Orson Welles himself once commented, “Kane is better than Hearst, just as Marion Davies is better than Susan Alexander.” Of course, it was a fiction only loosely based on Hearst’s life. (Hearst, for instance, did not lose his empire at the end – in fact he was still in control of it when the film was released, and in a position to ban every newspaper and radio station in his conglomerate from reviewing or even mentioning the movie.)
Which is why Nietzsche wrote his famous pamphlet alleging Wagner was of Jewish blood – he was reproving his friend with hypocrisy. But that led to a widespread misconception that Nietzsche himself was anti-Semitic, which he wasn’t.
astorian’s mention of the mobster movie made me think of mentioning Eliot Ness in this thread. In the Untouchables movie, Ness is portrayed as a ridiculously naive and idealistic G-Man with no plan other than righteous anger. Real histories of the Untouchables squad (at least, his own and one written by a fellow Untouchable, Paul Robsky) have him as being extremely street-smart and implementing the Untouchables plan in a focused and effective manner, opposing Al Capone with his wits more than with his guns.
I should mention, this doesn’t come remotely close to “most maligned”, but he’s been maligned nonetheless. Maybe a better candidate would be the other members of the real-life Untouchables squad, who were all omitted from the movie in favor of fictional characters.
When conducting works by Mendelsohn, Wagner would don a pair of white gloves so that his hands wouldn’t touch the Jewish composer’s music. After the performance, Wagner would peel off the gloves and drop them into the orchestra pit*.
Wagner was not a Nazi – that would have been quite a feat, because the Nazi party didn’t exist during his lifetime (he died in 1883). IIRC, he was a member of the Teutonic Knights.
I once was asked by two Jewish friends who were planning their wedding whether it was true that “Here Comes the Bride” was written by a Nazi. I said it technically was not, but suggested they might consider switching to the familiar “Wedding March”, which was written by… Mendelsohn.
*One of the Book(s) of Lists, Wallace, et al.
I just find it amusing that the post was essentially, “How dare Michael Moore use his target’s words against them!” 
Well, when Lamia described Wagner’s depiction as a “blood-sucking Nazi,” the “blood-sucking” part wasn’t a figure a speech. Litzomania is a rather bizarre film.
I bet you if you give me enough material, I can cut and paste segments together that have you saying almost anything I want you to.
I really didn’t want to hijack this thread into a discussion of this, but the reason nobody has ever been treated is because it’s never been built. The producers of the film promised him the 13 million dollars he needed to build it if they let them make the movie. He never saw a dime of it.
Thanks, Sublight. This’ll teach me to use the word “literally” literally. This is the second thread in which it’s led to misunderstanding.
For those of you lucky enough not to have seen Lisztomania, it depicts Wagner as both a vampire and the pre-incarnation of Hitler. Or, as I said, literally a blood-sucking Nazi.
Lisztomania also depicts Franz Liszt as having a penis the size of a May pole, but I don’t know that many men would consider that being “maligned”.
Also Danny DeVito’s loathsome movie Hoffa. Robert Kennedy was no saint, but his great achievment in life was taking on the Mob and their lackeys, including Hoffa. DeVito made him out to be a troll out to destroy holy Saint Jimmy. I’ve hated DeVito ever since.
[QUOTE=OtakuLoki]
It was an amazing feat. But, I believe that Shackleton’s trip from Antartica to South Georgia Island is more impressive - the distance was less 800 miles vs. 3600, but the waters of the high latitude southern oceans are so deadly that they routinely destroyed ships, not simply covered over jollyboats.
Bligh’s own reputation is not enhanced by the fact that he’s one of the very few Royal Navy commanders I can think of who was mutinied against twice.
[\quote]
First off, commasense, I believe that Bligh was given a compass with which to navigate, although the men on the Bounty thought they were condemning him to die.
