Understandably when you turn the rights over to a studio to do your story, they pretty much have free reign on what comes into their money-grubbing minds. But the least they could do was represent your main character, Danny, not his wife, authentically. Remember, no Pearl, no story. From the reviewer, and personal accounts, it reads as if this should be an investigative documentary about him, not her. Not some drama cesspool. Furthermore:
But recasting a story just so we can tell ourselves that we've found a hero is too easy. It's the quickest way to convince ourselves that what happened wasn't such a bad thing, that it had redeeming value, that we can close the book on it and move on with our lives. We do it too often -- with television shows about ordinary people with extraordinary powers, with magazine features that extol the "heroes among us" and with our impulse to elevate every story -- think Jessica Lynch, ambushed and wounded in Iraq -- to one of heroism.
is a wonderful side note about heroes and how we label them as often as Sam Adam's does its beer. It's also nice to see an admission of guilt in assisting with the process. What should have been done, is to tell Pitt and Aniston, to piss off and find an indie director who wanted your assistance every step of the way to ensure the validity of Pearl's character.
Best of luck in finding anything more about Mr. Pearl's death. "It is absolutely the business of a journalist." I know it probably hurts to hear that.
