Hollywood Distorting History?

It looks like the Jesus from Dogma. Buddahjeb your point about history books is valid to a point. History books are one persons version of the truth. Some Hollywood movies make no attempt to give audiences the truth. The most extreme example of this is U571, where the heroes of the tale are given the full American makeover. This is perhaps the most extreme example, most of the historical movies only suffer the odd change of fact.
 
Peter's the kind of fellow who would throw stones at people in glass houses.
 
Lacedaemonian said:
It looks like the Jesus from Dogma. Buddahjeb your point about history books is valid to a point. History books are one persons version of the truth. Some Hollywood movies make no attempt to give audiences the truth. The most extreme example of this is U571, where the heroes of the tale are given the full American makeover. This is perhaps the most extreme example, most of the historical movies only suffer the odd change of fact.

As I said earlier, U571 was fronted by a disclaimer stating the true historical events i.e. the fact it was HMS Bulldog which the events were taken from (protests played a part I'm sure). Still, as much as I agree that the "Americanisation" of certain events can be upsetting, I'd much rather that they at least openly admitted their change of history!
As said earlier in the thread, there's no accounting for stupidity and those who choose to believe that movies are a good source for historical events are the type of people who also believe "the man down the pub told me..." so if Hollywood doesn't do it then they'll just believe it from somewhere else.

At best with Hollywood "historical" movies, we only see one side of events in movies anyway ("Black Hawk Down" comes to mind) or the other side is so cartoonly bad (enter stage left: evil villain out to take over the world for no particular reason) that it becomes a biased telling of events as well.
 
For them to fail, the American public will have to stop watching them. This being my fundamental argument for accusing the American public for the creation of these movies. A harsh assessment, I know.

And an ignorant one as well, Lace. American movies generally make more money overseas now than they do domestically, blowing your American-bashing all to hell.

Those darned facts seem to keep getting in your way, bud! :D

At the end of the day, you played the race card by questioning my reasoning for believing people elsewhere were intrinsically not like me.

:eek: -------- Say wha...???

LOL - That's one of the funniest pieces of inverted logic I've ever seen. Wow! What's next? Saying "Don't kill" means one advocates murder?

Maybe if I say, "You make the most sense of anyone here," you'll get my meaning.
 
Andreas is me, and I just defined Peter spot-on, if I may say so myself. That's what he does.
 
aurelio said:
And an ignorant one as well, Lace. American movies generally make more money overseas now than they do domestically, blowing your American-bashing all to hell.

Those darned facts seem to keep getting in your way, bud! :D



:eek: -------- Say wha...???

LOL - That's one of the funniest pieces of inverted logic I've ever seen. Wow! What's next? Saying "Don't kill" means one advocates murder?

Maybe if I say, "You make the most sense of anyone here," you'll get my meaning.

You're not a very nice person, I am sure your poor sarcasm wins you many friends. Do you really think that Hollywood would still make a film if it was not going to do well in America? I have no stats or facts to back this up, but then you provided none either.

I do not understand how my logic is inverted. Please explain. When I said that you played the race card I implied that you were accusing me of being racist or something that constitutes racism.

Is it you that was involved in making cartoons/animations in Hollywood?

Why do you insist on saying that I am ignorant? I firmly believed that Hollywood was mainly supported by the American market. Whether I am right or wrong in this matter does not equate to ignorance. Your general attitude stinks. I have no issue with the American people, but in this matter I believe that Hollywood and the American people are intangibly to blame.

I have no wish to make this personal, but you have already crossed that line. Your last statement is plain rude. I hope that perhaps you life is filled with misery from this point on.
 
I'd like to point out that my initial comment was not directed at Peter. The second one was, and is a bit of a compliment.
 
Okay, Lace. Let's try to sort this out.

First, you started bashing American film makers and then American audiences for being either soley or primarily responsible for distorting history. Bashing a whole group of people is not a very nice thing, so if you feel that type of rhetoric is something a nice person does, then I'll have to disagree.

What I originally said to you was:
And now that all the "races" are mixed up virtually everywhere, people like you, Lace, are trying to re-separate people with "culture" or "religion" or you name it. That is complete hogwash too.

The question you should ask yourself is why you feel more comfortable thinking that people elsewhere are intrinsically not like you?
What I was suggesting to you was not that you were being racist, but using the same logic and replacing race with culture. It was a metaphor.

Then, I assume based on my statement above, you lumped me into a list of people who were "playing the race card," which I did not accept. So I said:
Is encouraging others not to use race to divide people "using the race card"???
Your response to that point was:
At the end of the day, you played the race card by questioning my reasoning for believing people elsewhere were intrinsically not like me.
I have to say Lace, this statement is not only another innacurate interpretation of what I said but, well... pretty darned weird. That you didn't see the irony present in what you said was frankly humorous. But also maddening, because you still insisted on accusing me of racism. Which is inaccurate. And not nice. And not fair. And not what nice people do.

So, having tried twice before to get you to truly understand what I was saying, I tried again, buy using sarcasm. Sarcasm is not nice, I'll admit, especially when directed at another person, but neither is being repeatedly accused of saying or doing something I didn't. But I also think you have thrown a lot stones, done some name calling and used provocative rhetoric with many people here, so I figured if you could dish it out, you could take it.

It's sad to me that we have come to verbal blows here over something that from my point of view was a misunderstanding on your part of what I actually said. I feel you do it again by bristling at my use of the word ignorant, which I didn't mean as an insult. To be ignorant of something only means you don't know about it. I am ignorant of all sorts of things. It's not a crime. It's very human. Here is a link:

http://www.boxofficeguru.com/intl.htm

If you check it out it will see that your argument was based on erroneous assumptions, which was my point. Igonorance is cured by knowledge.

I am sorry that you wish me misery, Lace, and I am also sorry that our conversation here came to this low point of "you said this and then I said that." And I'll also apologize for my use of sarcasm in response to you, which was admittedly mean-spirited.

My only wish for you is that you try to listen to others here a bit more clearly, and be less anxious to do battle, as I will also try to do.
 
Any further posts on this particular aspect of the conversation will be interspersed by pictures of fluffy kittens.
kitten_8se62_SM.JPG
 
Great idea. she's really cute. Where did you find it ?

No sarcasm in the sentence above, I'm just a cat craze girl.
 
I think that I just vented three months of working 60+ hour weeks in this thread. As in the cartoons, the steam is blasting out of my ears. Peace out!
 

Similar threads


Back
Top