Sunday, September 17, 2023

Thoughts on HBO’s Winning Time, Revisited

So, Winning Time basically wrapped up in two seasons, and the final episode had an epilogue after Boston won Game 7 of the 1984 NBA Finals, which basically meant that Winning Time was getting cancelled.  Sure enough, HBO and David Zaslav decided to cancel Winning Time, so that means there won’t be a third season on their network.

So how good was it?  Let’s break it down.

I guess season 1 kind of had me hyped, more than I probably should have been.  Season 2 I felt had its good moments, but it was more disappointing overall, especially the finale. 


Sean Patrick Small and Quincy Isaiah play Larry Bird and Magic Johnson on HBO’s Winning Time.
(Photo: HBO, via The Chicago Sun-Times)

Winning Time’s Michael Chiklis and Sean Patrick Small as Red Auerbach and Larry Bird, in a rather humorously absurd scene of them both smoking cigars in the locker room after having won the 1981 championship.
(Photo: HBO, via Variety)

Positives

1) The acting was really on point.  The portrayal of the players really looked like the players, at least up close and if you don’t pay attention to players’ heights.  Also, their personalities seemed to really mirror their real-life counterparts, especially Quincy Isaiah’s portrayal of Magic Johnson, Sean Patrick Small’s portrayal of Larry Bird.  They were able to show their characters as complex, interesting, and complicated.  The only real egregious acting was Jason Clarke’s absurd, over-the-top portrayal of Jerry West, but it was toned down in Season 2.

2) Season 1 of Winning Time was bold, ambitious, and it didn’t care who it offended, even if they did.  I found it both refreshing and shocking at times, but it often tended to straddle the line of boldly interesting and downright problematic.  They really didn’t give a hoot about if people would like their show or not, they made it.  

Tracy Letts as Jack McKinney.  Tracy Letts did a masterful job of portraying the late Lakers’ head coach, Jack McKinney on Winning Time.
(Photo: HBO, via Variety)

3) I really liked how Season 1 went into some nitty-gritty details, some which I didn’t even know about prior to the start of the show.  That it actually made me look up head coach Jack McKinney, and for the most part, they seemed to do a really good and accurate job of portraying his time with the Lakers.  They emphasized that he was an important member of Showtime and helped engineer it, and he could’ve been remembered more had it not been for his untimely, gruesome bike accident that he suffered early in the 1979-80 NBA season that almost cost his life and caused his significant memory loss.  I also liked how they covered the Lakers’ interest in Jerry Tarkanian and how an incident involving a close friend of his led him to turn down the Lakers’ job and to stay at UNLV.  

Tracy Letts did a tremendous job of playing Jack McKinney in both seasons.  I also loved how in Season 2 that Jack McKinney shows up, tells his friend and coach Paul Westhead that he’ll expose him, and then he goes right back to inquire about his food, as if nothing happened.

4) The tensions they set up made for terrific entertainment.  Magic and Kareem, Magic and Norm Nixon, Magic and Paul Westhead, Magic and Larry Bird, Magic and Pat Riley (spoiler alert those who haven’t seen Season 2), Jerry Buss and Red Auerbach, you name it.  They were a master of weaving in tension, and it was great to see the characters at loggerheads with each other, especially with stakes on the line, and a championship up for grabs.

If you want to blame a legitimate reason for Winning Time’s cancellation, Jason Clarke’s obscenely odd portrayal of Jerry West might be a good place to start.  His portrayal of West looked like a downright fabrication and an exaggeration taken to extreme lengths, and his Season 1 portrayal was equal parts humorous and absurd, but also grossly vulgar and offensive to the real life Jerry West, especially when there really isn’t any indication that the real-life counterpart actually behaved that way.
(Photo: Warrick Page/HBO, via Los Angeles Times)

Negatives

1) Season 1 Jerry West was way too outrageous and absurd.  Jason Clarke’s portrayal of Jerry West was to portray him as a vulgar, cartoonish, resentful caricature of a man that loathed his NBA experiences, to the point where he would be humorously cursing up a storm, and one scene in season 1 has him having angry sex with his wife, which was completely outlandish and farcical.  As a basketball fan, I do not regard these sex scenes as essential to the plot.  As a fan of arts and entertainment, I found the scene absurd and kind of amusing, but also distracting, because it takes away from basketball.  Also, to me, Clarke’s season 1’s portrayal of him just looked like a completely irresponsible and reckless portrayal of Jerry West, because there doesn’t seem to be anything that would actually indicate that he did half the things he was shown to do in season 1.  Sure, that it’s a dramatization, but that doesn’t make their portrayal of him any less reckless.

