If you were choosing the parts of Game Change to turn into an HBO movie, why would you decide to tell the story of Steve Schmidt when you could tell the story of John Edwards? … I smell Hollywood Liberalism! It’s fun for leftish industry types to mock Sarah Palin. But the Edwards incident is deeply embarrassing–to much of the left, and the press–even though it’s a much more dramatic, complex tale. …
reminded me. There’s more than one way to control the message. How you cover the story isn’t nearly as important as the stories you decide to cover or not to cover.
Who is Steve Schmidt?
Senior campaign strategist and advisor to John McCain during the 2008 presidential campaign.
If you’re doing a movie about the 2008 election, isn’t he more important than Edwards?
On the Democratic side, it was about Clinton and Obama.
They might be doing something separate about the Edwards campaign. That said, it’s definitely worth turning into a movie, if the memoirs of John Edwards’ chief ex-toady Andrew Young are worth anything.
I read that book, The Politician. The most interesting character there is Bunny Mellon.
Janis
I think you point out something that should be noted. The movie is getting criticized for not being faithful to the book, or reality. However, the fact of the matter is that it’s a movie about mcCain, Palin and the campaign manager.
If they want to make a movie about Slimeball Edwards, make a movie about him. but there is only so much time to cover the intended characters and plot line.
People will go to movies about people they love or hate. Palin fits that. Edwards does not. Besides, there is no happy ending in an Edwards movie, though you could have some sex scenes, and that sells.
Steve
Good point! A very minor event or incidental person can become ‘famous’ by just being noted and dwelled on in the media, even if it’s just through utube exposure .