|  | 
        
         |  | 
        
         |  lupus yonderboy
             from 1970. (United Kingdom) on 2009-01-17 19:24 [#02265573] Points: 1985 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | looking forward to this one. bought the independent today
 with the original interview. . . Michael Sheen looks pretty
 impressive . . . i think might have to rent all the
 presidents men as a warm up. . .
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  beneboi
             from WATMM on 2009-01-17 20:49 [#02265606] Points: 53 Status: Addict
 | 
| 
     
 
 | it's ok from what i understand it isnt very accurate 
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  lupus yonderboy
             from 1970. (United Kingdom) on 2009-01-17 21:32 [#02265627] Points: 1985 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | yeah i just finished watching the originals and when
 compared with the trailer it seems clear they've exercised a
 bit of dramatic license with the facts. . .
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  pantalaimon
             from Winterfell (United Kingdom) on 2009-01-18 03:38 [#02265693] Points: 7090 Status: Lurker | Show recordbag
 | 
| 
     
 
 | i'm annoyed they had to fictionalise some of it, surely they could have made a compelling film without doing that?
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  goDel
             from ɐpʎǝx (Seychelles) on 2009-01-18 04:54 [#02265715] Points: 10240 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | haven't seen the movie yet, but the documentary is awesome. that interview was filmed beautifully. just long shots where
 you can actually nixon physically respond to the
 interviewer. it shows all the magic in the non-verbal
 department. it's hard to believe this movie has something to
 add, other than to display actors trying to emulate those
 details.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  noseburger
             on 2009-01-18 05:05 [#02265717] Points: 1198 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | the independent is like a left-wing mail these days. harumph.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  BoxBob-K23
             from Finland on 2009-01-18 08:04 [#02265758] Points: 2440 Status: Regular | Followup to goDel: #02265715
 | 
| 
     
 
 | yea, having seen both, i can't say if this fictionalized film is really worth all the effort... the interviews speak
 for themselves.
 
 however, at least the film tells a very neat narrative, even
 if they did invent half of it - but if they did, I feel
 sorry for them. The actors are good, the historical settings
 look convincing... it's a pretty good movie, but the way it
 tries to dramatize a rather trivial story is cringe-worthy
 at times. And why on Earth would they add FAKE talking heads
 to a movie?? insane.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  lupus yonderboy
             from 1970. (United Kingdom) on 2009-01-18 08:30 [#02265766] Points: 1985 Status: Lurker
 | 
| 
     
 
 | it's got 90% at rotten tomatoes so far. . . seems worth a
 peep. . .
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         |  goDel
             from ɐpʎǝx (Seychelles) on 2009-01-18 09:25 [#02265788] Points: 10240 Status: Regular
 | 
| 
     
 
 | having just seen the movie, the funny thing is that it makes sense the movie is dramatized. they could have gone the
 realistic way and actually followed the transcript of the
 interviews, instead of mixing it all up and ram it into a 5
 minutes climax, but that would automatically reduce the
 movie to just a copy of the interview and making it
 redundant, one, and two, the movie would blatantly fall
 short when directly compared to reality. that 5 minutes
 climax, it's like they forced reality through a compressor -
 perhaps by necessity - and squeezed every bit of real
 emotion out of it. the problem is not necessarily with the
 actors, but with the given time. i think i'll save a copy of
 the documentary and delete the movie from hd.
 
 
 
 | 
        
         |   | 
        
         | Messageboard index
 
 
        
 |