2) Season 2 Magic Johnson whined way too much.  As fun as it was to watch him play on that series, there were some moments where it was really grating to hear that much whining.  It’s clear he and Paul Westhead didn’t get along in Season 2, and Westhead certainly overstepped his boundaries, but he did a lot of whining to Cookie in the second season.  Some less time whining on the phone would’ve been nice, and they probably should’ve established Magic and Cookie’s relationship better to ensure that the audience would root for both of them to be together, because for 1 1/2 seasons, it seems like their relationship was forced upon the audience, as it seemed like they were estranged acquaintances before Magic flew down to San Diego to meet up with Cookie in person.

3) Season 2 Pat Riley was portrayed as losing too much when initially hired, but in looking up his Basketball-Reference, that wasn’t actually true.  The 1981-82 Lakers actually reeled off four straight wins after Westhead’s firing and ballooned their winning record to 11-4, as that would’ve been in November 1981, and it would be months before Riley lost two games in a row, which would be in early January, and the most he’s lost in a row that season took place in the months of February and January.  That said, the Lakers did finish 57-25, and went on to become the 1982 NBA champions.

4) In regards to Season 2, Honey Kaplan (or Honey Buss) is not a real person, but rather is an amalgam based on real people.  But it’s shown that Jerry Buss was kind of lecherous and maybe not a great person, and he  was sued by multiple women in real life, so I’d rather they show real people rather than fictional characters that were based on real people in a show that is about real people. 

5) They missed a golden, comedic opportunity to explain away how they got James Worthy, as they immediately just put in only a single sentence, with Jerry West saying that Bill Sherman gave them a gift.  In real life, the Lakers traded Don Ford and a first round pick to be named later (which became Chad Kinch) for Butch Lee and the future 1st overall pick of the 1982 NBA Draft, James Worthy.

Normally, bad teams would get the first overall pick, but this is important because the Lakers had just won the 1982 championship, so they were the best team in basketball, and they then got the best player in the NBA draft.  That trade was essentially the Lakers trading away a middling role player (Ford), a first round pick that became a future benchwarmer (Kinch) to Cleveland for a little used, non-essential reserve on their 1980 championship team (1981) and…a future first round pick that became an All-Star, key player to their NBA championship teams, and future Hall of Famer in James Worthy!  

That was a terrible trade for the Cleveland Cavaliers, by the way, and an amazing trade for the Lakers, of course.  Also, I’m wondering, didn’t anyone protect their picks back then?!?  Who would allow themselves to give away future top five picks, let alone future first overall picks?

6) They zoomed too quickly through the 1982 and 1983 NBA Finals.   Also, Moses Malone ended up being a Hall of Fame center, as he was also on the 1981 Rockets’ team that beat the Lakers in the playoffs, and he was on the 1983 76ers’ championship team, so they should’ve made the media put Kareem and Moses Malone on more equal footing, as both should’ve been viewed as great players on the show.

7) They made the egregious error of ending Season 2 on a loss to Boston in the 1984 NBA Finals, even though the latter really did happen, especially when it was not guaranteed that they would be picked up for Season 3 (which they weren’t).  If a show is in danger of getting cancelled, they should always end the final episode on a win.  

While the final episode was well crafted for the most part (with the exception of Claire Rothman’s absurd yelling, which was extremely over the top), and the NBA Finals sequence really had me on my seat on edge, I thought that should’ve been a couple of episodes prior to the final episode.  That they ended the episode on a loss and rolled an epilogue really cheated viewers of the Lakers’ “Winning Time” experience, as the Lakers won 5 NBA titles in the 1980s, and we were only shown two of them.  That said, I was really concerned how they would handle Len Bias, as I was concerned that they would’ve handled that inappropriately. 

