I hadn’t questioned the authenticity of the miniseries until I read the readings assigned for today. Now that I look back on the miniseries Simon does put his ideas about the corruption of institutions in the series instead of trying to portray a realistic version of Evan’s book.
In the DVD extra feature interview one of the marines said they wished the series didn’t speak so negatively about the superiors in the unit since it’s wasn’t the same portrayal in the book. Is it because its Simon’s beliefs embedded into the series? Is this fair to Evan?
In the reading Beyond the Choir: An Interview with David Simon, Simon admits that he had to change Evan’s work for the purpose of effective storytelling. In this section of the interview he does praise himself a bit too much. When discussing why he changed Ray Pearson’s speech to “if Sadaam had invested more in the pussy infrastructure of Iraq there wouldn’t be a need to go to war” instead of his NAMBLA speech was because of his obligation to step in as a filmmaker. Personally, I would rather watch the Pearson’s genuine monologue instead of Simon’s version even if it appear to be less funny. Simon appears to think of himself as a filmmaker now instead of a journalist which is a characteristic of himself that he might have lost as he continue to produced miniseries for HBO. Even if Pearson agreed that Simon’s version of his speech would be something he might have said, I feel that this is an example of Simon manipulating the story to produce a series that would be a hit so that Simon can be credited. Or am I just looking too much into this?