MovieChat Forums > Rescue Dawn (2007) Discussion > Angry Family Members: The Truth

Angry Family Members: The Truth


Several posts have been made asking why Gene DeBruin's family members are angry about Gene's portrayal in Rescue Dawn.

I am a relative of Gene DeBruin's and I'd like to take this opportunity to explain why our family is upset.

The majority of the early promotional pieces for this movie tout it as a "true story." Example: http://rescuedawn.mgm.com/ ("This summer experience the incredible true story of one man's fight for freedom.") Some movie reviews have been posted under the title of "documentary." This leads people to believe that the movie is factual and that the characters are factual. However, the movie is not truthful. In many instances, it does not even closely recount the book upon which it is based: Escape From Laos, written by Dieter Dengler himself.

If you know the facts behind the story, it quickly becomes apparent that Herzog did not do his research for this movie, nor did the performers who have respresented the real POWs in the movie. In fact, Herzog, ignored repeated attempts on the part of my family to discuss the character of Gene DeBruin. We offered to provide Herzog with the facts about Gene. We offered to consult with him - free of charge. We emailed him, called him, wrote him letters. All were ignored.

Instead, he created a completely fictionalized chacter that is "based" on the real person Gene DeBruin and used Gene's name without out permission. The fictionalized character completely defames the real Gene. When challenged by our family, Rescue Dawn, promoted as true, suddenly changed to fiction. This was an interesting shift that left my family without legal recourse.

Our contention is that if Herzog wanted to make a documentary, then he and the performers should have done their homework and made it a true documentary. If Herzog wanted to make a work of fiction, then he should have dropped the "based on a true story" approach and not promoted it as a true story. He needed to make his intention clear, rather than riding both sides of the rail. His mixing and matching of fact and fiction has had a very sad and troubling result.

Gene DeBruin was a kind, highly intelligent, gentle man with a solid sense of morality. He wasn't perfect, but he was no idiot, either. His mother was always amazed how he earned so many A's in school without hardly cracking a book. He loved baseball, hunting, fishing, and the out of doors. He graduated from the University of Montana with a degree in Forestry and worked as a smokejumper (parachuting out of planes and putting out forest fires). He always left packages of Juicy Fruit gum in his pants pockets so his little sisters would find them when they cleaned out his pockets when doing the laundry. He made sure they would have a treat after helping their mom do the laundry for 10 kids in the old wringer washer. He sent me hand beaded slippers from Alaska. I still have them - complete with holes in the bottoms due to so much wear and tear. I won't give them up.

Gene DeBruin was a living, breathing human being who does not deserve to be misrepresented so non-chalantly in the the movie, Rescue Dawn. There are much better and more respectful ways to artistically express the message that is intended to be conveyed in Rescue Dawn. It is a pity that Mr. Herzog did not rise to this challenge.

reply

Well then so tell us... how DID Gene DeBruin behave in the POW camp? Sure, your post tells us he was a good guy prior to being tortured and imprisoned for two years in Laos. But what was he like by the time Dieter got there? And how could you prove it?

reply

We know based upon the words of Dieter Dengler and Pisidhi Indradat themselves.

There are thousands of pages of documented interviews and debriefs, conducted by the military, after both of these men returned. These documents were made available to us under the Freedom of Information Act and we have reviewed them all. Alot of information is also available online. You can access it yourself by "googling" the names of any of the POWs. A good account can also be found in Dengler's book, Escape From Laos. We also have personal letters from Dengler and from Indradat.

There are two video interviews - one from Dengler and one from Indradat - available for your own review at www.rescuedawnthetruth.com The letter from Dengler is also posted there. Please feel free to review these items first hand for yourself. They will explain a great deal about Gene's behavior in prison camp.

reply

Thanks for that URL. A lot of us will be interested to read up on this. Tell your family thank you, also.

reply

Just to clarify, my reply was meant to address one of debruinhein's earlier posts.

reply

Waah, waah, waah. Take a deep breath and realize that it was implied that he was behaving in a way that would have been out of character for himself. He was starving to death, and was in a completely depraved state. How he was before the imprisonment is completely irrelevant, as you should be able to understand. I really couldn't care less who or what he was before the events in this movie. Sounds to me like you need to get a freaking life and stop worrying about trivialities.

reply

And you need to understand that we have we have confirmed information that Gene did not behave this way in prison camp, based upon interviews with the two POWs (Dengler himself and Indradat) who made it out. I completely understand that people can change and behave in a manner that is out of character for them based upon their environment and their experiences in that environment. However, we have documentation that this is not what happened to Gene. We have thousands of pages of post-escape interview transcripts from Dengler and Indradat that solidly contradict the way Gene was portrayed in Rescue Dawn. Alot of this information was made available through the Freedom of Information Act. You can "google" it youself and learn more. You can also read it for yourself in Dengler's book, Escape From Laos. We also have personal letters from Dengler and Indradat that contradict the movie's portrayal of Gene. One of these letters is posted at www.rescuedawnthetruth.com Please feel free to visit the site and read it.

