Difference between revisions of "329-2010--Week 15 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
(→Things the movie got wrong) |
(→Things the movie got wrong) |
||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
I thought that a major problem with the film was that it portrayed Woodward and Bernstein as the lone forces facing the Nixon administration. Though their editor played a minor role, there were no other major players that were searching for the truth in the Watergate story. As we saw in class, several different people played key roles in the entire process that eventually led to Nixon's downfall, like the Judge John Sirica and the lead prosecutor, but that is not really seen in the film. -Melissa | I thought that a major problem with the film was that it portrayed Woodward and Bernstein as the lone forces facing the Nixon administration. Though their editor played a minor role, there were no other major players that were searching for the truth in the Watergate story. As we saw in class, several different people played key roles in the entire process that eventually led to Nixon's downfall, like the Judge John Sirica and the lead prosecutor, but that is not really seen in the film. -Melissa | ||
| + | |||
| + | I agree with Melissa. Also, they always showed "Woodstein" in the news room all alone, as if they were the only ones response for the coverage when really, EVERYONE would have been involved, even the lowliest coffee-fetcher. But again, as we've seen before, it is depicted that way for dramatic effect. Only showing those two men in the news room really gives the impression that they were solely responsible for the reporting of the Watergate scandal. -- Kelly R. | ||
== The movie as a primary source about the time/people who made it == | == The movie as a primary source about the time/people who made it == | ||
