Reagan drama 'is not hatchet job'

[Red Dawn]

"The Reagans is reasonably accurate, at times engrossing, at other times silly and sometimes even dull.

I didn't see it so I can't comment personally whether it was or wasn't a hatchet job but according to this article it seems all the Hub Bub put up by the Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles was much ado about nothing.

 

[Gaard]

In my opinion, it makes no difference whether this film is completely accurate or not, all the outrage was still much ado about nothing. I can't think of a single person, living or dead, sick or well, D or R, who, if portayed inaccurately in a film, would cause me to become so outraged. But then that's me. If others feel the need, more power to them. It's kind of comical when they deny that their criticism isn't party loyalty, though. (Isn't it suspicious that not one critic would admit that the outrage is due to partisanship, yet the origin of most of the criticism comes from the right?)

My favorite criticism on these boards was this..."According to drugde(who has the script and I assume some video or clips of it) they protray the Reagans as being nude when they learn of the election results! WTF!? "

 

[CaptnKirk]

Gutless

 

[KenGr]

I'm not sure whether anyone can really say this is "much ado about nothing". From the linked article:

"In The Washington Post, Tom Shales wrote: "While not a hatchet job or unrelentingly vicious attack, [it] definitely makes the Reagans rather freakish creatures.""

and

"Some controversial lines and scenes were cut from the version that was going to be shown on CBS."

It certainly appears that the original version deviated from the facts enough that CBS didn't think it was accurate enough to release as a docudrama. The real issue here was that the writers originally maintained that certain things were factual which, in fact, were not. I think most people accept (even if they don't like it) that TV is going to bias things. However, making things up is a step too far.

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

[it] definitely makes the Reagans rather freakish creatures.

I think the Reagans themselves solely hold the honor of that.

 

[Spamela]

mrs. spamela & i thought it was hilarious.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Spamela
mrs. spamela & i thought it was hilarious.

Well, there you go again!

 

[Mrburns2007]

Haven't seen it but from the pics I don't think that brolin was the right guy to play Reagan.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Mrburns2007
Haven't seen it but from the pics I don't think that brolin was the right guy to play Reagan.

A little to Animated you think?

 

[JoeBaD]

Real thought provoking post there Red.

Great source, the BBC. LOL!

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

I watched most of it. It was terrible cinema and poor history. Reagan came off looking like Bush (ill-informed yet resolute but a generally decent guy). Nancy looked like a power mad socialite with the parenting skills of a crocodile. But even Nancy gets positive spin for her concern for AIDS sufferers . . . unlike Ronnie.

My understanding is that the story was supposed to be a "relationship biopic" not a "Ronald Reagan biopic". Reagan lovers will swear it besmirched his great legacy . . . they must not realize that the "Champion of Federal Debt Creation" has been taken over by Bush.

Reagan haters will swear it pulled too many punches making Reagan look warm and fuzzy instead of the Peace Park Reagan.

"If it takes a bloodbath, let's get it over with!" - Gov. Ronald Reagan

Quote without a reference . . .

 

[Crimson]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
"The Reagans is reasonably accurate, at times engrossing, at other times silly and sometimes even dull.

I didn't see it so I can't comment personally whether it was or wasn't a hatchet job but according to this article it seems all the Hub Bub put up by the Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles was much ado about nothing.

You didn't see it.. but you conclude its much to do about nothing by "Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles".

Thanks for you uninformed opinion Red.. Is there anything else you would like to admit having no knowledge of, but like to sound off on like you do? Your hypocracy shows through the more you speak..

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
"The Reagans is reasonably accurate, at times engrossing, at other times silly and sometimes even dull.

I didn't see it so I can't comment personally whether it was or wasn't a hatchet job but according to this article it seems all the Hub Bub put up by the Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles was much ado about nothing.

You didn't see it.. but you conclude its much to do about nothing by "Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles".

Thanks for you uninformed opinion Red.. Is there anything else you would like to admit having no knowledge of, but like to sound off on like you do? Your hypocracy shows through the more you speak..

I have to say, that's precisely my complaint with all of the pre-screening hoopla raised by the Reagan-worshipers and conservative-types who panned the movie before ever seeing it. I also wonder what happened to all of the protest once CBS shifted the program to Showtime? Did the Reaganites exhaust their energies getting it off the network and then simply not have the energy to take on the cable channel? What a shallow "victory" in my opinion . . .

