by Alex Quarrie-Jones
A few days ago I watched Captain Phillips in the cinemas during the most horrendous weather to grace our islands for a while, but that’s not the important issue. Instead of simply doing a review, I wanted to examine quickly if it’s still a good idea to be making movies based on true stories or real-life events.
A few days ago I watched Captain Phillips in the cinemas during the most horrendous weather to grace our islands for a while, but that’s not the important issue. Instead of simply doing a review, I wanted to examine quickly if it’s still a good idea to be making movies based on true stories or real-life events.
If I briefly glance at the IMDB (because I trust its authority on these
matters), I can see that, out of the 10 ten highest rated movies, only one is
based on real-life events: Schindler’s List. Now, I’m not saying that movies
based on real-life are superior or inferior to more fictional films, but it
always seems that people will create more of an issue around a film based on
real-life and whether its portrayal, acting and tone really carry the truth.
Obviously, a basic complication with achieving a film of this kind is that you
can only really film it from the perspective of one person, i.e. how each other
character is displayed will rely upon the protagonist's feeling towards them.
Therefore, almost everyone can take offence at the ‘incorrect depiction of
events’. On top of this, the perspective that is chosen is usually one that
will engage and resonate with, generally, a Western audience. For example, if Captain Phillips was done from the point
of view of the hijackers, then I wonder whether it would have garnered as much
praise as it has.
Another issue that clearly faces these types of films is that in essence
it is a glorified documentary with some artistic licence. With real-life
stories, you face the problem that the end of the film may not necessarily be
the end of the story. Take the example of another recent film, The Fifth Estate, a biopic surrounding
Julian Assange and the creation of Wikileaks. Even though Benedict
Cumberbatch’s portrayal of Assange was critically praised, the actual story was
found to be weak and, as Guardian reviewer Mark Kermode put it, “After a while it becomes apparent that the
visual fizz is hiding an essential emptiness, a hole where the film's meaty
core should be”. You argue, primarily, that this comes from the fact that
the Wikileaks saga is an ongoing event so how can it be dramatised when a more
revisionist view might be needed?
Overall, then films that are based on real life, or on one specific
character, can be an excellent showcase of acting talent, take Meryl Streep in The Iron Lady. Yet, these films are
always subject to more criticism from viewers because the approach wasn’t how
they wanted to see it. In the end, the decision is a difficult one as everyone
has their own likes. The one thing to remember, though: a movie of this kind has
to walk the extremely thin line between fact and drama, so the best thing to do
is find a story that is one and the same.
Comments
Post a Comment
Comments with names are more likely to be published.