|
|
 | | From: | Don H | | Subject: | Finding Neverland | | Date: | Fri, 07 Jan 2005 18:43:42 GMT |
|
|
 | As a fan of Johnny Depp, I went to see this movie, even having learnt it
departs from historical accuracy, something which can be regarded as
reprehensible in biographies. However, it does convey the atmosphere of the
times, and probable attitudes of the persons involved.
Depp has a Scottish accent, which was convincing enough for me, and, as
usual, he manages to persuade that he is J.M.Barrie, playwright, ie. he IS
the role. Barrie predominates, mainly in his somewhat naive relationship
with widow, Sylvia L. Davies (Kate Winslet), and her four boys - which
provide inspiration for his successful play Peter Pan, after a recent flop.
The whole movie is sentimental and imaginative, and (as some critics have
noted) Oscar material.
While many will go for the history and romantic drama, for me the main
interest was in how an author can obtain ideas from the kaleidoscope of
life - and be game enough to put it on stage.
====================================
|
|
| | From: | Wally | | Subject: | Re: Finding Neverland | | Date: | Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:57:00 +1100 |
|
|
| Don H wrote:
> As a fan of Johnny Depp, I went to see this movie, even having learnt it
> departs from historical accuracy, something which can be regarded as
> reprehensible in biographies. However, it does convey the atmosphere of the
> times, and probable attitudes of the persons involved.
> Depp has a Scottish accent, which was convincing enough for me, and, as
> usual, he manages to persuade that he is J.M.Barrie, playwright, ie. he IS
> the role. Barrie predominates, mainly in his somewhat naive relationship
> with widow, Sylvia L. Davies (Kate Winslet), and her four boys - which
> provide inspiration for his successful play Peter Pan, after a recent flop.
> The whole movie is sentimental and imaginative, and (as some critics have
> noted) Oscar material.
> While many will go for the history and romantic drama, for me the main
> interest was in how an author can obtain ideas from the kaleidoscope of
> life - and be game enough to put it on stage.
> ====================================
>
>
Fantasy.
Slyvia Davies was married living with her husband at the time Barrie
wrote Peter Pan.
Sylvia Davies dies some 5 years after Peter Pan was first performed.
Sylvia Davies had 5 children.
|
|
| | From: | Rap§cal | | Subject: | Re: Finding Neverland | | Date: | Sat, 08 Jan 2005 23:10:25 GMT |
|
|
| On Sat, 08 Jan 2005 09:57:00 +1100, Wally
wrote:
>Don H wrote:
>
>> As a fan of Johnny Depp, I went to see this movie, even having learnt it
>> departs from historical accuracy, something which can be regarded as
>> reprehensible in biographies. However, it does convey the atmosphere of the
>> times, and probable attitudes of the persons involved.
>> Depp has a Scottish accent, which was convincing enough for me, and, as
>> usual, he manages to persuade that he is J.M.Barrie, playwright, ie. he IS
>> the role. Barrie predominates, mainly in his somewhat naive relationship
>> with widow, Sylvia L. Davies (Kate Winslet), and her four boys - which
>> provide inspiration for his successful play Peter Pan, after a recent flop.
>> The whole movie is sentimental and imaginative, and (as some critics have
>> noted) Oscar material.
>> While many will go for the history and romantic drama, for me the main
>> interest was in how an author can obtain ideas from the kaleidoscope of
>> life - and be game enough to put it on stage.
>> ====================================
>>
>>
>
>Fantasy.
>
>Slyvia Davies was married living with her husband at the time Barrie
>wrote Peter Pan.
>
>Sylvia Davies dies some 5 years after Peter Pan was first performed.
>
>Sylvia Davies had 5 children.
But still a brilliant film.
|
|
| | From: | Italo | | Subject: | Re: Finding Neverland | | Date: | Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:41:26 +1100 |
|
|
| "Rap§cal" wrote in message
news:k2q0u0d9l30s6huslp4tmnqlku78fft6ab@4ax.com...
> >Fantasy.
> >
> >Slyvia Davies was married living with her husband at the time Barrie
> >wrote Peter Pan.
> >
> >Sylvia Davies dies some 5 years after Peter Pan was first performed.
> >
> >Sylvia Davies had 5 children.
>
> But still a brilliant film.
Yes but, since most people these days don't read, they'll take the movie as
gospel when it comes to historical accuracy. Not so important when it comes
to writing 'Peter Pan' perhaps rather more when it comes to murderers ('Evil
Angels'), WWII ('Saving Private Ryan'), biographies ('The Doors') etc...
All movies based on historical characters and/or events should carry a
foreword stating whether the movie is fictionalised or historically
accurate. Unfortunately one of the selling points of any of these movies is
the supposed accuracy of the film hence most filmmakers/producers will tend
to resist this.
Most people accept a certain amount of compression or omission, after all
it's a 2-3 hour movie, but not wholesale BS passed off as fact.
--
Italo
|
|
| | From: | Rap§cal | | Subject: | Re: Finding Neverland | | Date: | Mon, 10 Jan 2005 00:18:10 GMT |
|
|
| On Sun, 9 Jan 2005 14:41:26 +1100, "Italo"
wrote:
>"Rap§cal" wrote in message
>news:k2q0u0d9l30s6huslp4tmnqlku78fft6ab@4ax.com...
>> >Fantasy.
>> >
>> >Slyvia Davies was married living with her husband at the time Barrie
>> >wrote Peter Pan.
>> >
>> >Sylvia Davies dies some 5 years after Peter Pan was first performed.