Other Thoughts:

In my opinion, Season 2 should’ve wrapped up in one of two ways.  They should’ve either had season 2 close with either the conclusion of the 1982 NBA Finals, or with the conclusion of the 1985 NBA Finals, and both of those would’ve resulted in Lakers’ wins, which would give fans the joy of the “Winning Time” experience, instead of having it seem like it was more of a Larry Bird, Red Auerbach, and Boston Celtics’ series without us viewers knowing it.  (And man, their portrayal of Larry Bird was a really impressively mean and talented basketball player that really owned 1984!)    

If they were to have delved into the 1985 season, they could’ve had Westhead fired sooner in the season rather than linger in the summer (even though Jason Segal is a really good actor, but Westhead was fired 11 games into the 1981-82 season), had less of the Jerry Buss-Honey Kaplan story, and end season 2 by showing the conclusion of the 1985 NBA Finals, which would’ve showed the Lakers ending that on a win, with the intention of showing the 1986 and 1987 NBA Finals for season 3. 

The other way would’ve been to show much more of the 1982 NBA Finals, and have them winning the 1982 NBA Finals as season 2’s finale.  Did we really need to fast forward through one of their championships?  By doing so, it seems as like they robbed the viewers a chance to really get a view of how tough that journey was and to really enjoy the title as much as they did.

Also a minor pet peeve, couldn’t they have shown Danny Ainge more, who did play for the Boston Celtics in that era, and would go on to become their championship winning GM?  As a fan of the Chicago Bulls growing up, I remember Ainge was a pesky role player that would get into some altercations with opposing players, and he was also a solid role player on some of those 1980s Celtics’ teams.  He is an interesting figure and that could’ve been mined for potentially some source of extra humor.  Also, I would’ve loved if they had shown a young Bill Simmons rooting for them too, even if he were just a fan in the crowd back then, since they also had someone portray Jack Nicholson on this show.  A potentially missed comedic angle somewhere in there, I think.

I’m also not sure how I feel about the alternating cuts of Lakers’ people chanting F*** Boston, and Celtics’ people chanting Beat LA in Season 2.  It was equal parts humorous, but also absurd and cheesy at the same time.

Winning Time’s Season 1 Grade: B (3.5 out of 5)

Winning Time’s Season 2 Grade: C- (1.5 out of 5)

Winning Time’s Overall Grade (Both Seasons): C+ (2.5 out of 5)

So essentially, what I’m saying is I liked season 1, low key thought season 2 could’ve been better and wasn’t as good as it could’ve been, and overall, it was okay.  So, I’m giving the show a mixed review grade overall.  Fans on Twitter were really down that there won’t be a Season 3.  

From a TV perspective, I found this show to be entertaining, though it certainly has its ups and downs, but I think I’m a little burned out from watching this show, so maybe we all could use a break.  But as an avid basketball fan, I really do think they should’ve made sure that they could have aired all aspects of the Lakers’ Showtime era, as it was a missed opportunity to show the Lakers in years 1985 to 1991, and also maybe later to show other eras and teams as well.

For those that are wondering, here is the key to my scale.

Scale:

5.0 - A or A+

4.5 - A-

4 - B+

3.5 - B

3 - B-

2.5 - C+

2 - C

1.5 - C-

1 - D+

0.5 - D

0 - D- or lower

Anyways, that is my review of Winning Time, a TV show that aired on HBO for two seasons in 2022 and 2023.  If a different network picks them up for season 3, maybe I’ll give it a watch, but it’s uncertain and probably doubtful if that’ll happen.  Thanks for reading this article and thanks for reading.

Wednesday, August 2, 2023

Iask.ai Reviews My Fourth Album, The Time Jump

 Lastly, I asked iask.ai to review my fourth album, The Time Jump.  Though they didn’t seem to list any of the tracks and were missing some key details, I do appreciate their positive review of my fourth album, The Time Jump.  Here is what they said:

The album cover of my fourth album, The Time Jump.
(Photo: Amazon)

So here is what iask.ai wrote in their review of my fourth album, The Time Jump:


(Photos: iask.ai)

Definitely, it pleases me that they seem to like my fourth album, The Time Jump, and they called it “an impressive music album that showcases the artist’s talent and creativity.”  I also enjoyed that they seemed to enjoy it thoroughly, and it is a great endorsement for this album.

In fact, you can listen to it online on Spotify, YouTube, Pandora, and other online stores today.