Again, our contention is that Rescue Dawn has been promoted as a true movie. If this is the case, then the facts about Gene should have been used, not invented.

Unfortunately, Gene is not here to defend himself. So, we have to do it for him.

Enjoy your research!

reply

[deleted]

Herzog did do a documentary called "Little Dieter learns to Fly," so he has done his research. TO make a better movie, he changed some stuff. It's fiction. You are correct that if it was listed as documentary, you should be angry. Also, if you are offended, sue. It is your right as an American; however, posting angry messages on message boards make you come off as bitter, for not receiving compensation for the movie. Rise above this, and if you are as deeply offended as you state, by all means file a lawsuit.

reply

Can you sue for libel on the behalf of another?

reply

If he is a close family member and unable to do so (is deceased, for instance), yes you can sue for defamation.

What can't you sue about in the American justice system anyway?

I do support their claim and feel sorry for them, but the movie still remains a good movie. Werner Herzog has always been a little "off", if you see what I mean.

It reminds me of Cinderella Man, and the bad portrayal or Max Baer. Still, I consider Cinderella Man a good movie, to watch with an asterisk.

reply

You cannot sue on behalf of a dead person, because the dead cannot be damaged. Death is one of the few exemptions from legal standing under defamation law.

reply

Yes he made "Little Dieter needs to fly" however DeBruin is hardly mentioned there , leaving the viewer who watched both fiction and documentary with a negative image of DeBruin; some major things are missing, like:
1.After his capture, DeBruin was moved to four different prisons, together with the other four prisoners. In May 1964, they managed to escape for three days, but were caught at a watering hole.
2. After that failed attempt, DeBruin attempted a second escape. The seven prisoners that worked together for this second attempt were:

* Pisidhi Indradat (Thai)
* Prasit Promsuwan (Thai)
* Prasit Thanee (Thai)
* Y.C. To (Chinese)
* Duane W. Martin (American)
* Dieter Dengler (American)

Dengler and Martin were the last to arrive at the POW camp. Initially, DeBruin and the other prisoners didn't trust them, but after some time, they revealed their escape plans to them.

And finally: Former survivors of the escape, Dengler and Pisidhi Indradat always spoke highly of DeBruin saying that he was always a leader and a good friend.

People who flame without any right to do so - go get some education and get some research done before opening your mouth and let your stomach rumble.

reply

I do not believe that a deceased individual can be "libeled". In other words, the executor of his estate (or anybody else for that matter) cannot sue even if, as was the case with a famous libel lawsuit concerning Errol Flynn, you are directly related to the individual (in the Flynn case the individual who sued was one of his daughters).

reply

sue sue sue! are you muppets so deprived of a freedom of expression?? of a tongue in your head?!

reply

Uh, no. It's their right to post angry messages. After all, they are related to the person depicted. You have no dog in this fight. You're just another viewer like me. Show some class and let them vent. Looks like they have some merit in their claims.

Dr. Kila Marr was right. Kill the Crystalline Entity.

reply

I like this post.

---
Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn

reply

Debruinhem. First off, it's a movie...whether it be true or not. It's a depiction of an event? Now, how many movie have you seen that says... "Based on a True story." Alot. The key word in that phrase is... "Based" it doesn't say, "The exact truth of the entire event" or "Let's go back in time and recreate what happened" because that's virtually impossible. Based implies one thing, "It gave me an idea to write a movie." I understand your complaint. I'm a screenwriter. Most screenwrtiers research their characters. The one thing you have to consider. Did Gene's character fit the plot perfectly? I was in complete awe of this movie. Maybe werner wanted Gene's character to be as such to fit his main idea. The screenplay im writing currently invovles my friends... some scenes are true events, but aren't completely the truth. I strew some of the words. It just happens.

reply

Maybe there should be a sliding scale rating on movies that are "Based on a true story". It appears that the existing scale is coming from people who see these movies and talk about them after. In many cases it appears that the "book" is usually closer to the truth then the movie. I suppose with the
existing "loophole factors" one could take a tiny fragment of Mr Whipple's life story and rewrite into a finished product resembling the "Transformers". I would like to see a standard whereby the term "Based on a true story" would hold a great deal of credibility. I think people are tired of misleading statements and trying to be lawyers arguing over credibility. I mean if we wanted to be mislead we could consult the government and I am certain we would be sent into a whirlwind of confusion so please give us sanity in our entertainment. After all is nothing sacred.

reply

[deleted]

If that`s the case then at least show some respect and change the name of the character.

reply

Such a simple solution. Changing the character's name would be all it would have taken to not defame Gene. Why didn't that occur to Werner Herzog?

reply

You're a total JERK! A pampered, selfish jerk without a shred of human empathy. These are Gene's loving relatives writing here, and you are calling his memory to them "trivialities"??? They're talking about something you obviously are completely ignorant of: HONOR.

