So after meeting with Joshua and reading my previous blogs. I was left wondering why Hollywood producers or directors would change the gender role or race of a person in movies.

Movie adaptations of true stories are suppose to be as accurate as possible but it's weird how sometimes the role of a character is changed. Is it to make the story better? Or is it because they lack actors/actresses of a certain race or gender that the character is suppose to be?
If the didn't have an actor/actress to play a certain role couldn't they just held auditions to find one instead or changing the character to a different race or gender?

For example, in my previous blog I talked about the movie 21. The original group mainly consisted of Asians. But in the movie there is only like 1 or 2 Asian guys following them around. And they didn't even have a leading role. The leading role was a Caucasian guy.

I'm pretty sure there are plenty of Asian actors that could have been casted but instead they had a white male actor take the role.

I always wonder if this media is prejudice about casting other ethnic groups in hit movies.

I think Hollywood stereotype groups. For example Asian actors/actress are always portrayed as martial artists, geeks, or kung-fu fighting people. African-Americans are portrayed as drug dealers, violent, and rude people.

It would be interesting to find out why Hollywood does this because true story films aren't' true if the character roles are altered and changed.

Gridiron Gang

Gridiron Gang Casts:
The Rock, Xzibit, L. Scott Caldwell, Leon Rippy.

This is a movie about how you can use football to rehabilitate juvenile delinquents.
The movie is about the real life story of a juvenile camp detention officer and the Kilpatrick Mustangs during the 1990 season.

My Thoughts:
I think Gridiron Gang is like any other football movies that Hollywood has produced. Like "The Invincible" or "The Longest Yard," the movie plot is basically the same. Hollywood's version will always make it seem like playing football will solve everything. And sometimes it doesn't. Although it shows the team working together and being motivated to win the game, the reaity is taht they're still in a juvenile detention center.

Alpha Dog

Alpha Dog is a 2006 crime film written and directed by Nick Cassavetes. The film is based on the true story of the kidnapping and murder of 15-year-old Nicholas Markowitz in 2000.


MOVIE PLOT:

Johnny Truelove (Emile Hirsch) is a drug dealer in California. Jake Mazursky (Ben Foster) is a member of the gang and owes Johnny money. A heated argument is held between the two, which results in a violent fight because Jake doesn't want to pay him.

The next day, Johnny and his crew decided to go to Jake personally and collect the money. On the way, they saw Jake's brother, Zack Mazursky (Anton Yelchin) and decided to kidnap him.

Johnny and is gang all learn of Zack's kidnapping, but do nothing as Zack seems cool with everything.

While deciding what to do with Zack, Johnny asks Frankie about the possibility of having Zack killed and disposed of. Frankie suggests that they offer Zack money for to keep his mouth shut.

While Frankie, Zack, and the gang are at a party at a hotel, Johnny approaches Elvis, who is in debt with Johnny, and offers to cancel the debt if he agrees to have Zack murdered. Elvis agrees and Johnny gives him a TEC-9 pistol and leaves.

Elvis arrives at the party and explains to Frankie that he is taking Zack home. Frankie is relieved to have Zack go home until Elvis reveals Johnny's plan to kill Zack.

Frankie, Elvis, and Keith takes Zack up to the hills. Zack is not aware of what's going to happen and becomes suspicious when Keith silently goes to wait in the van.

Realizing what's happening, Zack asks Frankie what they're doing, Frankie reassures him and tells him that he would never hurt him, and ties Zack up with tape.

Then Elvis knocks Zack into the grave with the shovel and fires at Zack with the pistol killing him.

Zack's body is found 3 days later. The epilogue shows the aftermath of the crime.

After being convicted, the gang members serve time: Tiko serving 9 years for the kidnapping; Keith serving at a juvenile facility until the age of 25 for digging Zack's grave and 2nd degree murder; Frankie serving a life sentence for aggravated kidnapping; and Elvis on death row for murdering Zack. Johnny disappears and is finally arrested in Paraguay in 2005 after 5 years of being on the America's Most Wanted list.


