Well, the argument is that it wasn't an actual documentary since a few
of the 'facts' presented were contrived, and in a few cases complete
fabrications.
Therefore people argue it should never have won as a Documentary, since
it was not a factual representation of events, and went beyond merely
putting a 'spin' on a documentary.

Then there is the other side that argues that it was factual, and these
things actually did happen in ways similar enough to those depicted, to
warrant their inclusion in the documentary as 'fact'.

It won an Oscar I believe.

-Gel


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Dinowitz [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 

The CFDJ editorial board was asked before the contest what issues had to
be dealt with. New categories, security and proper placement were the
main things that came up. The new categories are there but need tighter
definitions. The security is not there at all (really. I could crack
that system in seconds) and there is/was NO control over proper
placement of items in the right categories. Maybe next time, unless some
other well known CF site doesn't come forward with their own awards
first. ;)

So what was this columbine documentary fiasco?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5

Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more 
resources for the community. 
http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm

                                Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
                                

Reply via email to