[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]

/siberia/ - Off-topic

"No chin, no right to speak."
Name
Options
Subject
Comment
Flag
File
Embed
Password(For file deletion.)

Not reporting is bourgeois


 

I've seen a common opinion among "theatre" types that when you're adapting something, whatever the source material was for whatever you were adapting is little more than a prop for your own story. They'll even take it further claiming that the source materialshould be changed because people already know the source material and they want a new story. And they continue saying this shit no matter how many times it's proven wrong.

But they cross a line when they apply this attitude to history. It's no longer you making a story worse with your own little dipshit innovations. At that point, you are spreading misinformation. You are actively deceiving the public. This should be banned or, at the very least, the work must be titled and labeled in such a way as to make it clear that it is a fanciful work of fiction and in no way representative of history. You shouldn't be able to deceive the public, "artistic" or not.

File: 1747434277352.jpeg (5.32 KB, 213x236, images (14).jpeg)

>I don't care what history says, Napoleon was a cuck

The reason is they see it has too fanfic-y just call it alt-history, so they see it as worth the price of marketability to hazard misinforming people, and they can even be purposeful in their misinformation to propaganize in a manner that would open opportunities for more profit.

I like when they make western great men black women because it makes the fascists go insane though

>>665545
I wish they made them black woman,instead they make them an afro-americ*n man

>>665545
Contrarianism is a mental disorder.

>>665554
This motherfucker doesn't like pissing off fascists, everyone laugh at this stupid idiot.
It's the fascistas being contrarian you silly dumb dumb

File: 1747438728845.jpg (104.81 KB, 1230x915, 2et6ki.jpg)

>>665563
>you're either a baiting contrarian fascist or a baiting contrarian radlib
Wrong.

File: 1747438969631.jpg (54.91 KB, 1024x720, 1677481684209.jpg)

>>665569
Good thing that's not what I said, or even adjacent to what I said.

>>665571
That is what you said, or at least what you implied. You were saying that you need to like works that are intentionally historically inaccurate if their particular historical inaccurate makes fascists mad. And if you don't, that makes you a fascist, who are the real contrarians. So either you're a silly contrarian radlib or a silly contrarian fascist.

This triggers the chud

>>665577
>haha we did something flagrantly inaccurate i bet you're triggered now
That's a path that doesn't end well.

>>665467
>And they continue saying this shit no matter how many times it's proven wrong.
What do you mean by this? When has it been proven wrong? How does one prove such a thing wrong?

Stfu

>>665584
>adapts something
>adaption makes a bunch of changes
>people hate it and it is forever criticized for those changes
Many such cases, and they would prove this bit of """wisdom""" wrong.

>>665583
it leads to them making money, stop being triggered so easily

>>665588
can you list some of these many cases? do they far outnumber the opposite case? i'm not buying your premise.

>>665590
The vast majority of movie adaptations. It's the rule, not the exception, that that book readers do not like the movie adaptations of the book, and it is always specifically for changes. This alone would go against the idea that book readers want a new story. It would be easier to name when this didn't happen.

>>665589
Maybe when the grift was fresh.

>>665592
I don't believe that it's the rule and not the exception. Could you establish a pattern of examples please? Also you've changed from history to fiction books.

>>665597
You quoted the part about adapting books.

With history, it doesn't matter what the audiences think. A lie isn't less bad because it's an entertaining lie.

>>665589
BTW, the linked video is a scene from The Patriot where the British army seizes a colonial plantation and attempts to free its slaves, only for the black people there to all claim they were working there as free men.

File: 1747450141435.jpg (42.15 KB, 480x835, 1573639195906-b.jpg)

>>665573
>You were saying that you need to like works that are intentionally historically inaccurate if their particular historical inaccurate makes fascists mad. And if you don't, that makes you a fascist, who are the real contrarians.
Oh, you got me wrong. >>665563 is my first post ITT, I'm not op. I just think it's okay to think people who've actively made the lives of people close to me harder/ended them getting pissed off is funny.

>>665622
Misinforming the public to own the fascists epic style doesn't ultimately do anything except misinform the public.

File: 1747450562282.png (243.86 KB, 349x466, ClipboardImage.png)

There's a point where it stops being a problem because nobody thinks it's true any more.

>>665628
An openly fantastical story that doesn't even pretend to be historical is different.

File: 1747452750508.png (434.67 KB, 640x359, ClipboardImage.png)

>>665629
>openly fantastical
I figured that wasn't a disqualifier considering picrel is in the OP.

