My girlfriend bought me all three seasons so far of Narcos on DVD.

It's a great series, but I noticed the character of Judy Moncada is wholly invented. Of course, the cartel sub-boss Moncada was a real guy (and he was murdered at Pablo Escobar's built-to-order prison, just as in the show), yet his "wife" Judy and her "you do this" alpha female attitude is merely a figment of the writers' imagination. No one like her ever called the shots and certainly not to the extent of being pivotal in ending Pablo Escobar's run.

It's funny how so many reviews of Season 2 in particular lauded this "kick-ass" and "strong" female character without realizing she was entirely made-up.

Can you think of other characters (female, gay, transgender, non-white) inserted into "based on a true story" tales to fulfil the diversity agenda?

Not a "true story"- but Morgan Freeman's character in Robin Hood Prince of Thieves is a classic example of this.

Quote: (03-13-2018 08:41 AM)RexImperator Wrote:  

Not a "true story"- but Morgan Freeman's character in Robin Hood Prince of Thieves is a classic example of this.

Similarly, Morgan Freeman being cast as "Red" in the great movie "The Shawshank redemption", is a diversity move, with Freeman himself joking about his nickname "Red", in the movie (originally the Red Stephen King character was an Irish red-hair dude), when answering a question by Dufresne.
Paul Newman was reportedly to be chosen for the Red role, but anyway, Freeman did do a great job on this movie, so, props to him.

Tauriel, that elf-lady from The Hobbit Trilogy.

She wasn't in the original book at all. Inserted into the shit films purely for girl-power reasons. Goes without saying that she was faster, stronger,clever than any man etc.

EDIT: Also not a true story!

Every competent-though-excellent female police officer in any movie, television series or training video.

Black Heimdall, for Thor and the Avengers (Idris Elba).

The new Netflix marvel show is feminist bullshit. Jessica something, I’m more of a DC fan...as a black man I’m afraid to watch black panther for the ammount of pandering they’re doing.....but look films make movies to sell. Ofcourse they’re going to make BS to make women feel strong

Zero Dark Thirty -> supposedly true, color me skeptical. Greatly amplified this chicks role if you ask me.

Rudy had that short guy in it. Also, in The Revenant, DiCaprio's character, Hugh Glass, is not known to have had a Native American wife in real life.

For those that know a bit of aviation history, the story of the Avro Arrow is one that never fails to get Canadian aviation nerds in a lather.

(tl;dr: Canadian aerospace firm in the 50's designs advanced high-altitude interceptor, which was then nixed in favour of buying missile systems from the US. Brain drain from Cdn firms to US defence contractors ensues)

When gov't broadcaster the CBC figured they could use the story to show Canada losing out to the big bad Americans and those awful Conservatives, they came up with The Arrow, a fictionalized account of the story of the Arrow. One of the lead engineers in the show was of course a female.

At the end of the series, they did a 'what happened to them after' series of vignettes on all the leading figures in the project. When it came to the chick, they said something like "although not a true person, (this character) is meant to represent the efforts of all the women who contributed to the project" or some such drivel. Yeah, way to make the coffee Mabel, we couldn't have done it without you.

Telling enough is the cast list: of the top ten billed, the only 2 fictional characters are the females.

This sums it up pretty well:http://www.ggower.com/dief/text/time1.shtml

Quote: (03-13-2018 06:55 PM)Grit Wrote:  

Zero Dark Thirty -> supposedly true, color me skeptical. Greatly amplified this chicks role if you ask me.

It's not true. The chick did not exist, she was a composite of a large number of people. Of course, what John Reed found most amusing about the portrayal was that she was a pain-in-the-ass contrarian, which pretty much can't exist in large bureaucracies:

http://johntreed.net/Zero-Dark-Thirty.html

Quote:Quote:

The goal of the movie makers seems to be to tell the exciting story of a single, young, American woman CIA employee who was the sole driving force making the killing of bin Laden happen. Apparently, there were one or more young women involved but the movie character is not only a composite of many men and women, she gives the impression this was a one-person thing, which it never was. In other words, they took a stock Hollywood story line—the Dirty Harry type low-level person who fights against the brass up above and gets the job done in spite of them. I actually lived that story to an extent in the Army—the fighting the brass up above part. But in the real world, people who do that, like I did or like the various famous whistle-blowers who make the news from time to time, are pulled out of any jobs that matter and made assistant to someone who is not authorized to have an assistant.