Spoiled, self centered brats like you make me want to puke. You need a change of diapers and a spanking.

And even if Gene was worse than depicted in the movie, he was 100x the "man" that you are.


reply

[deleted]

silkforcalde: may you feel the pain some day that you waah waah waah at now. youre the one who needs a life, you obviously have no one you care about, or probably who cares much about you. and the defamation of a real mans name to sell a movie is hardly a triviality

reply

He's got a point. If Gene was not at all like the selfish, somewhat deranged figure in the film then they should have at least changed his name or, more appropriately, been more accurate. I mean, we are all human and can have little tiffs and stuff when the pressure is on, such as it would be for them. But near the end when they split up it really made this man look bad. That's a slap in the face to people who knew him.

reply

You may be right, but there is no need to trivialize what the family thinks. Don't be such an insensitive twat.

reply

Trivialities? Presumably then, if you became an overnight hero, by some chance action, you would have no problem with Hollywood making a film of your life, and then casting your Mother as a crack-addled prostitute, since it would give the film a bit of extra mileage. After all, artistic licence is FAR more important than something so trivial as the TRUTH.

reply

Why would they use his real name if they want to imply anything?

Get out of your *beep* and act like a human being, you dirty dog.

reply

I have nothing to say in this conversation but I was just reading it and saw your post and I was suddenly dumbfounded and lost faith in the human race for a minute...

You are an extremely uncaring and un-empathetic person that shoots of his\her mouth without thinking. It is because of people like you that the world is in the state it is. You should not have a voice and your opinion should never be expressed for you are an utterly vile idiot who doesn't deserve to be heard.

I sincerely hope you were a child/teenager when you made that astoundingly ignorant post, and that the years have given you time to grow a conscience and a sense of humanity... otherwise I hope you are no longer alive to see this post, because your presence, if the same as when you wrote this, is damaging to the planet.

I am sorry for you, truly.


!No IMDB idiot may respond to this.!

reply

[deleted]

This is why film makers say "based on a true story" rather than "this is the true story"... They are not claiming everything portrayed is 100% accurate, that's why it says "based on".

reply

Anyone who spent more than two years starving and being mistreated in a harsh POW camp - is entitled to be more than a little demented. Who wouldn't be?

Deiter was only there six months - so he probably was still holding on to a little of his sanity.

If you watch the documentary you'll see that they never refer to Gene and in the interviews I've seen about the movie with Werner, Christian and Jeremy - no one ever mentions Gene. Maybe they are trying to let him rest in peace.

I'm sure his family wants to think he was always that great guy before he became a POW. Regarding anything Deiter or any other prisoner said afterwards - maybe they were trying to be kind. Unless you were there - there is no way to be certain.

The only certain thing is that there is no way anyone (no matter how heroic) could remain completely sane after two years of the kind of treatment these guys received.

reply

Instead of presuming that everybody lied about how he acted when in the POW camp, let's assume their testimony is true, and show the man some honor.

Seriously what the Hell is wrong with you?

reply

Funny,

I just watched the trailer. It doesn't say "based on a true story." It says, "comes the incredible true story."

I found something else funny. Dengler is of German decent, born and raised there. Even a few years before his death, after spending the last 60 or so years of his life in the States, Denger had a heavy German accent. Why would they not either cast a character with the accent or have Christian Bale adapt the accent?

reply

Well, someone else noticed the lack of accent! Thank you...

I knew Dieter for about forty years, met him in Squaw Valley in 1961 and if there was one distinction Dieter possessed, it was his Swabian accent. He never really lost it.

I did not go to see this film in the cinema but rather waited until it came to Blockbuster...and was I disappointed! A mutual friend, whose husband was very close to Dieter, told me she could not believe that there had been no accent, that I would not like the film and so I was prepared. She was right!

But what I was not prepared for was the miserable acting by Christian Bale. Probably only those of us who knew Dieter would realize how unlike him Mr Bale was. Aside from the accent, he had none of Dieter's charm nor did he show the range of emotions and the animated Dieter we all knew. Why did they not give him another name as they should have done with Mr Debruin, who Dieter had respected and cared so much for...?