File: 1747459348808.png (92.62 KB, 602x396, pocahontas.png)

>>665637
Pocahontas portrays itself as a kind of magical retelling of historical events. So, there's magic and tree spirits and anthropomorphized animals surrounding what the movie would like you to believe is real history. The problem is that the supposed "real history" bits are utter nonsense. So, the problem with Pocahontas isn't that it has talking trees, its that when it gets to the "real history," it's basically spreading settler myths.

>>665590
The Hobbit
I, Robot
The Centenial Man
The Foundation
The most recent Fahrenheit 451 film

normies dont care about historical innaccuracy

/thread

>>667564
That doesn't matter. Misinforming people isn't okay because they're okay with being misinformed.

Though I would disagree with this. Hollywood likes to portray their films as good faith representations of the past for a reason. It's the same reason they like to plaster "INSPIRED BY A TRUE STORY" on their films. They know audiences would be turned off if they knew it was bullshit.

>>667570
I really couldn't care less if Captain Phillips, starring Tom Hanks, doesn't depict the captain like an asshole that caused the crew to end up in the pirate raid situation. I can Google that. What I care about is if the movie is compelling. I do in fact find the movie compelling. I appreciate the little nods to late-stage capitalism and imperialism the movie makes even if it's ultimately interested in the pirate raid spectacle. That kind of continuity with reality isn't "realistic", for example I doubt the real captain had a conversation about the overfishing problem with the pirate leader, but it elevates the movie beyond mere entertainment.

>>667572
It's inaccurate drek and misinformation.

>>667579
Couldn't care less.

>>667587
You're posting in this thread, so you care enough to think that it is permissible.

They could easily have done an entirely fictionalized account. They chose not to because they wanted the legitimacy that comes with their depiction being a supposedly "true story."

I get that "theatre" types then do this doublethink where they like to act like history is just a prop and everyone knows this, but then they can never explain why they don't just do an entirely fictionalized account.

>>667592
You know what? I can't say your argument isn't noble. At the same time, I'm not interested in condemning movies I find compelling, because they're not 100% true to the real events, the proverbial "throwing out the baby with the bathwater".

>>667563
I, Robot isn't a good example because it's so different from the book that it can't even really be called adaptation. The book is just a collection of short stories that were initially unrelated. Asimov just compiled them because they had similar themes and then changed the names of characters to that they would reappear throughout the different stories. The Will Smith movie is a lot more like Asimov's other novel Caves of Steel but with some elements and characters taken from the book I, Robot. I liked both the book and the movie though.

Catch me if you can was all fake, the big scam the original guy managed to do was tell the big lie of his big disguise adventure that was turned into a movie.
And the terminal is fake too, the real story was a yugoslav living in a Parisian airport.

>>667724
I, Robot is a decent popcorn action flick, but I doubt that it is what any fan of I, Robot, or Asimov in general, would have wanted. It's actually best enjoyed not knowing that it's based on Asimov's works at all, completely contradicting the myth that book readers want a new story.

>>665467
>idpol about culture and costumes

>>668021
Wanting historical accuracy isn't idpol.

In fact, I would argue that idpol is one of the forces that has pushed for historical inaccuracy. It goes both ways, too. Like, historically cowboys were a pretty diverse bunch, but white idpol insisted that they all be portrayed as white.

File: 1748037738650.jpg (276.24 KB, 1556x2400, 81QNtASdSAL.jpg)

>>667979
Yes. Unfortunately, fakery can get pretty popular.

There is justice in this world, though. This book went from a national sensation to a mega-flop when it was outed as a lie.

They even had the raw nerve to try to make a movie out of it after it was exploded. It had a box office of $80,000. Oof.

File: 1748046913274.jpg (80.57 KB, 1170x770, GretRQnWgAALgB6.jpg)

>why is fiction unrealistic thread no. 32405210423842483942342

>>668970
That's just the thing. History isn't fiction.

Whatever excuses you can make for defiling a fictional work in a supposed adaptation, you cannot make when creating a historical piece. You have officially moved into the realm of disinformation and there is no excuse that changes that.

>>668979
Go pick up a history book instead of complaining about Hollywood films you fucking burger.

>>668981
Hollywood films will misinform people regardless of if I watch them or ignore them.

A social ill isn't solved by ignoring it.


Unique IPs: 19

[Return][Go to top] [Catalog] | [Home][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[ home / rules / faq ] [ overboard / sfw / alt ] [ leftypol / edu / labor / siberia / lgbt / latam / hobby / tech / games / anime / music / draw / AKM ] [ meta ] [ wiki / shop / tv / tiktok / twitter / patreon ] [ GET / ref / marx / booru ]