CAST:

Emile Hirsch as Johnny Truelove (leader)
Real-life Counterpart: Jesse James Hollywood (convicted July 8, 2009 of the kidnapping and murder of Nick Markowitz and was sentenced to life in prison); 20 years old at the time.

Justin Timberlake as Frankie Ballenbacher
Real-life Counterpart: Jesse Rugge (sentenced to life in prison, for the kidnapping of Nick Markowitz with the possibility of parole after seven years. His petition for parole was denied in 2006.) 20 years old at the time.

Shawn Hatosy as Elvis Schmidt (shooter)
Real-life Counterpart: Ryan Hoyt (on death row at San Quentin for the murder of Nick Markowitz) 21 years old at the time.

Ben Foster as Jake Mazursky (elder half-brother of victim)
Real-life Counterpart: Benjamin Markowitz 21 years old at the time. Served 3 years in prison for robbery. Since released.

Anton Yelchin as Zack Mazursky (victim)
Real-life Counterpart: Nicholas Markowitz (murdered by Ryan Hoyt a member of Jesse James Hollywood's crew.) Hollywood has since been tried and convicted for the kidnapping and his role in the murder. 15 when he died.

Sharon Stone as Olivia Mazursky (mother of victim)
Real-life Counterpart: Susan Markowitz

Chris Marquette as Keith Stratten
Real-life Counterpart: Graham Pressley 17 at the time. In July 2002 tried as an minor and October 2002 as an adult. Served 5 years in juvie for digging Nick's grave. 2nd degree murder. (was released from the California Youth Authority Facility in 2007)

Olivia Wilde as Angela Holden
Real-life Counterpart: Michelle Lasher, Hollywood's girlfriend. 21 at the time. Arrested for harboring a fugitive/ Hollywood.

Bruce Willis as Sonny Truelove
Real-life Counterpart: John "Jack" Hollywood Jesse James's father. Arrested in 2005, the same day son Jesse James was captured in Brazil, for manufacturing the illicit narcotic GHB, but the charge was later thrown out in court. Jack remained in custody on an outstanding 2002 warrant for a marijuana-related charge, and later received 18 months in a Arizona prison.



My thoughts:

I think the screenwriters made this film as accurate as they can based on the interviews from the witnesses. Although we don't really know what happened during the actual event we get a glimpse of how that murder took place.

21

The Hollywood Version:
Ben Campbell is a math genius at MIT. Kevin Spacey who recruits Ben for the MIT Blackjack Team. They learn how to play the age-old art of card counting.

Once they get good enough, Spacey took the team to Las Vegas to give their new talent a try in a real world setting. Of course, things don't go quite as planned, and Ben learns some harsh lessons about life and love before going off to Harvard Medical School.

In Reality:

21 gives us the greatest whitewash in recent Hollywood history--a broad, sweeping stroke of Caucasian across the majority of the cast.

The real MIT Blackjack Team was mostly all Asian, but you'd never know that from the film. Even Kevin Spacey's character was based in part on an Asian professor.

At least they did cast a pair of Asians as members of the Blackjack Team. They were made into goofy loser sidekick types, while the white kids handled all of the heavy intellectual lifting.

My Thoughts:

It's pretty messed up how the movie producers cast mostly white kids for this movie. I mean the original group were all Asian. But then again there like barely any Asian actors or actress. But at the same time, the producers could have held a casting call to get Asian kids in the movie. I think movie directors and producers do this a lot because they want to make the movie more "interesting" by having a diverse group and they NEVER make the movie like how that story actually happened. Why make a movie based on a true story if it doesn't even have the actual facts in there and its not even going to be like the true story?

Pursuit of Happyness

The Hollywood Version:
Chris Gardner is a hard-working man with a pain-in-the-ass wife and an adorable little son. All Gardner wants to do is make enough of a living to provide for his son.

