The problem with this movie isn’t that it contains some fiction, it’s that it took a very interesting true story and completely replaced it with a much less interesting and completely fictional parade of cliches.
Just guessing, maybe the professor was supposed to represent Maynard Amerine. Hey, now that I think about it, this movie was probably a Gilligan’s Island metaphor – Mary Ann, Ginger, et al!
The Toronto International Film Festival has exhibited a fondness for this type of movie in the past (Mondovino screened here), so I will look for it for next year.
I completely agree. I am certainly someone who can appreciate the occasional fluffy and unserious movie, or one that takes large liberties in claiming to be “based on a true story,” but it was disappointing that the story they fabricated was so much less interesting than the real stories. Sure, there were pretty scenes and a few nice looking people, but it takes more than that to hold my interest. Doesn’t Hollywood usually bend the truth to make the movie more interesting, rather than less interesting?
I have much higher hopes for the movie that has Spurrier and Taber involved.
I agree that the movie was largely fiction and that I would like to see a movie that is closer to what actually happened. But could that movie have the blond girl and the brunette?
On a side note, Bottle Shock had to have created a problem for Kamen’s project. There is a recent example of a pair of “based on a true story” movies are released in quick succession (Capote) where the 2nd one did very badly. My understanding is that Kamen’s screenplay was well underway when Bottle Shock began shooting, but the Bottle Shock release had to have given them a bit of pause.