That’s not to say there are not some subversives within the CIA or the military trying to actually get stuff done in spite of the bureaucracy—and succeeding—but they must operate like saboteurs or spies. They do not get in the face of the superiors and scream at them in insubordinate ways like Hollywood characters including the “Maya” character played by Jessica Chastain. I chewed out a captain company commander like that once in Vietnam. He kept me from being a platoon leader—I remained an assistant platoon leader which does not exist—and he gave me a 40 on my efficiency report at a time when your career was over if you got below a 97. Indeed, no one I ever met in the military ever heard of a grade below 90 before they met me.

Had Maya done what I did or what she is depicted as doing in the movie, she would have been on the next plane home, given a broom closet for an office then fired after they kept book on her for a judicious period of time so she could not claim it happened because of the altercation.

Let's leave aside the action-movie troping they did on the actual raid: assholes fist-bumping and shit. Again, per John Reed...

Quote:Quote:

On 2/12/13, I read an interview with the SEAL who claims to have shot bin Laden. He confirmed exactly what I just said. He said the movie depicted them talking in the Bin Laden compound when in fact they were totally silent for the simple reason that they did not want a bad guy to know where they were.

He also said they did not celebrate the way the movie kept depicting. In fact, they figured it was a suicide mission and were apporpriately somber from when they were first told they were going on it. In that case, my guess is their demeanor after they got on the choppers to get out of Pakistan was stark terror and ultimately surprise and relief. The guy who shot bin Laden said an emotional goodbye to his wife, who did not know the mission but knew her husband well enough to sense the suicide nature of it, before the mission and silently took what he believed was one last look at his sleeping children before he left. He also said the actual events in the bin Laden compound happened in a much shorter period of time than the movie showed.

...

When special ops people do any mission, it’s sort of slow and quiet in the approach to maintain the element of surprise, but once the shooting starts, you are essentially extremely vulnerable little bunny rabbits—to use the phrase a downed American pilot in the Serbian war used—who need to be rescued by conventional forces ASAP.

The entire cast of Hamilton.

You guys still watch films and tv series? Why?

I watched the film The Lost City of Z. It's a somewhat creative take on the life of explorer Percy Fawcett. However, for the most part, it does stay true to the actual real story, with one blaring exception.

At one point, Fawcett remarks to a very large, public audience that an important source in his research, Manuscript 512 was discovered by his wife, Nina Agnes Paterson, a key character in the film who was in real life, rather irrelevant. Nina, blushes with pride and proceeds to be a pain in the ass wife for the rest of the film, trying to convince her husband to not participate in the advancement of science and global exploration.

Unfortunately for her, Manuscript 512 was discovered by Fawcett himself at the National Library of Rio de Janeiro, which is located on a continent that she never visited.

Her role in his explorations was entirely invented, which is unfortunately, because she did play a role, the role of raising his sons. But, it would be unconscionable to praise a woman for contributing to the life of a man by contributing in a maternal role, so fuck historical fact.

Quote: (03-13-2018 05:06 PM)mikado Wrote:  

Black Heimdall, for Thor and the Avengers (Idris Elba).

I didn't know superheroes existed in real life.

seriously - almost all movies and TV series have their diversity put-ins. You can name literally ANY SERIES OR MOVIE and see it. The thread should rather search for the one exception where the diversity hires were not put in.

'Hidden Figures (2016)'

Quote from The Telegraph;

'In the film, one such figure is lead engineer Paul Stafford, a fictional character created to embody attitudes that were typical at that time.

When real-life mathematician Katherine G Johnson – a black woman – becomes an essential member of his team, his whole world is threatened.'

Kirsten Dunst's character was also fictional;

'Two-time Golden Globe nominee Kirsten Dunst plays Nasa supervisor Vivian Mitchell (again a fictional character created to explore the prejudices the real-life hidden figures faced) as a complex and very real person who encompasses the unspoken bias of the times.'

