[Milsurplus] Is Fiction Garbage ?

[Todd, KA1KAQ]

On Sat, Mar 3, 2012 at 7:02 AM, Hue Miller <kargo_cult at msn.com> wrote:

> I summarize:
> truly EXECRABLE. I can understand a person up to maybe age 16-18 being
> thrilled by the
> movie, but: if over about 18 years old, how dumb would one have to be, to
> enjoy this?
>

Well, you've sorta hit on the actual issue here, Hue: entertainment, not
historical documentary, value. Clearly the Battle of the Bulge was not a
fictitious even. Hollywood's interpretation of it clearly is. No different
than more recent flicks like Pearl Harbor or U-571: historical events
turned into special effects action films. Enjoyed the effects and visual
experience of both, deplored the misrepresentation of actual events
involving great sacrifice by many. Not to mention pissing off our British
friends who actually captured the first submarine Enigma machine and had
Bletchley Park decoding German decrypts nearly 2 years before we entered
the war.

To me, that's the bigger insult. I can figure it out pretty fast for
myself, but with no clear disclaimer at the beginning of the show
explaining the difference, a lot of younger folks leave the theater
believing this is how it happened. "Based on Actual Events" is the closest
I've seen. Some folks get wrapped around the axle at times because they
didn't use a period-accurate radio in a certain scene where only a tiny
minority would notice, yet IMO a far greater injustice is done in the story
telling aspect. Entertainment vs. Documentary. Hollywood is in the biz to
make money. To do so, they need to appeal to the majority, most of which
could care less about accuracy. They want to be entertained.

And if such things take place, you just know Jimmy Doolittle was spinning
in his grave for being depicted by the likes of Alec Baldwin in 'Pearl
Harbor'. But that's another issue.

~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4