Children were forcibly removed from their families and placed in church-run missions. This happened from 1905-1967 so there are plenty of people alive who experienced it.
The situation was “controversial, upsetting, ugly, and depressing” but they still made a movie of it. I remember it 20 years on because there was a scene of a girl being forcibly removed from her mother and it has stuck with me ever since.
I kinda feel like if they can dramatize that…they can dramatize anything.
I could tell you, but I think such historical events are also inappropriate for a Cafe Society thread with no clear purpose. What are your examples, OP, and why do you want a list of everyone else’s?
I think the difference, though, is that there’s a point in dramatizing certain things. The Holocaust is so frequently dramatized not only because of its sheer scale - 12 million killed - but also because of its specific anti-Semitism, too.
But suppose that someone decided to specifically zoom in one day and make an elaborate video documentary about some person getting brutally raped, tortured and murdered in 500 BC Babylon (say this really happened.) I could picture a lot of backlash from people - “why exactly do we have to focus on this particular horrible thing out of millions of atrocities in human history?”
But hardly “too controversial,” just not commercial. The OP said “dramatize” and “the subject of drama.” That doesn’t mean you have to show the gory detail, if (for example) you wanted to make a movie about one such case.
On the other hand, I wonder if he still would have had the main characters attempt to suicide-bomb the London Marathon if he’d made the movie after certain events a few years later…
There are a shit ton of films that already exist that are basically that exact plot (not the 500 BC part, but basically just someone getting raped, tortured and murdered) so I don’t see why you think that would be too controversial. The extreme horror genre is full of these.
I don’t think there is any such event that exists that is “too controversial” to dramatize.
Actually, on reflection perhaps not. If the movie were still in production at the time of the time of a very similar real event then no doubt he’d push on but he most likely wouldn’t have chosen an exact contemporary situation if he had a choice beforehand.
It’d divert from the point of the film which was to satirise the mindset of such perpatrators, not to be a representation of an event itself and he’d probably prefer that it isn’t misunderstood as such.
My point is that “too controversial” would not be a reason Morris is likely to entertain for too long.
If you are really interested, there is enough information in the video to give you further research. If you aren’t interested then you will do what you just did and ask for a silly summary.
I didn’t ask for a silly summary, and I don’t appreciate the snarky reply to a request for what is considered common courtesy around here. I usually include a brief quote from an article I’m linking to so that people don’t have to read something that would only take a couple of minutes, much less 47 minutes.
