Wiki for Dr. McClurkens Courses

User Tools

Site Tools

Trace: • week_5_questions_comments-325_19
329:question:329--week_15_questions_comments-2024

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revisionPrevious revision
Next revision		Previous revision
329:question:329--week_15_questions_comments-2024 [2024/12/05 08:49] – [How does this movie work as a primary source about the time in which it was made?] 71.171.124.237329:question:329--week_15_questions_comments-2024 [2024/12/05 13:52] (current) – [The "So What" Question] 76.78.172.116
Line 16: Line 16:
 All the President’s Men does a great job capturing the story behind the Watergate scandal. It shows how Woodward and Bernstein worked tirelessly to piece everything together by chasing leads, double-checking facts, and by relying on sources like Deep Throat. The film closely follows the actual timeline of events, showing how the conspiracy gradually unraveled. It also perfectly captures the mood of the 1970s, with its tension and widespread distrust of the Nixon administration. The portrayals of key players like Ben Bradlee and Katharine Graham feel authentic and highlight the courage it took Woodward and Bernstein to publish their findings. Overall, this film offers a compelling and realistic look at investigative journalism at its best. -Sam B. All the President’s Men does a great job capturing the story behind the Watergate scandal. It shows how Woodward and Bernstein worked tirelessly to piece everything together by chasing leads, double-checking facts, and by relying on sources like Deep Throat. The film closely follows the actual timeline of events, showing how the conspiracy gradually unraveled. It also perfectly captures the mood of the 1970s, with its tension and widespread distrust of the Nixon administration. The portrayals of key players like Ben Bradlee and Katharine Graham feel authentic and highlight the courage it took Woodward and Bernstein to publish their findings. Overall, this film offers a compelling and realistic look at investigative journalism at its best. -Sam B.
  
 +This movie gets many things right about the history of Watergate. One thing it gets right is many of the main characters to the story. Another thing this movie gets right about history is the timeline of the Watergate scandal. -Maddy
 +
 +The film faithfully captures the investigative journalism that led to the Watergate affair, including the dangers that Woodward and Bernstein faced in exposing political corruption, the role of anonymous sources like Mark Felt ("Deep Throat"), and document reviews. It successfully captures the tense atmosphere of the 1970s while maintaining the historical authenticity of insignificant events like the break-in at the Watergate Complex and the slow unraveling of the plot. By using actual newsroom documents and incorporating the reporters in the scriptwriting process, the filmmakers made every effort to maintain realism. -Ryan K
 ====== Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ====== ====== Problems with historical accuracy? Errors in fact? ======
  
Line 24: Line 27:
  
 While All the President’s Men is mostly accurate, it takes some creative liberties. The film simplifies timelines and makes the investigation seem faster and more linear than it actually was. It also focuses heavily on Woodward and Bernstein, sidelining contributions from other journalists that played a role in uncovering Watergate. Some scenes, like the one where they misreport a grand jury source, are fictionalized for tension. Additionally, the depiction of Deep Throat exaggerates his involvement, and the Washington Post’s role is made to seem more singular than it truly was. These choices make the story more engaging but ultimately detract from the film’s overall accuracy. - Sam B. While All the President’s Men is mostly accurate, it takes some creative liberties. The film simplifies timelines and makes the investigation seem faster and more linear than it actually was. It also focuses heavily on Woodward and Bernstein, sidelining contributions from other journalists that played a role in uncovering Watergate. Some scenes, like the one where they misreport a grand jury source, are fictionalized for tension. Additionally, the depiction of Deep Throat exaggerates his involvement, and the Washington Post’s role is made to seem more singular than it truly was. These choices make the story more engaging but ultimately detract from the film’s overall accuracy. - Sam B.
 +
 +While this movie gets many things right about history it does have a few historical inaccuracies. One inaccuracy is the sources the news reporters get their information from. In the movie, they get them from 2-3 main sources but in real life, this wasn't the case. This was an artistic liberty taken to streamline the movie so that it is easier for the audience to follow. Another historical inaccuracy is how simple and quick the investigation because it actual was much more complex than the film showed but again if they made the film to match history perfectly it would have been too complex for the general audience to follow. -Maddy
 ====== How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ====== ====== How does the film’s overall interpretation(s) deviate from scholarly historical sources? ======
  
Line 78: Line 83:
  
 We should care about this film because of the accuracy it betrays. It sought to capture the feelings of Americans right after the event initially took place. It’s seems most of the county’s wrong doings are covered up and spun into a view that makes this country look better, but this film showed the raw emotions of the American people. -Leah B.  We should care about this film because of the accuracy it betrays. It sought to capture the feelings of Americans right after the event initially took place. It’s seems most of the county’s wrong doings are covered up and spun into a view that makes this country look better, but this film showed the raw emotions of the American people. -Leah B. 
 +
 +History repeats itself over and over again- especially in politics and government corruption. This kind of thing has always existed and especially as the modern era moves on, its going to be especially important to document misconduct and to hold those responsible accountable, or else it just continues. A lot of the Nixon era corruption has been reduced to jokes by now, but this is very serious and it went very deep, which should be extremely alarming. Future generations should be aware of past lawbreaking so that it can be prevented from happening again. This is also not a subject that is focused on much in school and anyone who wasn't born then wouldn't know the details of this scandal, so its important that this movie exists as a representation of what happened. It also serves as a reminder that the American people deserve to know the truth. -Jenna
 +
 +This film shows how investigative journalism exposes political corruption and holds powerful figures accountable, highlighting the necessity of a free press in a democracy. It documents the Watergate controversy and Woodward and Bernstein's tenacity, reminding us of the necessity to fight misinformation and uphold journalism. It remains relevant as a warning about unbridled power and government transparency.-Ryan K
329/question/329--week_15_questions_comments-2024.1733388588.txt.gz · Last modified: 2024/12/05 08:49 by 71.171.124.237