Chris Gardner wows an employee at Dean Wittersolves by solving a Rubik's Cube in record time, and he apparently passes the only test needed to qualify a man to become a stock broker. He toils for months, sleeping in subways and churches with his son at his side, but in the end it all pays off when he claims the one and only opening at Dean Witter, crying tears of joy and getting jiggy wit it in the streets of San Francisco.

In Reality:
Gardner did get a chance to show his stuff in the Dean Witter training program (though his acceptance had nothing to do with solving a Rubik's Cube). But, as the more honest book version points out, he apparently wasn't quite the father the film made him out to be.

First, he was so focused on getting a job and earning his first million that, he didn't even know where the hell his son was for the first four months of the program. And apparently his son was concieved when he was married to another woman.

In addition, instead of being arrested just before his big interview due to parking tickets, it seems that Chris was actually arrested after Jackie accused him of domestic violence.

"That's right son, you gotta keep that pimp hand strong."

Chris did indeed get his life turned around after landing the job as a broker. There were just some things in Gardner's past that they couldn't have Will Smith do on screen. Like selling drugs, or doing cocaine with his mistress.

My Thoughts:

I'm surprised that they made the Hollywood Chris Gardner, played by Will Smith, to be very different from the actual Chris Gardner. In the movie he was seen as a good father and a guy who really wanted a good job to support himself and his son. And it turns out that he was not like that in real life. I think Hollywood left out some important things that he did. It's funny because screenwriters always make a person seem like a good guy when really they're not/ What we are missing are the real struggle that Chris Gardner was facing. I think they should have added all the other things he did to make it seem like he really worked his ass off to pursue the "happyness" he wanted.

Flight 93

Many have wondered what really happened on Flight 93 during the terrorist attack on America on Septmeber 11, 2001. Some people think that Flight 93 was shot down by the government and others believe that Flight 93 was hijacked.

Paul Greengrass, director of the film United 93 strongly believed that the plan was never shot down but was hijacked. He beleieved that the passengers on board did their best to try and take over the plane themselves so that they can safely land it.


A cell phone call to his wife from Thomas E. Burnett Jr., Thoratec Corporation senior vice president and passenger on United Airlines Flight 93 on Sept. 11, 2001 "A group of us are going to do something."

Questioning the Story:

Did the families of the passengers and crew of Flight 93 support the making of the film?
Yes. According to United 93 director Paul Greengrass, all of the family members wanted the film to be made.

How did director Paul Greengrass try to make the film as factual as possible?
Paul Greengrass hired flight attendants and commercial airline pilots to play the roles in the film He also cast several civilian and military controllers on duty on Sept. 11, 2001 to play as themselves. Greengrass also interviewed 100 family and friends to find out more about how each passenger was like.

How many people were on board United Flight 93?
There were 37 passengers (including the hijackers) and 7 crew members, including Captain Jason Dahl and his first officer, LeRoy W. Homer Jr. The passengers ranged in age from 20 to 69 and included one married couple - (Crash Site Tour). The plane could be seated for 182 but instead there was only a 20% capacity on the plane on Sept. 11, 2001. - (wikipedia.org)

How do we know that exactly four terrorists were on board United Flight 93?
Phone calls from the passengers and DNA evidence showed that there were exactly four terrorists were on board Flight 93.They were Ziad Jarrah, Ahmed Al Haznawi, Saeed Al Ghamdi, and Ahmed Al Nami - (American Morning with Paula Zahn).

Did the four terrorists really have a bomb on board?
According to the 9/11 Commision report, it was determined that the terrorists did not have a real bomb on board the plane. Also during cell phone calls, some of the passengers also believed that the terrorists did not have a real bomb.

