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.