 

[sandorski]

Was Reagan naked when he heard the results? If he was, so what? Republicans think he was never naked?

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
"The Reagans is reasonably accurate, at times engrossing, at other times silly and sometimes even dull.

I didn't see it so I can't comment personally whether it was or wasn't a hatchet job but according to this article it seems all the Hub Bub put up by the Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles was much ado about nothing.

You didn't see it.. but you conclude its much to do about nothing by "Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles".

Thanks for you uninformed opinion Red.. Is there anything else you would like to admit having no knowledge of, but like to sound off on like you do? Your hypocracy shows through the more you speak..

I have to say, that's precisely my complaint with all of the pre-screening hoopla raised by the Reagan-worshipers and conservative-types who panned the movie before ever seeing it. I also wonder what happened to all of the protest once CBS shifted the program to Showtime? Did the Reaganites exhaust their energies getting it off the network and then simply not have the energy to take on the cable channel? What a shallow "victory" in my opinion . . .

I assure you that there was still quite a force trying to get Showtime to not air it But you are still a tad off on your assesment of some of the people who were offering criticism of it. Mike Reagan had been talking about the movie and script long before it was posted on this board and before the Media picked up the story. He was not contacted as were NONE of the Reagans. You'd think that a supposed "story of X" would atleast contact people involved with X, no? That alone is cause for criticism. Next you have the leaked script which Drudge provided some of. Also there were sound/video? clips that accompianied the script. So yes - more basis for criticism. Third you have the "producers" who admittedly had an agenda, but yeah I suppose we should just disregard what Patti had to say about the script.
Ofcourse there always is that "you haven't seen it" argument but when you have this much VALID criticism one can make the argument that it is trash. I'll probably watch this when it gets re-aired, but after hearing and reading about this as much as I have - it'll likely be the trash I suspect it of being

CkG

 

[Gaard]

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
"The Reagans is reasonably accurate, at times engrossing, at other times silly and sometimes even dull.

I didn't see it so I can't comment personally whether it was or wasn't a hatchet job but according to this article it seems all the Hub Bub put up by the Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles was much ado about nothing.

You didn't see it.. but you conclude its much to do about nothing by "Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles".

Thanks for you uninformed opinion Red.. Is there anything else you would like to admit having no knowledge of, but like to sound off on like you do? Your hypocracy shows through the more you speak..

Did you see these words in Red's post? ...according to this article...

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
"The Reagans is reasonably accurate, at times engrossing, at other times silly and sometimes even dull.

I didn't see it so I can't comment personally whether it was or wasn't a hatchet job but according to this article it seems all the Hub Bub put up by the Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles was much ado about nothing.

You didn't see it.. but you conclude its much to do about nothing by "Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles".

Thanks for you uninformed opinion Red.. Is there anything else you would like to admit having no knowledge of, but like to sound off on like you do? Your hypocracy shows through the more you speak..

Did you see these words in Red's post? ...according to this article...

Hey Crimson was emotionally wounded by the truth!

 

[miguel]

Originally posted by: Gaard

Originally posted by: Crimson

Originally posted by: Red Dawn
"The Reagans is reasonably accurate, at times engrossing, at other times silly and sometimes even dull.

I didn't see it so I can't comment personally whether it was or wasn't a hatchet job but according to this article it seems all the Hub Bub put up by the Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles was much ado about nothing.

You didn't see it.. but you conclude its much to do about nothing by "Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles".

Thanks for you uninformed opinion Red.. Is there anything else you would like to admit having no knowledge of, but like to sound off on like you do? Your hypocracy shows through the more you speak..

Did you see these words in Red's post? ...according to this article...

Uh, did you read the article? There is no where in there that they said "Ultra Conservative Chicken Littles" nor did it offer a conclusion that Red Dawn came up with on his own, that it was much ado about nothing.

 

[Gaard]

After seeing it, some critics were left asking what the fuss was about.

"The political fuss and bother that nudged this film from network to Sunday night pay TV is in some ways more engaging than the film itself."

Many reviewers said the film was negative towards Mr Reagan and wife Nancy - but that was not unusual for biopics, and it was not as bad as some had feared.

They portrayed the Reagans as being naked when finding out the results of the election. WTF?!?

In The Washington Post, Tom Shales wrote: "While not a hatchet job or unrelentingly vicious attack, [it] definitely makes the Reagans rather freakish creatures."



Edit: OK, in case anyone's confused, the 'naked' quote isn't really from the article.