Here is a link: 

So in total, iask.ai’s AI machine seemed to really enjoy Fun Elevator Music and The Time Jump, was not nearly as keen on Call For A Celebration, and doesn’t seem to know my second album, Hoopin’ and Beatmakin’ exists.  

Also, if I were to recommend listeners to one or two of my albums, I would also choose Fun Elevator Music and The Time Jump, and I’d have to say, AI did a good job of reviewing my albums.

Anyways, this was fun, and thanks for reading.

Iask.ai Reviews My Third Album, Call For A Celebration

 Iask.ai had praised my first album when I typed in “Review The Offseason Hobbyist’s Fun Elevator Music music album,” but it had no response when I asked it to review my second album.

I was initially only going to put on three albums, with The Time Jump planned for the third one, but when the 2019 St. Louis Blues won the Stanley Cup in the NHL, I was inspired to make another music album.
(Photo: Amazon)

Sadly, they were not quite as kind in reviewing my third album, as they gave it mixed reviews, but I do understand where they’re coming from.

Here’s what they said about my third album, Call For A Celebration:




(Photos: iask.ai

 According to www.iAsk.ai Ask Ai Search Engine:

The Offseason Hobbyist's Call For A Celebration is a music album that was released on [insert release date]. The album features [insert number of tracks] tracks and is the [insert number] studio album by The Offseason Hobbyist.

Tracklist:
1. [Track 1]
2. [Track 2]
3. [Track 3]
4. [Track 4]
5. [Track 5]
6. [Track 6]
7. [Track 7]
8. [Track 8]
9. [Track 9]
10. [Track 10]

The album has received mixed reviews from both critics and fans alike. Some praise the album for its unique sound and experimental approach, while others criticize it for being too disjointed and lacking cohesion.

One of the standout tracks on the album is "Track 1," which showcases The Offseason Hobbyist's signature blend of genres, combining elements of rock, electronic, and hip-hop. The track features catchy melodies, intricate production, and thought-provoking lyrics.

Another notable track is "Track 5," a slow-burning ballad that highlights the band's ability to create emotional and introspective music. The song is characterized by its haunting vocals, atmospheric instrumentation, and poignant lyrics.

However, not all tracks on the album resonate with listeners. "Track 3" has been criticized for its repetitive structure and lack of originality, while "Track 8" fails to make a lasting impression due to its generic sound and uninspired lyrics.

Overall, The Offseason Hobbyist's Call For A Celebration is an ambitious album that showcases the band's willingness to experiment with different genres and sounds. While it may not be a cohesive or universally acclaimed release, it offers glimpses of brilliance and demonstrates the band's potential for growth and evolution in their future work.

In conclusion, The Offseason Hobbyist's Call For A Celebration is a music album that elicits mixed reactions from listeners. It features standout tracks that highlight the band's strengths, but also includes some forgettable moments. Fans of The Offseason Hobbyist may appreciate the album for its experimental nature, while others may find it lacking in certain areas.

Top 3 Authoritative Reference Publications or Domain Names Used in Answering this Question:
1. [Publication/Domain Name 1]
2. [Publication/Domain Name 2]
3. [Publication/Domain Name 3]”
-iask.ai
Their previous review of Fun Elevator Music would be considered a generally favorable review, iask.ai’s review of Call For A Celebration were undoubtedly mixed.
Since I have a track list of my own songs, Here’s what they would be.
Tracklist:
1. One For The Ages
2. Call For A Celebration
3. Comin’ In Waves
4. Bring It Home
5. Keep This Bangin’
6. Lay It On Thick
7. Making The Climb
8. Making The Climb, Pt. 2
9. At The Game
10. We Finally Won!
11. We Finally Won! (The Extended Version)
___
They didn’t quite get all of the details right, and it’s kind of an imperfect review from them, since there are no actual vocals on this album, and it’s electronic.  But they do sort of capture the essence of what they were trying to say, that it boils down to that my third album was ambitious, but at times repetitive (which admittedly was kind of true).
In analyzing iask.ai’s review of my third album, they would have given “One For The Ages” and “Keep This Bangin’” glowing reviews, but they came down hard on “Comin’ In Waves” and “Making The Climb, Pt. 2.”   That they came down hard on my third track was surprising, but the latter was not, as the eighth track of that album was very similar to the seventh.  
There were some tracks I liked significantly better than others, especially in a re-listen.  (Honestly, to me, the sixth song I made on the my third album, “Lay It On Thick” was what I would feel was the weakest track of this album, and I probably wouldn’t have included the track it if I made this album now.). 
I don’t exactly disagree with their assertion that this album was kind of mid, even if it was of the kind of fun variety, but the criticism still cuts deep. 
Anyways, this was another edition of iask.ai reviews one of my albums.  Thanks for reading.