>> >
>> >Sylvia Davies had 5 children.
>>
>> But still a brilliant film.
>
>Yes but, since most people these days don't read, they'll take the movie as
>gospel when it comes to historical accuracy. Not so important when it comes
>to writing 'Peter Pan' perhaps rather more when it comes to murderers ('Evil
>Angels'), WWII ('Saving Private Ryan'), biographies ('The Doors') etc...
>
>All movies based on historical characters and/or events should carry a
>foreword stating whether the movie is fictionalised or historically
>accurate. Unfortunately one of the selling points of any of these movies is
>the supposed accuracy of the film hence most filmmakers/producers will tend
>to resist this.
>
>Most people accept a certain amount of compression or omission, after all
>it's a 2-3 hour movie, but not wholesale BS passed off as fact.
Yes, I learnt my lesson after The Untouchables and Murder in the First
(now there's some major manipulation). It is not as satisfying to
find out that the film is inaccurate but I still enjoyed FN very much
and thought it was a brilliant film. Once I saw the words "Inspired
by true events" I knew to take the "facts" with a grain of salt. As
entertainment it's great, as an historical documentary it leaves a
little to be desired (but may capture the right feeling?).
After all, the fantasy elements certainly didn't actually happen.
PeterB
|
|
| | From: | Don H | | Subject: | Re: Finding Neverland | | Date: | Sun, 09 Jan 2005 19:27:07 GMT |
|
|
| I was trying to judge FN purely AS a movie; same with Team America: World
Police, and Catwoman.
With FN, there was a comment at start about "based on book - The Man Who
Was Peter Pan".
I agree that anything actually historical is better left alone, ie. not
tampered with by those who think they can improve on it. In the case of FN
the true facts could still have made an interesting movie - and conveyed the
same message.
It's odd how we view movie sources. Scriptwriters didn't dare tamper with
Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter - except omit some minor bits. See what
happened when they tried to give Catwoman a new past! All are fiction,
anyway.
When it comes to political or religious themes from the actual past, it
depends on one's allegiance as to how they're depicted. Queen Eliz. the
First has been glorified time and again; likewise Jesus and other Biblical
characters.
American history is a one-sided event in most cases, as too British war
films (except "The Long, the Short, and the Tall").
So, provided some disclaimer is evident, we just have to tolerate the
situation, I suppose.
===================================
"Italo" wrote in message
news:41e0a7d4$0$28882$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.au...
> "Rap§cal" wrote in message
> news:k2q0u0d9l30s6huslp4tmnqlku78fft6ab@4ax.com...
> > >Fantasy.
> > >
> > >Slyvia Davies was married living with her husband at the time Barrie
> > >wrote Peter Pan.
> > >
> > >Sylvia Davies dies some 5 years after Peter Pan was first performed.
> > >
> > >Sylvia Davies had 5 children.
> >
> > But still a brilliant film.
>
> Yes but, since most people these days don't read, they'll take the movie
as
> gospel when it comes to historical accuracy. Not so important when it
comes
> to writing 'Peter Pan' perhaps rather more when it comes to murderers
('Evil
> Angels'), WWII ('Saving Private Ryan'), biographies ('The Doors') etc...
>
> All movies based on historical characters and/or events should carry a
> foreword stating whether the movie is fictionalised or historically
> accurate. Unfortunately one of the selling points of any of these movies
is
> the supposed accuracy of the film hence most filmmakers/producers will
tend
> to resist this.
>
> Most people accept a certain amount of compression or omission, after all
> it's a 2-3 hour movie, but not wholesale BS passed off as fact.
>
> --
> Italo
>
>
|
|
| | From: | Italo | | Subject: | Re: Finding Neverland | | Date: | Mon, 10 Jan 2005 19:31:10 +1100 |
|
|
| "Don H" wrote in message
news:fAfEd.112136$K7.74737@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> I was trying to judge FN purely AS a movie; same with Team America: World
> Police, and Catwoman.
Yes but there is a big difference between having a 'fictional' story placed
in a 'real' historical setting ('Shakespeare in Love', 'Gladiator' etc...)
as opposed to having a film deliberately distorting historical facts and
then claiming it's a true account .
> With FN, there was a comment at start about "based on book - The Man Who
> Was Peter Pan".
> I agree that anything actually historical is better left alone, ie. not
> tampered with by those who think they can improve on it. In the case of
FN
> the true facts could still have made an interesting movie - and conveyed
the
> same message.
Yep and most of the time historical distortions are made for the stupidest
reasons.
Exactly, god knows how filmakers think
> It's odd how we view movie sources. Scriptwriters didn't dare tamper
with
> Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter - except omit some minor bits. See
what
> happened when they tried to give Catwoman a new past! All are fiction,
> anyway.
There you go again with Catwoman :-)
> When it comes to political or religious themes from the actual past, it
> depends on one's allegiance as to how they're depicted. Queen Eliz. the
> First has been glorified time and again; likewise Jesus and other Biblical
> characters.
That is true to a degree but the basic historical facts of any event do not
change and should not be changed unless the movie is a pure fiction. It
basically demeans the real people involved in those events.
> American history is a one-sided event in most cases, as too British war
> films (except "The Long, the Short, and the Tall").
> So, provided some disclaimer is evident, we just have to tolerate the
> situation, I suppose.
Yep trust the US of Amnesia to get it wrong time and time again, from the
bible and the roman empire to WWII and Vietnam. A little disclaimer is good
for the soul.
--
Italo
|
|
|
