When
it comes to whether or not filmmakers are obligated to re-present the truth of
historical events in movies, I am “on the fence”. The reason I believe they should reveal the complete
truth about history is because society will potentially learn important historical
events from the movie. Their learning is
indirect and sometimes left unnoticed.
For example, I have not studied or researched anything about the
horrible tragedy of the Titanic. I only
know about this due to the movie titled, Titanic. Even though I watched the movie for
entertainment, I implicitly learned about this historical occurrence; and
therefore, I believe what I saw on the movie (minus the love affair between
Jack and Rose.)
On
the other hand, I do believe it is also acceptable for filmmakers to fabricate the
truth to a certain extent in order to make the movie more appealing Filmmakers’ main objective is to attract
society to watch their movies, and to do so, they must create their films to be
as appealing as they can be. In some
re-presentations of crucial historical events, filmmakers have added certain
scenes or even taken out certain events/ occurrences to fulfill the filmmaker’s
“vision” of the movie. I believe this is
okay just as long as they verify in the beginning of the film that the movie
does not completely reflect the actual events 100% accurately. It is common for filmmakers to mention in the
beginning of their film “based on true events”, and this is respectable in
opposition to “based on a true story”.
Overall,
I do believe filmmakers have an obligation to produce accurate re-presentations
of historical events in their movies depending on the situation and the movie
itself. Filmmakers need to be aware that
society will most likely learn something from these movies, so if they do
fabricate the truth, the filmmakers must identify when and how they do so.
No comments:
Post a Comment