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/hidden...n-figures/

Kevin Costner's character, the meritocratic 'Al Harrison' wasn't real either, but rather a 'composite of several characters'.

Jesus, I'm only half-way through the Wikipedia 'historical accuracy' sub-title and I've given up already. I haven't seen the film myself, but I hate this sort of interfering with history as I just know that most of the audience will take everything in the film at face value. Honestly, it just weakens the end product. Artistic liberties is one thing, but once you just start creating characters out of thin air for 'reasons' you lose all integrity in my eyes.

Quote: (03-14-2018 05:01 AM)Richard Turpin Wrote:  

'Hidden Figures (2016)'

Quote from The Telegraph;

'In the film, one such figure is lead engineer Paul Stafford, a fictional character created to embody attitudes that were typical at that time.

When real-life mathematician Katherine G Johnson – a black woman – becomes an essential member of his team, his whole world is threatened.'

Kirsten Dunst's character was also fictional;

'Two-time Golden Globe nominee Kirsten Dunst plays Nasa supervisor Vivian Mitchell (again a fictional character created to explore the prejudices the real-life hidden figures faced) as a complex and very real person who encompasses the unspoken bias of the times.'

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/films/hidden...n-figures/

Kevin Costner's character, the meritocratic 'Al Harrison' wasn't real either, but rather a 'composite of several characters'.

Jesus, I'm only half-way through the Wikipedia 'historical accuracy' sub-title and I've given up already. I haven't seen the film myself, but I hate this sort of interfering with history as I just know that most of the audience will take everything in the film as face value. Honestly, it just weakens the end product. Artistic liberties is one thing, but once you just start creating characters out of thin air for 'reasons' you lose all integrity in my eyes.

The funny part about the movie is that the women are actually real - most of them rare mathematical prodigies who were willing to do tedious mostly boring work. Men born with that talent might be unwilling to do that job.

Either way - this is interesting - in the movie they actually made up more cases of racism and even created characters for it. There were some cases of racists there, but it was mostly silent:

http://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfa...n-figures/

Quote:Quote:

Did Katherine Johnson feel the segregation of the outside world while working at NASA?
No. "I didn't feel the segregation at NASA, because everybody there was doing research," says the real Katherine G. Johnson. "You had a mission and you worked on it, and it was important to you to do your job...and play bridge at lunch. I didn't feel any segregation. I knew it was there, but I didn't feel it." Even though much of the racism coming from Katherine's coworkers in the movie seems to be largely made up (in real life she claimed to be treated as a peer), the movie's depiction of state laws regarding the use of separate bathrooms, buses, etc. was very real. African-American computers had also been put in the segregated west section of the Langley campus and were dubbed the "West Computers." -

Those two characters are pure fiction - they were created to show racism, while in reality the most racist thing that happened to those highly intelligent women was a sign that said "colored computers". But even then one of the women took down the sign and even took down the next one someone put up. Afterwards no one bothered to set up another sign and that was it.

But something about the story struck me as odd. I don't want to take away from the abilities of those women - I am sure that they were capable, but somehow I doubt that their pick was purely based on merit as many 18yo geniuses would be giving an arm to work on NASA while doing similar calculations in their sleep.

Quote:Quote:

Kennedy and his vice president, Lyndon Johnson, saw jobs as a vehicle to achieving racial integration and NASA and its contractors were creating 200,000 new jobs in the American South.

Johnson thought southern poverty caused southern racism, and he believed that pouring money into the region could bring the South into the nation’s economic and social mainstream.

Kennedy placed Johnson at the heads of both his National Space Council and the President’s Commission on Equal Employment Opportunity, enabling the vice president to implement the strategy. NASA and its contractors were required to hire blacks, creating upper-level job opportunities that had never been available before to them, well before passage of the Civil Rights Act made equal employment opportunity the law of the land.

NASA created a contractors’ group in Alabama that used its money and influence to make sure African Americans got space jobs. The agency hired Charlie Smoot, called NASA’s “first Negro recruiter” in official histories, to travel the nation making the tough case to persuade black scientists and engineers to move into a South where they faced persecution and less freedom. NASA invited the presidents of the nation’s black colleges to Huntsville in 1963 and opened the agency’s college Co-Op program to blacks. Then, through the early 1960s, the African American scientists, technicians and engineers continued the progress.