I heard Dieter tell his story many times and each time, it was riveting. I found the film boring, the character portrayals dismal, and the story distorted.

With all of the wonderful young German actors today, why not select one of them to play Dieter? Had our Governor Schwarzenegger been younger, he could have played this spendidly, with an Austrian accent and plenty of charisma. Not like this Englishman, saying at one point, "Yes, we must do..." Dieter never said, "must", he would always say, "We got to do..."

Werner Herzog has milked this Dieter Dengler story for all its worth, walked over people's feelings and made a ridiculous film. I once spoke to Dieter about the earlier "Little Dieter" film and he said Herr Herzog had cheated him financially.... Well, I guess he has cheated him again, along with his friends.

reply

Ferriter...Glad to see someone who knew Dieter personally commenting on this film. You may not know this, but Christian Bale is a master of accents and dialects, and does it like no other. I don't know why Herzog didn't utilize his talent for this to show Dieter's German accent!???
While I enjoyed the film for what it was, I later have become outraged at how inaccuratly Gene Debruin was portrayed, and so hurtful to his family.
Yes, Herzog has milked Dieter's story for all he can, and, reading your words, it is no surprise that he cheated Dieter financially.

reply

[deleted]

Thank you for posting this further information. It was interesting to read the website you mentioned. I don't really understand why this movie did not accurately portray the people in the camp. I think the true-to-life story would have been as moving, interesting, saddening. To fictionalize the life of still-living people is simply immoral. And to portray a prisoner as failing at the escape attempt, and another (Pasit) as also failing, when he actually fought the guards also, seems to be unnecessary and, obviously, dishonest. I understand your feelings at having your brother maligned.

reply

When human testimonial is solid undeniable evidence, Michael Jackson will be put in prison. Look, I'm not saying Gene wasn't a good guy. *beep* if I know, I'm just saying you have to allow for the possibility that he might not have been after, as has been said, two years in Laos. I don't expect you, personally, to do so, but as someone who isn't so close to the subject it's natural to reason these things out. If I were related to the man I might take issue with the film as well, I'm not.

You're simply unable, understandably, to seperate yourself from the truth and enjoy the film as a film. It's clear that you are likely not the biggest fan of films in general and thus are probably unfamiliar with Herzog's work. Nearly everything he's done has been a fictionalized tale based on a true story. The key words here are "based on" and not "true story." Once the words "based on" have been added, the filmmaker is allowed to do whatever they want, hell, they could remove every single shred of truth and it still wouldn't be a crime. I highly advise you not to take legal action for your own sake. You have no case and it would be a waste of money.

The best you can do is put the information out there for people to stumble across when they're researching the true story this film is based on, but please, please, stop bitching about it.

reply

I agree with imdb-8417, I really appreciate debruinheim's input, and I can completely understand why family members would be upset if viewers were seeing what was felt to be a demonstrated defamation of a (clearly) beloved relative on film.

Zdhalewo -- to my reading debruinhein seems to be saying they don't have a legal case against Herzog -- apparently because, officially, the film is fiction.

I can appreciate how the family would feel frustrated. They seem to have made such an effort to prevent the depiction as it occurred, and now they're left without recourse -- except to try to set the record straight by reaching out publicly -- hoping to get as far on their own as Herzog did with a major motion picture -- using a web site, and message boards...

And we can see how open-minded and receptive people can be on the message boards!

Silkforcalde -- I have to say that as a reader I was truly shocked by your post. Dude. Gene Debruin was a real person, and he was not portrayed favorably -- especially in contrast to Deiter, who is characterized by unflagging selflessness and courage -- and they're saying, patiently, repeatedly, from the testimony of the men who were there, that it's pretty clear he wasn't actually like that. They're talking about someone who is obviously close to their hearts. Did you really have to flame off like that? What's gained?

Maybe we all should all take imdb-8417's hint and read the web site before jumping in to squabble with this family? Otherwise, a number of responses here seem a little disrespectful to me, to be honest.

IMDB -- I know you guys don't want to be the "moral police." But given all the circumstances, do you really feel like all the posts on this thread are respectful of your abuse policy? Really? Bearing in mind these are complete strangers attacking folks who are just trying to air their point of view about their exploited dead relative?

