Difference between revisions of "329--Week 15 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
(→3 Movie as primary source about makers/time/setting/genre) |
Srichardson (Talk | contribs) (→Comments on Reading in ''Reel History'') |
||
| Line 133: | Line 133: | ||
Toplin mentioned movies that attempt to recount one specific event or one or two historical figures are more prone to criticism because, well they are easier to criticize. The movies we have dubbed the most historically accurate this semester are ones that explain history from the "community's" perspective (''Matewan'', ''Gone With the Wind'', ''Long Walk Home'' to name a few). Lately this semester, we have focused on historical films revolving around one or two characters - ''Born on the Fourth...'' and ''All The President's Men''. These movies, along with my ''Cinderella Man'' project, have made me admire the efforts of these filmmakers focusing on one event or historical figure. While these films tend to be under the microscope when viewed by film critics and historians, when they are done accurately, it provides viewers with facts and a specific perspective about the time period. I personally enjoy these types of films because there is always another side to a story, but it's not always clear what that side is. History is never viewed by only one set of eyes, and movies are a great way to explore other visions. - David F. | Toplin mentioned movies that attempt to recount one specific event or one or two historical figures are more prone to criticism because, well they are easier to criticize. The movies we have dubbed the most historically accurate this semester are ones that explain history from the "community's" perspective (''Matewan'', ''Gone With the Wind'', ''Long Walk Home'' to name a few). Lately this semester, we have focused on historical films revolving around one or two characters - ''Born on the Fourth...'' and ''All The President's Men''. These movies, along with my ''Cinderella Man'' project, have made me admire the efforts of these filmmakers focusing on one event or historical figure. While these films tend to be under the microscope when viewed by film critics and historians, when they are done accurately, it provides viewers with facts and a specific perspective about the time period. I personally enjoy these types of films because there is always another side to a story, but it's not always clear what that side is. History is never viewed by only one set of eyes, and movies are a great way to explore other visions. - David F. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Jonathan, I completely agree. This is, after all, a movie based on a book that Woodward and Bernstein wrote about their experience in the Watergate investigation. While Toplin is correct in that the other figures are mostly absent from the film, I don't think this is problematic. In my opinion, part of the film's strength is that it doesn't attempt to portray the entire Watergate fiasco. Toplin's criticism is in my opinion misguided. He criticizes the film for failing to do what it never intended to. - Sarah Richardson | ||
