The other night, the History Channel’s primetime offering was Forrest Gump. Now, I realize there are only so many documentaries about Hitler to fill the programming day, but Forrest Gump? It’s not 1994 anymore, so I won’t rehash the debate about whether or not FG is a good movie (hint: it’s not), but it’s definitely bad history. What’s next, explaining Watergate by showing the movie Dick? (It’s a wonderful satire, but also very bad history.) Explaining the Elizabethan Era by showing Shakespeare in Love? And if (as seems inconceivable), the History Channel ever runs out of World War II documentaries, will they start showing Disney’s Bedknobs & Broomsticks? C’mon, gang, I know it seems appealing to chase ratings with crowd-pleasing movie favorites, but ultimately, compromising your mission and your reputation for historical accuracy just for a quick ratings fix seems self-defeating and stupid. But then, as a wise historical figure once said, “Stupid is as stupid does.”
Posted December 18 2007 — 5:55 PM EST
- Katy Perry's Left Shark returns for Shark Week
- Joni Mitchell's attorney recomments permanent conservator
- Can’t Buy Me Love actress Amanda Peterson remembered by her mother
- Robert De Niro's 'The Comedian' finds a new director
- Who should play the young Han Solo in the 'Star Wars' spinoff? Vote now!
- Elodie Yung cast as Elektra in 'Daredevil' season 2
- Two more networks pull Bill Cosby reruns
- They look like THAT now? See some of the latest child stars all grown up
- Channing Tatum in 'Magic Mike XXL' leads our quip picks
- Reel-to-real couples: 12 relationships on-screen and off
- 'Back to the Future' turns 30: See the cast, then and now
- 'Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice': 6 EW exclusive photos
- Khloé Kardashian, Paul Rudd, Taylor Swift & More!