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
- Anthony Geary may return to 'General Hospital' if 'story is interesting'
- See the first trailer for Michael Bay's Benghazi movie
- Did 'Scream' just reveal the killer?
- Cindy Crawford is developing NBC series about fashion in the '80s
- Chris Pine reportedly signed for 'Wonder Woman'
- 'Orange Is the New Black': What happened to Nicky Nichols?
- 'Empire' creator goes behind the scenes of 'American Crime Story'
- Stars go back to work! 'Scandal,' 'Arrow,' 'The Good Wife,' more return to set
- Charlie Hunnam and Excalibur glisten in 'King Arthur' first look photos
- Here are the 2015 games we're looking forward to most
- #50Scoops50Days: Keep up with the latest in fall TV news
- Ashley Madison profiles for TV's most famous adulterers
- Ellie Kemper, Matthew Fox, The VS Angels & More!