If you've been following along, you might be distrustful of movies that claim to be "based on a true story". And with good reason. In case you aren't convinced by now, here's a few specific examples.
1. "The Pursuit of Happyness" - This movie is based on the book of the same name, which was the truth story of Chris Gardner in his attempt to be a good father and provide for his son, but at the same time try to break into the stock broker business. Overcoming homelessness and personal trials, he succeeds. But is this the real story?
Not entirely. The theme is correct, but real life isn't always that kind. For example, Chris Gardner's son was actually two, not five as portrayed in the movie. For the first four months of the training program, he didn't even know where his son was. In the movie, he was paid nothing while training, but in reality he was paid $1000 a month. In the movie, his wife's name is Linda, but that character is based on two real life people: Sherry and Jackie. One was the mother of his child, and the other was who he moved on to. His son was actually birthed while he was having affairs. He was known to do cocaine in the late 70's with his woman, but did give it up. The movie also implies that only the top person would be hired, but in reality anyone that passed the exam would be hired; Chris's 88% was a good score for the test. He also has a daughter that wasn't shown in the film.
Here is a link to more information about what's similar and what's different between the movie and Chris Gardner's biography. If you want the true story, which is much more candid and less "Hollywood", just read the book. You'll actually get the story.
2. "21" - This is a typical story of math genius who goes to Harvard and joins a group who want to learn the art of card counting in blackjack. The teacher then takes them to Vegas to put the lessons into practice. After a beating, the math genius heads back to Harvard and goes into medical school. What can be fictional here?
Well, there was an infamous group of card counters from Harvard that infiltrated Vegas, but the biggest difference was that most of the team was actually Asian American. Even the teacher (Kevin Spacey's character) was Asian American. In fact, of the five main people, only one wasn't Asian. In fact, there are very few details in the movie that are based on fact. They are mostly based on elements that would make a good movie. Typical of Hollywood.
Here is a link to more information about the differences between the movie and the actual team. Very interesting differences here.
3. "The Hurricane" - This is a movie notoriously plays with the facts. It's about promising boxer Rubin "Hurricane" Carter who was convicted of a triple homicide. After twenty years in prison, and after overcoming racist system after racist system, he is found innocent when three Canadians find missing evidence that sets him free. It's a nice story, but what issues could there?
Many. The movie shows a fight between Carter and a white boxer named Joey Giardello where Carter obviously wins the fight but loses when the racist judges award Giardello the victory. In real life, Carter lost the fight badly, and the real Giardello sued the filmmakers over the scene and won. As far as Carter's background, he had been arrested by age 14 for assault and armed robbery, and by age 22 he'd been in jail twice for brutal street muggings. As far as the legal side of it, there was enough evidence against Carter to convict him twice (in 1967 and 1976). He failed a lie detector test miserably. At his second trial, people who'd been witnesses in his first trial admitted that they'd been asked to lie for him. As far as the Canadians who found the piece of evidence to set him free... that was fiction. The only reason he was freed was because of procedural errors on the prosecution's side, and the case was thrown out by the court of appeals. After 22 years, the prosecution had no interest in starting the trial from scratch since some of the key members were dead.
4. "300" - This is a historical movie about the Battle of Thermopylae between the grossly outnumbered 300 Spartans and the might of the Persian Empire. The story tells the tale of how a meager force of 300 held off the thousands of Persians long enough to save Athens. Sounds too good to be true right?
The Battle of Thermopylae is a well-documented historical event in the sense that tactics and numbers have been recorded, but the fighting styles were not saved. The movie changes certain historical truths that seem to distort people's views on what to believe. This viewpoint comes from Herodotus who wrote about the battle and who also wrote scathing viewpoints about Persia's slavery and Athenian democracy. In fact, Persia wasn't documented to have slaves (unlike Greek society which survived because of it). The slaves of Egypt, Greece, and other societies would flee to Persia because they could be free there. Herodotus wrote against the Persian Empire and how horrible it was, many points were then used as inspiration for movies like 300 and Alexander. But the truth is that he roamed freely through the empire and writing against it. Why? Because he could. Because Persia was a much more free society than Greece. So, if one actually looks closer at the Persian/Greek war, it actually looks more like present-day America and the war on terror. The Greeks would attack Persia in small, calculated terrorist attacks, and Persia finally had enough and decided to invade. So if you know your history, then you'd realized that the movie is bachwards and we the viewers are actually cheering for the wrong side: a terrorist society that promotes inequality and slavery, instead of the larger, benevolent, peaceful society. The other great missing truth is the fact that the Spartans didn't fight the Persians alone: it's the first time Sparta and Athens worked together (a unified Greek force). The movie also neglects to mention the Battle of Salamis, the naval battle that was the turning point for the war which happened at the same point. Also, the elephants and rhinos in the movie were to add fantasy elements to it; there was no historical fact in it. Here is a link to help you learn more about why our perceptions are wrong.
5. "The Amityville Horror" - This is one of two kings of the "true" horror genres (the other being the highly embellished "Exorcist"). Following a family murder in a house, the story follows a family that moves into the same house when supernatural events wreak havoc on the family. Sounds like a good haunted house movie, but that's all.
The truth is a lot less creepy. The Lutz family (who went through the "ordeal") worked with a man on the writing of the book. However, an independent researcher found a hundred things that couldn't have been true in the book (book claims snow prints but there wasn't any snow at that time, police were called but no records show the police being called or visiting the house, Indians mentioned in the book to have used that ground never were recorded in that vicinity, etc.). George Lutz wanted several times for paranormal researchers to visit the house, but when he was told that if nothing was found that it would make big headlines. Lutz declined to have the investigators because he didn't want to create a media sensation. Oddly, not long after, he had a seance take place at the house with the local news crews to film it. (Didn't want attention, huh...) Supposedly a priest came to the house to bless it and a malevolent spirit followed him and attacked him with sores. The priest himself denied this ever happening. Lutz himself thought he was portrayed in a negative way in the movie, so he sued. The judge ruled against him because it was viewed as a work of fiction and protected under the 1st Amendment, as well as the fact that because of the book and movie, millions of people have watched it and he himself has benefited financially from it. It finally came out that the lawyer for the original murderer and the Lutz family made up the whole haunting story over some wine. Why? The Lutz family were paid well, the writer was hailed (even though he further embellished the story, which was further embellished for the screen), and the lawyer hoped to get a new trial for his client. It is widely believed that the embellishment of the Exorcist movie was a contributor in the Amityville Horror creation. Unfortunately, anyone who's lived in the house since has been harassed by fans. And sadly, the real murder of the DeFeo family has been marginalized. When in doubt, check out Snopes for the real story.
So in conclusion, don't believe that a movie is true no matter how sad, happy, scary, far fetched, resonable, or believeable. Do your research! Without it, we do nothing more than spread the falsehoods that keep Hollywood giving us cheap nonsense.
No comments:
Post a Comment