As for the second quote, and Bligh’s second mutiny, they really aren’t in the same league at all. The second of Bligh’s mutinies was the Nore Mutiny. This second mutiny was actually a major work stoppage and blockade of London. The sailors were rebelling against the practice of impressment and especially tyrranical captains (which list does not include Bligh…). Bligh actually acted as a mediator between the sailors and the Royal Navy in this engagement.
I refer you to Caroline Alexander’s book Mutiny on the Bounty, available at bookstores everywhere, for an interesting account of these events.
Tenebras
PS She also wrote the equally engaging Endurance about Sheckleton.
PPS No, I’m not related to her, nor am I her personal booster. Just a great book. 
I’d forgotten that one, but you’re right.
I’m a Republican with little use for any of the Kennedy clan, but one thing Bobby Kennedy could be justly proud of was his work fighting organized crime (some think Bobby’s courageous war on the Mob may have gotten his brother John killed).
MAYBE Jimmy Hoffa started out as an idealist, and MAYBE he turned to mobsters for help because he thought he needed the power they could give to his fledgling union. PERHAPS a decent movie with a more honest screenplay could have shown him as a tragic figure who turned to evil with good intentions.
But by the time Robert Kennedy began investigating Hoffa, the Teamsters were corrupt and criminal, through and through. To make Hoffa out to be an innocent victim of persecution by a snobbish New England aristocrat is contemptible.
It’s not easy to make me sympathize with a Kennedy, but “Hoffa” did the trick.
According to Wikipedia, he was given “a sextant and a pocket watch, but no charts or compass.” This accords with my recollections of my readings on the mutiny. (I have Caroline Alexander’s book, but I haven’t gotten around to reading it.)
As far as Bligh vs. Shackleton, both men’s accomplishments were amazing, and perhaps it serves no purpose to declare one superior to the other. But all in all, I thing Bligh’s voyage was the more difficult because he did it with no charts, only a sextant and watch. Shackleton may have been a greater leader, but I think Bligh was the greater seaman.
MAYBE F.I.S.T.
According to Wikipedia, he was given “a sextant and a pocket watch, but no charts or compass.” This accords with my recollections of my readings on the mutiny. (I have Caroline Alexander’s book, but I haven’t gotten around to reading it.)
As far as Bligh vs. Shackleton, both men’s accomplishments were amazing, and perhaps it serves no purpose to declare one superior to the other. But all in all, I thing Bligh’s voyage was the more difficult because he did it with no charts, only a sextant and watch. Shackleton may have been a greater leader, but I think Bligh was the greater seaman.
Have you actually seen the movie?
Yes, Salieri claims he killed Mozart. But the movie makes clear that he did nothing of the sort. He made the claim because Mozart died after agreeing to collaborate with Salieri. Salieri’s point was that he was such a mediocrity that God killed Mozart to prevent Salieri from sharing in Mozart’s genius. Their potential collaboration was what did Mozart in, not anything Salieri did to him.
Salieri is portrayed with the utmost sympathy: someone with talent confronted by the presence of genius and realizing how lacking he is. The claim is based on his deep depression and it not meant to be taken literally.
replying to RealityChuck -
I agree with you that this is what the author is trying to say about Salieri in “Amadeus”, but I would venture that most people who saw the movie did not catch this.
Most people I know anyway who saw the movie saw him as an embittered murderous mediocrity. Perhaps a failing in the writing or movie adaptation. If “the point” is that hard to get, there has been a failing in presentation.
If they are looking down (or up), Davy Crockett and John Chism are probably happy that John Wayne played them in movies. But I would be willing to bet that Ghengus Khan is not happy with The Consqueror. Any similarity between that film and real life is well beyond a coincidence - it is a miracle.
My wife contends that the reason there are so many earthquakes in Asia is because somewhere in the world someone is watching that film and Khan is spinning in his grave.
Obviously, that should be The Conqueror. Probably the ghost of Khan slipped that “s” in there.
Interestingly enough, The New Jewish Wedding, a book I used for my wedding planning, said that:
We didn’t use either in our wedding, but not because of any request made by our rabbi or anyone else- we just thought they were too much of a cliche for us.