So, a few weeks ago, I finally got the woman I love to sit down and watch the first two LOTR DVDs. Naturally, she fell in lust with Aragorn, and wanted to know a while lot more about what the Viggo-unit is going to be in next.
Now, since I live in Hidalgo county, I was already aware of the upcoming film “Hidalgo”. Nothing at all to do with where I live, but it looks pretty fun.
The trailers I checked out all claim the film is “Based on a True Story”, but when I saw Wild Bill Himself show up near the beginning of them, I started to worry.
Well, it sounds like Disney’s playing fast and loose with history again. I don’t think that’s any major development. That Fusco dude sounds like a skeevy character and the Frank Hopkins legend is mostly myth. Some horse freaks are angry about it. While I would agree that promoting false history is a Bad Thing, I really don’t get the hysteria. It’s Disney. I’m more concerned about why the hell they have to kill off the parents in every freaking story…
It is amazing that the promoters of this film would go to so much trouble. As the link in the OP says, “Hopkins is a historical fraud, the movie Hidalgo is pure fiction, and the frankhopkins.com website is a deliberate attempt to conceal the truth.” To which the answer should be … so what? Gee, a Hollywood movie – pure fiction? Who woulda guessed? I guess the “true story” here is that Hopkins told wild tall tales back in the days of Buffalo Bill. To which I say sarcastically, “No! Really?” The point is to make a good movie. If the old lie was a good story, hey, go for it!! Why hang the “based on a true story” label on it at all? But then again, why not? Ever since “Fargo” we’ve known it’s a pretty meaningless claim …
I plan on going to that movie and enjoying the heck out of it.
well, i have to back the Long Riders group on this one. i’ll admit to being very interested, nay even excited, when i saw the previews for Hidalgo at the theater. as a horseperson and buckled 100-mile endurance-ride winner, i couldn’t wait to see a movie about a genuine long-distance horse race. so the fact that the story is all a big hoax, yet Disney will be advertising it as “based on a true story”, i take as an insult to those who do and have “gone the distance.” i’m strongly against passing total fiction off as actual history. (yeah, ok so the real history books have done it for ages. but if we KNOW it’s total BS nowadays, we shouldn’t perpetuate tall tales as anything else.)
or else i’ve been wasting my time hanging out here, after all.
I’ve said it elsewhere, and I’ll say it again: this is a tempest in a teacup. “Based on a true story” is an advertising slogan, and you’d have to be awfully anal retentive to be upset that Hollywood (gasp!) made a claim to get publicity!. How shocking! That’s never happened before! :rolleyes:
Whether the story is true or not has absolutely no bearing on the movie. It doesn’t change what’s on the screen one iota.
And, in this case, the claim isn’t even inaccurate. It’s is based on a story told by an actual person. Note the word “based,” which means they’ve changed it to suit their purposes. It is also true that the story exists. Disney took that actual story and made a movie from it. Calling it a true story is perfectly legitmate.
Finally, they are not making a documentary; they’re making a work that is described by the technical term “fiction.” Those who object to the “true story” claim need to look up the word.
< finishes shelling pistachios for the hamsters, in hopes that they won’t eat THIS version of my posting. >>
so basically, RealityChuck, you’re saying… what?
that if Disney decides to make their next movie about Joshua Abraham Norton, actually proclaiming him to be the Emperor of the United States and Protector of Mexico, and they have a cover of “Based on a true story”, then everything’s hunky-dory because he made those claims and actually told people that that’s what he was?
um, didn’t a prominent entity recently get its knickers in a major twist when it was discovered they had published as fact what turned out to be self-serving fictions concocted by one of their employees?
Personally I think it is a wee bit more than semantic hairsplitting when they use the claim ‘Based on a True Story’. The very term implies some attempt to adhere to historical fact (this is roughly what we tend to mean by ‘true stories’).
All evidence indicates that the entire truth of this matter appears to be in the character named ‘Frank Hopkins’ and beyond that everything else is pure speculation. It is a simple lie to use this claim and potentially appeal to people who are honestly interested in the real past.
If Disney had advertised a ‘Rollicking Adventure’ I’d have nothing to complain about. We use the words because they mean something…disregarding thse niceties in the name of marketing approacheth ‘Evil’.
I’d never even heard of Frank Hopkins before I saw the trailer for Hidalgo - so I’m curious, what did he lie about or greatly exaggerate? The linked article in the OP doesn’t elaborate. What parts of Frank Hopkin’s biography and/or the upcoming movie are exaggerated/changed for artistic reasons/completely fictitious?
Was he not a long distance horse racer? Not of the caliber he claimed? Actually participated in the Ocean of Fire race? Other aspects of his life?
