Sam said:
Its a "story" (fictional) about the
early days of Apple vs. Microsoft. I
don't even want to talk about it really. Just know it was horrible in
every way possible. If anyone dares to pipe up and say they actually
liked it I swear to you I will unleash such a torrent of rage upon thee
so please don't. Keep it to yourself for your own good.
Ligh-en up Sam! It's not the Learning Channel and it's not the History
Channel. It's Turner, and they just colorized history a little. Partly to
keep the audience interested and partly to squeeze it all into 2 hours.
I enjoyed all of the scenes that take place in Albuquerque. (MITS, the
hookers, Bill getting arrested). :)
You just have to remember that not everyone on this list lives here in
California. In other places it not considered polite to tell people what
they can't think, what they can't say. :) --Doug
The only problem with this is that for the majority of the people who
watched the show, what they saw was reality. We know better,
but they don't. So now people all over have this view of how things
went, and who these people are that at best is inaccurate, and at
worst is blatantly wrong.
A good example of this is the movie Amadeus. A very good and
very well made movie. However it portrays Salieri as what is
basically an evil egotist who actively engaged in some morally
questionable acts against Mozart. When in reality this was not
completely the case. It turns out that the movie is rife with
inaccuracies. However, ask people who've seen the movie what
they think about Salieri, they'll say he was slime.
While I agree that the _intention_ is to entertain, and so artistic
license is used, I think that there is a point where one should be
required to explicitly point out that what they are portraying is not
"historically accurate" . And some might even say that it is
morally wrong to take so much artistic license as to knowingly
make someone appear to be a much worse person than they
actually were just to "move the story along".
George