I know a lot of people have a big gripe with the way Ron Howard portrayed Max Baer. In the movie Max Baer is a heartless killer. In real life he killed a man in the ring but was very remorseful.
Understandably, shedding a historical character in an inaccurate light certainly isn't a good thing to do. Howard had to do it this way. If he shows Baer as an overall nice guy, not out to actually harm Jimmy, then the conflict that Mae feels completely loses it's effectiveness. With Max going out and telling Mae that he was going to essentially kill her husband, it helped to add a new layer to the championship bout. That's just my two cents. Maybe you disagree, but I don't think the ultimate victory, for both Mae and Jimmy, would have been as good.
A great Boxing film needs a great villain. And the way Max Baer was portrayed, as inaccurate as it may have been, was pitch perfect for what was needed.
I felt that The Great Depression and/or age were ample enough villains.
For me, the portrayal of Baer hurt the movie. It cheapened it. And not just because of how inaccurate it was. Every character was so real, except for Baer, who was almost cartoonish.
Projecting an Ali-type persona (and a pretty lame one at that) onto a 1930's fighter took me out of the movie. They could've shown Baer for the decent, caring guy that he was while simply showing that he was all business once in the ring, without missing a thing. He didn't need to be some bloodthirsty monster in order to pose a very real and ominous threat.
Dragged what otherwise would've been a 9 down to a 7 for me.
As is my opinion about many movies, it was not meant to be a documentary. Rather, drama based on (key words) something that happened.
I found it very successful entertainment. Why so many don't understand that movies aren't factual is beyond me. They're for entertainment, plain and simple. You want historically correct,educational recordings? Go find them. Movies that are not promoted as such...guess what...surprise, surprise...are not, and don't need to be.
edit:
by ChristianDiorScientist» Sat Apr 2 2016 08:12:47 This is a great article about the defamation of dead people through egregious film representation. A film doesn't have to be the history channel, but when it's using real people's names and events I need to see the truth even if the facts have been altered.
'Just read your post, and all I can say, is read my last paragraph. I understand your need to see the truth as do I on occasion. Go get it. I saw no defamation, as I knew I wasn't watching a (once again) documentary. Key word, dramatization, it's a wonderfully entertaining thing...
.....................Sometimes ya gotta wonder....
I'll reciprocate by allowing you to continue with your pompous, holier than thou posts (while looking down your nose, I presume) while I continue to have fun. 💏
.....................Sometimes ya gotta wonder....