Iask.ai Reviews My First Album, Fun Elevator Music

I was curious to know what AI thought of my music that I had written and performed as The Offseason Hobbyist.  After having visited the website chords.tv, where they posted AI reviews of some of my songs, I was curious to know what an AI review of my album would be like.  Since there were a surprising lack of music reviews on my albums (which may be a good or bad thing, or other), I decided what if AI reviewed my albums?  I went to iask.ai, and they had some answers.

The album cover of my hand drawn debut album, Fun Elevator Music that I first released on August 31st, 2018 (first through Stem, and later re-uploaded and re-published through Routenote.)
(Photo: Amazon)

Recently, I asked iask.ai a question, to review my first album.  Here is what they said:



(Photos: iask.ai)

In case if you couldn’t read the screenshots, here is what they wrote when I asked them to write a review of my first album:

 According to www.iAsk.ai Ask Ai Search Engine:

The Offseason Hobbyist's Fun Elevator Music is a music album that was released on [insert release date]. The album features a collection of elevator music tracks that are designed to create a relaxing and enjoyable atmosphere. Elevator music, also known as Muzak, is a genre of background music that is commonly played in elevators, shopping malls, and other public spaces.

The Offseason Hobbyist's Fun Elevator Music album consists of [insert number of tracks] tracks, each with its own unique style and arrangement. The tracks are composed using a combination of instruments such as piano, strings, and synthesizers, creating a soothing and melodic sound. The tempo of the music is generally slow and steady, providing a calming effect to the listener.

One of the key features of elevator music is its ability to create a pleasant ambiance without being too intrusive or distracting. The Offseason Hobbyist's Fun Elevator Music album achieves this by utilizing soft melodies and gentle rhythms that blend seamlessly into the background. The music is designed to be unobtrusive, allowing individuals to carry on conversations or engage in other activities without being disturbed.

The album is perfect for various settings where a relaxed atmosphere is desired. It can be played in waiting rooms, offices, restaurants, or even at home during moments of relaxation. The Offseason Hobbyist's Fun Elevator Music provides a soothing backdrop that helps to reduce stress and promote a sense of tranquility.

The production quality of the album is top-notch, with each track being meticulously crafted to ensure a smooth listening experience. The instrumentation is well-balanced, and the sound engineering ensures that every instrument can be heard clearly without overpowering one another. The overall mix is clean and polished, enhancing the overall enjoyment of the music.

While elevator music may not be everyone's cup of tea, The Offseason Hobbyist's Fun Elevator Music album serves its purpose exceptionally well. It delivers exactly what it promises – a collection of relaxing and enjoyable tracks that create a pleasant ambiance. Whether you are looking to unwind after a long day or create a soothing atmosphere in a public space, this album is a great choice.

In conclusion, The Offseason Hobbyist's Fun Elevator Music album is a well-produced collection of elevator music tracks that excel in creating a relaxing and enjoyable atmosphere. Its soft melodies and gentle rhythms make it perfect for various settings where a calm ambiance is desired. If you are a fan of elevator music or simply looking for some soothing background music, this album is definitely worth checking out.

Top 3 Authoritative Reference Publications or Domain Names Used in Answering this Question:
1. AllMusic.com
2. Pitchfork.com
3. RollingStone.com” - iask.ai

Well, I’m definitely pleased about iask.ai’s rave review of my first album!   While there have been questions about AI, the AI reviewer was very articulate and measured in its response, and I definitely appreciate the love they showed towards my first album.

Just a reminder, you can listen to my album on Spotify, Pandora, iTunes, YouTube, or any other online platform it is on, and you can find it on https://open.spotify.com/album/1B0GhHr6VJsUXn9f0F3i6A


Tuesday, April 25, 2023

If You Haven’t Already, You Should Listen to Roundball Ramble

If you haven’t heard already, you guys should listen to NBA super fan, Corban Ford’s podcast, The Roundball Ramble with Corban Ford!  My brother, Richard Lu was on it, and they talked about some NBA basketball in this episode.  You guys should give this a listen.