How did the filmmakers know that the hijackers had killed several people on the plane before it crashed?
Passenger, Marion Britton called her friend and told him that two people had been killed and that the plane had been turned around. At least one of passengers had been stabbed. Authorities believe that this was Mark Rothenberg, the only first-class passenger. Flight attendant, Debra Welsh, may have been the other early victim of the hijackers. - (wikipedia.org)

Was Captain Dahl really stabbed to death in the cockpit as the film depicts?
Likely not. In the film United 93, Captain Jason Dahl was stabbed to death in the cockpit, and then his body is dragged into the first-class cabin by the terrorists. Sandy Dahl, Jason Dahl's wife, was unable to tell the film's director, Paul Greengrass, what really happened regarding her husband.
During the Moussaoui trial, the jury heard moans and terrorist shouts for someone (believed to be the captain) to stay on the cockpit floor. It is believed that these ongoing moans are coming from a still alive Captain Dahl.- (azcentral.com).

Is it true that there was a passenger on board who may have been able to land the airplane?
Yes. Donalld F. Greene of Greenwich Connecticut was the Executive Vice President of The Safe Flight Instrument Corporation, and he was also a licensed pilot of small aircraft.

Do we know if the passengers ever made it into the cockpit, as depicted in the film?
It is unknown if the passengers of United Flight 93 ever actually made it into the cockpit of the airplane. Black box recordings revealed that it is possible the passengers broke into the cockpit after the hijacker began aiming the plane down for a crash. On the recording, one of the hijackers can be heard saying "pull it down, pull it down." A desperate physical struggle would have then ensued.

How fast was the plane traveling when it crashed?
When Flight 93 struck the ground on September 11 near Shanksville, Somerset County, Pennsylvania, it was traveling at more than 500mph. It crashed upside-down at a forty-five degree angle - (Crash Site Tour).

Is it possible that the government shot the plane down?
There is no evidence to show that Flight 93 was shot down. When asked this question during an Entertainment Weekly interview, director Paul Greengrass responded by saying the following:

"The simple truth is that it wasn't shot down, and it's very unlikely that it could have been. I actually find the disturbing truth to be the absolute worst — that that plane, given the state of confusion [on the ground], probably would have reached its target. The thing about the theories is that they tend to be quite comfortable in a funny sort of way because they reduce the world to a series of simple propositions of bad guys changing world history. Wouldn't it just be easier if conspiracies were true? But they're not. The world is actually frighteningly complex."

Were any items that belonged to the people on board ever found?
Yes. Personal items, miscellaneous debris and human remains were found as far away as six miles from the crash site. Nearby residents and businesses outside Shanksville, Somerset County, reported finding books, clothing, papers and what appeared to be human remains.

Blog 2

Like I said in my previous blog, I want to see how film adaptation and other media differ in telling what happened in a story.

I want to start off with historical events and then work my way to other true based stories.


My first attack going to be on 1995's Braveheart. this film was produced and directed by Mel Gibson who also played the lead role.

In this movie, Gibson played as a Scottish man, William Wallace, who opposed Edward I of England, played by Patrick McGoohan.
This started the First War of Scottish Independence.

The story plot goes like this: William Wallace's father and brother was killed by Edward I of England. After slaying an English sheriff, who killed his childhood friend, Wallace and his men dressed up as Englishmen and enters the castle and burns the castle. The commoners of Scotland rise in revolt againgst England. Wallace and his Scottish army fought many battles with England. Wallace is then captured and beheaded for treason.

The film's depiction of the Battle of Stirling is often considered one of the greatest movie battles in cinema history.
The film generated huge interest in Scotland and in Scottish history, not only around the world, but also in Scotland itself.

This film adaptation shows how Scotland fought against England for their independence. Although it is from the 1280 era, we get the idea of how the world was like. Films that are adapted from historical events make us gain more knowledge of how the earlier years were like. Instead of reading about historical events and not really know what that time period is like, watching a film that is adapted from a historical event lets us undestand the stories more.