Difference between revisions of "329-2010--Week 15 Questions/Comments"
From McClurken Wiki
(→Things the movie got right) |
B4ssm4st3r (Talk | contribs) (→Things the movie got wrong) |
||
| Line 32: | Line 32: | ||
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. | 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. | ||
| + | |||
| + | I also agree with LeAnn, it struck me as odd that there was no competitiveness between the two men. It was only at one point in the beginning of the film. And they were always working on the case alone, with very little outside help. Also I did find some copies of Woodward's Notebooks online... and no where were there drawings of people in sunglasses. (maybe in another notebook?) I was quite disappointed. Nevertheless [http://www.hrc.utexas.edu/exhibitions/web/woodstein/post/index2.html the notebooks] are still interesting. Yet really hard to read. Journalists these days with their sloppy handwriting. -Jenn | ||
== 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 == | ||
