exercise which seemed focused on dismissing the power of film to portray historically accurate situations. >Just about everyone arguing with me is trying to justify citing "The Jungle" as valid source all by itself. It's a work of fiction. Speaking of strawmen...

by Klinky 4y ago

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

WalterBright 4y ago

> this incorrect notion that fiction cannot depict things in a historically accurate manner This is a misunderstanding of what I wrote. I didn't say that fiction cannot do this. I said it is wrong to cite it as the truth. If you've got evidence of the truth, cite the evidence.

Klinky 4y ago
No it's not a misunderstanding of what you wrote. > He said the documentary nailed what it was actually like. The hollywood version, nope. Here you are comparing a fictional film with a documentary and dismissing the ability for fictional film to accurately portray the experience. This is not the case with all fictional films, and not all documentaries are actually superior or free from fiction/embellishment themselves.
- WalterBright 4y ago
  Except you won't know if the fictional film is accurate or not because they don't cite sources.
  - Klinky 4y ago
    You cannot ask your dad or my dad or WW2 vets if it's an accurate depiction? People shouldn't assume fiction is fact, but that doesn't mean fiction cannot contain facts. I don't think anyone is saying you should cite fiction alone, but it can be used to spur interest in a topic.
    - WalterBright 4y ago
      > that doesn't mean fiction cannot contain facts I never said "cannot contain facts". You're arguing with your strawman. > I don't think anyone is saying you should cite fiction alone Just about everyone arguing with me is trying to justify citing "The Jungle" as valid source all by itself. It's a work of fiction.
      - Klinky 4y ago
        > I never said "cannot contain facts". You're arguing with your strawman. Then I don't get the point of your exercise which seemed focused on dismissing the power of film to portray historically accurate situations. >Just about everyone arguing with me is trying to justify citing "The Jungle" as valid source all by itself. It's a work of fiction. Speaking of strawmen...