I do believe that some diversity pushing was their goal even back then, though the ladies were also hired on merit.

Quote: (03-13-2018 10:04 PM)rudebwoy Wrote:  

Quote: (03-13-2018 05:06 PM)mikado Wrote:  

Black Heimdall, for Thor and the Avengers (Idris Elba).

I didn't know superheroes existed in real life.

Norse mythology, trough is part of real history. Vikings surely didn't imagine a black man guarding the rainbow bridge.

Great idea for a thread btw.

I have an anti-diversity nomination: Schindler's List. This propaganda movie shows the labor camps consisting fully of Jews when in reality there where also large and unignorable amounts of gypsies, homosexuals, handicapped people, communists and political dissidents.

I never watched Hidden Figures. I saw a film cover with fat women on the front and decided to give it a pass.

Bad Ass, the film about the 2010 AC Transit bus fight. The real fight was between a white and black man, but it was changed in the film to a Latino defending a black man from a pair of white skinheads.

The BBC produces scores and scores of production where women are put into super-kick-ass roles and Britain is essentially a 40% black country in some depictions from the 1800s.







WE WAZ QUEENS




WE WAZ ROMANS


WE WAZ ZEUS - the Greek God.

Sure - some of those are mythology, but hey - it's all the same.

The reason for all this change is either to cuck for feminism or open borders - or simply destroy all myths and real historical accounts of the West.

For example - in the TV series Vikings they initially had the usual all-male warriors and some shield-maidens for defensive capacities:



By the final season that changed to 40% female offensive warriors and many women leading armies and tribes.


They even made up crap about all-female units fighting on equal terms with professional soldiers.





The new TV series Britannica around the old British celts and Romans is all about women and diversity.
Especially you see in this vid lanky women take down multiple professional soldiers as if it's nothing.

I don't even blame the black actors - I would play the part myself if cultural marxists hired me to do their shit. Still - over time this will indoctrinate an even greater part of the population and ultimately wipe out all Western identity - and that is the goal after all.

Quote: (03-14-2018 06:23 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

For example - in the TV series Vikings they initially had the usual all-male warriors and some shield-maidens for defensive capacities:

By the final season that changed to 40% female offensive warriors and many women leading armies and tribes.

How did you make it to the final season? I watch the first episode, observed how the writers were bending over backwards to include some unneeded go-girlism completely unnecessary to the plot and in violation of basic biological principles and never proceeded to the second episode.

No regrets.

I still watch it, just for the sake of it to see how it ends. Btw, where the hell is that black queen Margaret from?

Quote: (03-14-2018 06:23 AM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

The BBC produces scores and scores of production where women are put into super-kick-ass roles and Britain is essentially a 40% black country in some depictions from the 1800s.

....

Thank-you.

As a Brit, I was watching this thread waiting for these examples (that I couldn't quite recall the details of) to make an appearance. You posted them better than I could have, saving me the trouble.

For me, it's this historical element that troubles. This is where it crosses the line from being stupid and annoying to becoming something much more sinister.

Another example was another BBC show; '1066; A year to conquer England'. The envoy to William of Normandy was a black man and was suspiciously (to me at the time) given loads of screen-time. Now the fact that he was black (if true) would have been fascinating to me and I would have gone away from the programme having learnt something.

But .....

This is a Q&A with the show's historical consultant from the BBC owned 'History Extra' site;

Q: 'In episode one of 1066, a black character appeared as an envoy to William of Normandy. Is there precedence in history for a black man to have been in this court and in the employ of William?

A: The only near-contemporary source to mention an envoy sent by Duke William is William of Jumièges, writing shortly after the conquest, probably in the early 1070s. He says: “Harold immediately seized Edward’s kingdom, thus perjuring the fealty he had sworn to the duke. The duke then instantly dispatched messengers to Harold urging him to renounce this act of folly and with worthy submission keep the faith which he had pledged with an oath.” Neither this nor any later accounts say anything specific about identity, let alone the ethnicity, of the ambassador.'


A simple 'No' would have done!

https://www.historyextra.com/period/norm...r-england/