I take it you mean the amplification is worse when Hollywood does it, not that it's a worse thing that Hollywood does it.
I think people already are confused about facts because the supposed facts differ depending on which news outlet you pay attention to (as well as which radio shows you listen to or weblogs you read). There's the whole "Let's Roll" thing and all sorts of stories that seem to have been tweaked one way or another.
Of course there are actual transcripts of some stuff that happened on the plane and at air traffic control, etc. and one can hope that hasn't been messed with by anyone.
Anyway. Some critics and viewers will say they feel the movie is really accurate, others will say it isn't-- people will sometimes believe these assessments without knowing how these assessments were made (how much does the critic know about what really happened? have they read the transcriptss?). And so on.
Hmmm. I wonder if the History Channel will do a History vs. Hollywood episode about this movie. If you aren't familiar with the show, it's very much what it sounds like-- a bunch of historians point out differences between fact and the fictionalized version of it. I usually find the show fascinating.
Of course any time I see a movie or show based on or about some real life occurence, it just makes me incredibly curious about what actually happened and I usually end up doing research after the fact. But then I grew up in a household where my Dad would often point out inaccuracies in movies and applaud movies that fit history better, etc.
It's hard for me to imagine people would see a movie and have that replace their own personal recollections, I would think they'd be more critical of the movie if they lived through or felt they knew the story. I'm sure it does happen tho.
There were already TV movies about Flight 93, I didn't screen it though. I believe one was more documentary and one was more Tv movie.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Movie tickets
Date: 2006-04-28 01:52 am (UTC)I think people already are confused about facts because the supposed facts differ depending on which news outlet you pay attention to (as well as which radio shows you listen to or weblogs you read). There's the whole "Let's Roll" thing and all sorts of stories that seem to have been tweaked one way or another.
Of course there are actual transcripts of some stuff that happened on the plane and at air traffic control, etc. and one can hope that hasn't been messed with by anyone.
Anyway. Some critics and viewers will say they feel the movie is really accurate, others will say it isn't-- people will sometimes believe these assessments without knowing how these assessments were made (how much does the critic know about what really happened? have they read the transcriptss?). And so on.
Hmmm. I wonder if the History Channel will do a History vs. Hollywood episode about this movie. If you aren't familiar with the show, it's very much what it sounds like-- a bunch of historians point out differences between fact and the fictionalized version of it. I usually find the show fascinating.
Of course any time I see a movie or show based on or about some real life occurence, it just makes me incredibly curious about what actually happened and I usually end up doing research after the fact. But then I grew up in a household where my Dad would often point out inaccuracies in movies and applaud movies that fit history better, etc.
It's hard for me to imagine people would see a movie and have that replace their own personal recollections, I would think they'd be more critical of the movie if they lived through or felt they knew the story. I'm sure it does happen tho.
There were already TV movies about Flight 93, I didn't screen it though. I believe one was more documentary and one was more Tv movie.