[martin14]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I probabally won't even see 'Argo' as I'd be afraid they'd completely ignore the Canadian Consulate's role in the whole affair, and it would just piss me off.

Same for me.

[Gunnair]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Yeah, let's vilify Walt Disney 'cause Pocahontas wasn't historically accurate either. Argo did a great job of depicting the emotion of the incident. That's more important than getting the facts exactly correct. Understanding history is more about understanding theme, emotion and context than fact. Afleck gets good marks from me on the important aspects of the story, especially given that it's meant to be entertainment, not documentary.

Does this suggest you gave U571 a pass because it captured the emotion of the moment?

[Jonny_C]

Those who have an interest in real history, and realistic interpretations of it, are justified in being disappointed in something like "Argo". Outraged? No. It's a commercial product the purpose of which is to make money. Affleck didn't care about history, he cared about box office receipts. It's just too bad that he thought he had to butcher history in order to achieve success. But he was pandering mainly to an American audience and he really doesn't have to be apologetic for what he did. It's show biz.

That's my rational reaction.

My gut reaction is a little different, but hell, in the end, who cares?

[Lemmy]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Does this suggest you gave U571 a pass because it captured the emotion of the moment?

Kind of, yeah. Did the film accurately portray how submariners felt during a depth-charging? The importance of Enigma? The brutality of the Battle of the Atlantic?

Take it even a step farther: I would suggest that Dances With Wolves and Last of the Mohicans, which are fictional films, are relatively accurate histories on the same grounds that Argo passes. And they're both (all three, if you count U571) also excellent films.

[Jonny_C]

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I probabally won't even see 'Argo' as I'd be afraid they'd completely ignore the Canadian Consulate's role in the whole affair, and it would just piss me off.

I'm in much the same boat. Being a Canadian, the inaccuracy of it takes the shine off it for me. There's plenty of other good entertainment to watch where accuracy doesn't matter.

[Gunnair]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Gunnair Gunnair:

Does this suggest you gave U571 a pass because it captured the emotion of the moment?

Kind of, yeah. Did the film accurately portray how submariners felt during a depth-charging? The importance of Enigma? The brutality of the Battle of the Atlantic?

Take it even a step farther: I would suggest that Dances With Wolves and Last of the Mohicans, which are fictional films, are relatively accurate histories on the same grounds that Argo passes. And they're both (all three, if you count U571) also excellent films.

Double post

[Gunnair]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Gunnair Gunnair:

Does this suggest you gave U571 a pass because it captured the emotion of the moment?

Kind of, yeah. Did the film accurately portray how submariners felt during a depth-charging? The importance of Enigma? The brutality of the Battle of the Atlantic?

Take it even a step farther: I would suggest that Dances With Wolves and Last of the Mohicans, which are fictional films, are relatively accurate histories on the same grounds that Argo passes. And they're both (all three, if you count U571) also excellent films.

Come now, that's apples and oranges. Argo is about an historical event - Dances With Wolves is a fictional event in an historical time period.

[stratos]

I've not seen Argo, no major need or rush in my oppinon. As for what the Canadian Embasy did for those that were lucky enough to get there. Hell yeah I remember. Every time the Iran hostage stuff comes up I just think wow those lucky few who made it to the Embasy and were hidden and taken care of. I still remember how mind blowing it was at the time it happened and the news finaly came out what was done for them.

[bootlegga]

Lemmy Lemmy:

Yeah, let's vilify Walt Disney 'cause Pocahontas wasn't historically accurate either. Argo did a great job of depicting the emotion of the incident. That's more important than getting the facts exactly correct. Understanding history is more about understanding theme, emotion and context than fact. Afleck gets good marks from me on the important aspects of the story, especially given that it's meant to be entertainment, not documentary.

Stop making so damned much sense!

The last group of people I'd ever expect to teach me history is Hollywood - the entire point of their product is to let yourself shut down the analytical part of your mind and just relax and enjoy yourself.