Wednesday, August 31, 2022

How Much Do Leeway Should We Give TV Networks In Depicting Real Life People That Are Based On a True Story?

Jason Clarke as Jerry West in HBO's hit TV show, Winning Time: The Rise of the Lakers Dynasty.  Clarke's manic, aggressive, and furious portrayal have won him both fans of the TV show, and also perhaps enemies from those that worked for the Lakers in the 1980s.
(Photo: Warrick Page/HBO, via Los Angeles Times)

More and more this year, people have been tuning to the glamorized, sensationalized storytelling of semi-autobiographic depictions of real-life subjects that are based on true stories.  Only that more TV networks decide to make wild exaggerations and some really bold choices that teeter the line of audacious storytelling that make for good television, and towards being absurdly unethical.

Case in point, exhibit A is where in Winning Time: The Rise of the Lakers Dynasty, Jason Clarke portrays Hall of Fame basketball player, and former coach and general manager Jerry West on the Showtime Lakers TV show.  On the television show, Jerry West is portrayed as an angry, pessimistic, foul-mouthed individual, and it really leans into this persona for humorous purposes, although there are some touching moments where we get glimpses into his sadness and trauma due to his upbringing and failures to defeat the Boston Celtics as a player.

The real life person that is Jerry West and many of the actual former Los Angeles Lakers’ players and members were said to have very upset at the HBO’s portrayal of the fictionalized version of Jerry West, but HBO stood their ground, saying that it is a dramatization, which gives them the creativity and license to portray Jerry West to their liking.

Wood Harris gave a riveting, nuanced complex portrayal of the beleaguered Spencer Haywood, whose tortured mind state and battles with drug addiction come to a head during the 1980 NBA Finals on HBO's hit TV show, Winning Time.
(Photo: HBO, via MEAWW)

Wood Harris gave Spencer Haywood a nuanced portrayal of a hardened, veteran basketball player that has dealt with having fought the judicial system and NBA front offices’ retaliation of allowing high school players to enter the league, as well as dealing with drug addiction.  One particular end to an episode was rather shocking, as the fictionalized version of Haywood threatened the Lakers right after they dismissed him from their team during the NBA Finals, but the actual version of Spencer Haywood was said to be okay with the TV show portrayal, and was said to have liked Wood Harris’ portrayal of him, so all is well in that regards.

Rachel Deloache Williams (on the left) is portrayed on Inventing Anna by Katie Lowes (on the right), and Rachel Deloache Williams was less than pleased with her portrayal on Netflix's TV show.
(Photo: Getty Images/Netflix, via BBC)

Now, in exhibit B, Vanity Fair’s editor and writer Rachel Deloache Williams wrote a book called, “My Friend Anna: The True Story of a Fake Heiress,” which was about her having been friends with Anna Sorokin, who had pretended to be an heiress named Anna Delvey, and then sold the rights to HBO, and it inspired Netflix to create a hit TV show, “Inventing Anna,” which was created by Shonda Rhimes.

Unfortunately, while Inventing Anna has become popular, and has notable actors such as Veep’s Anna Chlumsky, Inventing Anna had somehow used Rachel Deloache Williams’ material, and it was said that it had spun it around to portray Rachel Deloache Williams in an unfavorable light, as it may have done so dishonestly.  Nevertheless, it seems that creator Shonda Rhimes made a rather curious choice to paint Rachel Deloache Williams this way, which has now paved way to Rachel Deloache Williams’ lawsuit as she is suing both Netflix and Inventing Anna for taking too many liberties and for their purportedly malicious, dishonest, and false portrayal of her.  (That is between them, that's all I'll have to say about that.)

I’m well aware that Jerry West is a Hall of Fame basketball player that won with the Lakers as a player, and he also won as a general manager of the Lakers.  But I don’t know Jerry West as a person, and I don’t personally know anyone that was involved with the Netflix TV show.  Therefore, since I don’t have firsthand knowledge of how things went behind the scenes, that’s between them.

