I saw this article a few days ago on CNN, in which Napster founder Sean Parker sets straight the differences between himself and the character portrayed in the movie The Social Network. I saw the movie, twice. It was one of those movie that gets your attention and doesn’t let go. When I first heard that Justin Timberlake was to be in the movie, I have to admit I was a little unsure about him and his acting abilities. Yet I was impressed; he was convincing as the Napster founder who was both genius and partier. This brings me back to the article, and how Sean Parker objected to his screen portrayal.
Can a movie based on a true story hold it’s own just on the story? I had a discussion with a friend a while back about this very topic. She explained that one of the major flaws of most movies based on true stories is that the main (or true) character doesn’t change. Instead, it is the main character that changes everyone around him or her. In order to turn these true stories into something that audiences will enjoy, characters are frequently changed, which sometimes means making enemies out of characters who were never anything like their character on screen. This implies that movies based on true stories may not be that true at all.
Is this something that should be allowed? Is this right or wrong? This is something I would like to hear about from my readers.
The Social Network just won the Golden just won the Golden Globe for Best Motion Picture – drama, and just grabbed an Oscar nomination for Best Picture, announced announced. This serves as a testament not only to the film’s originality and ambition, but also to the fact that it helps us visualize a development which has come to change how we live. So it seems, for at least the Social Network fact isn’t always better.