[stratos]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Lemmy Lemmy:

Yeah, let's vilify Walt Disney 'cause Pocahontas wasn't historically accurate either. Argo did a great job of depicting the emotion of the incident. That's more important than getting the facts exactly correct. Understanding history is more about understanding theme, emotion and context than fact. Afleck gets good marks from me on the important aspects of the story, especially given that it's meant to be entertainment, not documentary.

Stop making so damned much sense!

The last group of people I'd ever expect to teach me history is Hollywood - the entire point of their product is to let yourself shut down the analytical part of your mind and just relax and enjoy yourself.

[Gunnair]

bootlegga bootlegga:

Lemmy Lemmy:

Yeah, let's vilify Walt Disney 'cause Pocahontas wasn't historically accurate either. Argo did a great job of depicting the emotion of the incident. That's more important than getting the facts exactly correct. Understanding history is more about understanding theme, emotion and context than fact. Afleck gets good marks from me on the important aspects of the story, especially given that it's meant to be entertainment, not documentary.

Stop making so damned much sense!

The last group of people I'd ever expect to teach me history is Hollywood - the entire point of their product is to let yourself shut down the analytical part of your mind and just relax and enjoy yourself.

Fair enough, but one opts to ignore fact and concentrate on themes and moods then it's fiction or fantasy. I don't expect an eye fir significant historical accuracy in Hollywood, but Argo, like U571 like Pearl Harbour like The Patriot like Braveheart move beyond the small liberties into outright fabrications. Trying to sell that as history, even history lite, is beyond weak.

Filed under fantasy.

[Jonny_C]

Gunnair Gunnair:

Fair enough, but one opts to ignore fact and concentrate on themes and moods then it's fiction or fantasy. I don't expect an eye fir significant historical accuracy in Hollywood, but Argo, like U571 like Pearl Harbour like The Patriot like Braveheart move beyond the small liberties into outright fabrications. Trying to sell that as history, even history lite, is beyond weak.

Filed under fantasy.

Well said.

I wonder if U571, Pearl Harbor and The Patriot billed themselves as "Based on a true story". I think maybe U571 did.

[Freakinoldguy]

Nobody expects Hollywood and Ben Affleck to teach anyone about history. After all people today have the wikipedia for that.

But, by the same token Hollywood shouldn't be using inuendo's and making claims that their story is a true story just to sell a product. By claiming the contents of the movie came frome the recently de-classified CIA files isn't just saying it's based on a true story, it's hinting very strongly that it's pretty much a true story and not just Ben Afflecks idea of how it should have happened.

$1:

As former president Jimmy Carter later observed,

“90% of the contributions to the ideas and the consummation of the plan were Canadian. And the movie gives almost full credit to the American CIA. And with that exception, the movie is very good. But Ben Affleck’s character in the film was… only in Tehran a day and a half. And the main hero, in my opinion, was Ken Taylor, who was the Canadian ambassador who orchestrated the entire process.”

Facts that were conviently forgotten under the guise this being a true story and maybe what pisses me off the most is that Affleck is basically denigrating the role prominent people played in the affair just to make himself a buck and his country look better in the eyes of the world.

So, I guess if you want emotions go see Bambi but if you want historical accuracy don't bother with anything that ever came out of Hollywood especially the movies that claim to be based on the truth.

[Gunnair]

Jonny_C Jonny_C:

Gunnair Gunnair:

Fair enough, but one opts to ignore fact and concentrate on themes and moods then it's fiction or fantasy. I don't expect an eye fir significant historical accuracy in Hollywood, but Argo, like U571 like Pearl Harbour like The Patriot like Braveheart move beyond the small liberties into outright fabrications. Trying to sell that as history, even history lite, is beyond weak.

Filed under fantasy.

Well said.

I wonder if U571, Pearl Harbor and The Patriot billed themselves as "Based on a true story". I think maybe U571 did.

Harbour.

I don't change my Canuck spelling for anyone!

[raydan]

Again...
Based on a true story simply means the story for the film was based on true events and then written into a script to suit the films needs. The film can be almost totally accurate or be loaded with fiction like Braveheart.

This movie was "based on a true story"... sorry... get over it.