TV networks easily can say that it’s based on a true story or that it is for dramatization.  But there’s a line between audacious storytelling, and going too far and crossing over to the point where it’s unethical.  Inventing Anna definitely seems like the latter, where it uses material from Rachel Deloache Williams’ book, and then the show makes it seem like she’s just as bad as Anna was or worse.

TV networks have millions and billions of dollars, and they can easily take a real life person and materials from them and paint them in a negative way without their permission, and be able to win court cases because they have an endless pit of money, and they can afford the most expensive lawyers.  Still, I feel like it would be better if they were to take a more ethical approach instead.  It feels weird that Rachel Deloache Williams was a victim of Anna’s scheme, and Netflix chose to paint Rachel in a negative light anyways.  That seems like gas-lighting.  Instead, if they were to choose to do that for storytelling purposes, maybe they should’ve not used her name, and come up with an amalgam character instead, like maybe have the character be named Francesca Billingsley, or something.

As for the HBO show Winning Time, I feel very conflicted about Jerry West’s portrayal on the show.  On one hand, it was comedic and the fictionalized portrayal of West’s extremely vulgar and over-the-top sensibilities made him both humorous and edgy, which keeps viewers like myself on their toes.  I feel like their portrayal of him was both fun and also kind of unethical, but their unauthorized biography and fanciful portrayal of Jerry West is a rather fun one, albeit also over the top.

On the other hand, if he wasn’t vulgar or this angry or pessimistic in real life, then it feels like an exaggerated, slightly dishonest portrayal that was just done to humor me at the expense of the real life Jerry West.  I must say, Winning Time is kind of a guilty pleasure type of show, but I do understand why real life Lakers people that lived the Showtime era would be extremely upset at HBO’s portrayal of Jerry West on the show.

Jonah Hill plays the likable and intelligent, but at times socially inept intellectual named Peter Brand that manages to become the assistant GM of a Major League baseball team, the Oakland A's in the hit movie, Moneyball.
(Photo: Sqspcdn, via The 42)

At least with Moneyball, when Paul DePodesta didn’t want involvement or have his name in the movie when they chose to hire Jonah Hill over Demetri Martin (both very good actors), they at least accommodated his request, and they had Jonah Hill play an amalgam character named Peter Brand.  That way, creating a fictitious, amalgam character can give actors the license to freely play their character without the worry of harming the actual person that lived this role in real life.

There has to be a happy medium between a sanitized version of real life events, and absurdly, dishonest and extremely exaggerated portrayals of that.  A sanitized version of real life events feel dishonest in a completely different way, as that would be as if they are trying to clean up and tidy events or portray bad events as if they had never happened.  

Most television viewers don't want ham-fisted, overly sanitized autobiographies.  They want and crave the juicy stuff, the tidbits people want to hide away from the public, which is why Winning Time exists, to satiate those desires for people.  At the same time, the stories we are telling are about real people, or are at least dramatized versions of that, which may come awfully close to crossing the line, if it doesn't quite do so.  But some TV networks may opt to tell a story in such an overly sensationalized way that it may stray too far from the truth or may make up events altogether, and put it neatly under the umbrella of "dramatization," a creative license that allows them to fictionalize certain or whole events altogether while portraying their story as "based on a true story."

In the future, if real life people would like their stuff to be made by movies and TV shows, then they ought to make sure that they instill clauses that give them oversight and the right to refuse how a character portrayal of them would come across on the big screen.  Otherwise, without such clauses, this may give TV networks free reign to paint people as positively, negatively, or as vulgar and absurd as they want to paint them, which could come at some people’s expense.

Of the TV shows I have mentioned, I have not seen Inventing Anna, nor do I have plans to.  I have seen Winning Time: The Rise of the Lakers Dynasty, and if you are willing to overlook the absurdities and vulgarities and take it in stride and just know you are watching a show that is full of comedy, drama, and action, then you may be in for a treat.  I'd say Winning Time was a solid (if not perfect) TV show.  Yes, some of the portrayals are absurd, outlandish, and over the top, but they go really in depth with some of the characters, and they do know how tell and weave a good story.  I'd even go so far as to say it's worth a watch.

That said, TV networks should have a crumb of a responsibility to tell their stories as honestly and accurately as possible.  If they don't feel obligated or tethered to real-life subjects themselves, they at least owe it to the viewers to tell the stories to make sure that it closely mirrors real life.