As you can see, zub, the collective Doper imagination is as fertile as it is twisted.
But a few clues would help. A forty page paper on anything? For a specific class? Hard science? Social sciences? Lit?
We can jump start the synapses of a corpse but ya gotta give us something to work with. We can help. Trust us. ::lightning bolt reduces Veb to smoking cinders::
Oh. Is your heart set on getting a degree out of this?
Compare and contrast the life/appearance/etc. of a historical character vs. the manner in which they are portrayed in the cinema.
I just love fact-based movies in which a real-life person with bad teeth, zits and a pot-belly (not to mention the five divorces and police record) is portrayed on film by handsome (BIG TIME STAR), and all those nasty little details such as the wife-beating incident are never touched upon, though it would certainly be relevant.
I’m thinking of no one in particular but you could probably select several examples, i. e. I recall that the real Erin Brokovich was far more “complex” than Julia Roberts’ portrayal.
I recall reading that Knute Rockne never hauled out the famous George Gipp story until seven years after Gipp’s death, as opposed to a game soon thereafter, as I always imagined.
The first one that popped into my mind was whatsisname, The Birdman of Alcatraz. The movie version was hunky, wistful Burt Lancaster, triumphing over incarceration. The real Birdman was a genuinely vile, hateful pedophile who was so obnoxious the other inmates would have killed him in a heartbeat, given the chance. Yeah, he watched birds and wrote in prison. Trouble is, most of his writings involved the forcible rape of young boys.
Ironically there was a public outcry of pity over his imprisonment. Of course people were envisioning stalwart Burt gently yearning as his birds flew to freedom. They would have strung the real Birdman up from the nearest lamppost if they’d known what he was like.