Debruinheim -- kudos to you for keeping a cool head. You put your heart on your sleeve here. After it was kicked at, you responded with courtesy and reason. From my point of view, you've shown some true emotional depth and maturity. It speaks well of the Debruins; I can imagine Gene was a good man.



reply

mwillmott-
I whole-heartedly agree with your post. Talk about adding insult to injury....As if being held prisoner of war for years, and having to live in those abhorrent conditions, while being subjected to torture and starvation wasn't dehumanizing enough, with the man already dead, unable to defend himself, and with the real facts from interviews and the writings of other POW's that were actually THERE, including Dieter himself!, they(Herzog, et al) completely misrepresent the character and actions of who this man really was, and what he did. But its all ok, because they clearly said "Based on a true story", so that gives them license to do whatever they want....

I'm not sure if I'm more upset with, Herzog and the Producers of RD(completely ignorning all attempts to communicate with them by the Debruin family? WTF???) or with some of these chicken s*** posters like Silkforcalde, who sounds like such a great humanitarian, he probably wouldn't piss on his best friend if he was on fire. Assuming he has any friends...

Finally, another big kudos to imdb-8417 for really understanding the bottom line here, that telling this story more factually would not have made it resonate with audiences any less at all. They're just along for the ride, and will believe what they're shown(for better or worse) and it seems to me that the real story had just as much drama and emotion, as what was portrayed in the film. The truth is, upon hearing the truth about Gene, it definitely takes away from the emotional impact of the film, at least for me. Sometimes there is a need to fictionalize events for a film to make them more dramatic, but in my humble opinion, that definitely did not need to happen in this case, especially when as a result they blatantly slandered the character and actions, of by all accounts, a very good man.

reply

"Finally, another big kudos to imdb-8417 for really understanding the bottom line here, that telling this story more factually would not have made it resonate with audiences any less at all. They're just along for the ride, and will believe what they're shown(for better or worse) and it seems to me that the real story had just as much drama and emotion, as what was portrayed in the film."

That's a judgement call made by the artist. And he's telling his story anyway, it's really for him to decide. The story's impact doesn't change for me, because it's much more about Dieter anyway. Gene's character was very interesting (like I said he was portrayed sympathetically), and he added some tension to the camp scenes. The character was very believable, as good fictional characters are.

I do sympathize with the family, but to be honest few people are going to remember the name of the supporting characters. I thought Gene was portrayed pretty sympathetically, so at least he wasn't turned into some bad guy.

I do agree that Herzog could've just changed the name of the character, if he was going to totally change the character's behavior. I think sometimes when writing a story you get attached to using the original names, but out of respect for the family I would've changed his name.


reply

mwillmott, that was an excellent post

reply

I'd say debruinheim makes a pretty compellilng case.

However, to say Herzog did not do his homework for this film doesn't make much sense. Look at the travel, time, and expense invested in the making of Little Dieter Needs to Fly alone--it is enough to prove that Herzog was well acquainted with his subject matter. Light years ahead of what most directors would do to prepare a story like this. If the family has a beef with Herzog (seems reasonable to me) it is for his intentional distortion of the facts, not careless misrepresentations.

reply

"Esthetic truth." Herzog's artistic conviction. Look it up. As Herzog says, "Facts create norms; truth illumination."

Essentially, the phrase boils down to argument that "facts" should be altered if it is necessary to get to a greater "truth:" in this case, the alteration of Gene's character makes clear exactly what was at stake for Dengler in the jungle. Gene becomes the voice of someone who is incapable of looking into the junge and seeing anything but a prison, and justifiably so. Dengler sees it as freedom, which is also a perfectly justifiable position. So they must go head-to-head. As this is Dengler's story, we follow him.

And as for the facts: I'm reminded of Stephen King's thoughts on filmmakers "ruining" his books - he simply points to the bookshelf and says, "They're not ruined. They're right there."

The point: The film is fictional. The beaded slippers from Alaska are not.

reply

Tin Man-5,
I think there is a difference when retelling a story that includes real people identified by name. For me "based on a true story" or "actual events" does not excuse glaring inaccuracies of same for the sake of "aesthetic truth" or making a better miovie, especially in cases involving actual persons and their immediate relatives that are or may still be alive. The DeBruin family has every right to be upset. Nobody evidently contacted them for input and we have interviews and letters from Dieter Dengler and Pisidhi Indradat on www.rescuedawnthetruth.com, that paint a completely different picture of Gene DeBruin and the events that transpired. About the only good thing Pisidhi Indradat had to say about the film is that the location manager did a good job picking sites that authentically depicted the prison area. Herzog is free to make fictionalized recounts, but wrongly buys himself extra cachet with the viewing audience in saying that his film is based on a true story. He should have changed the names if he wanted to go that far astray.

reply

I must just not be understanding here exactly what you all are whining about or maybe it's you who doesn't quite understand what I said earlier. Any movie ever made could put the label "based on a true story" on it and there would be absolutely nothing wrong with it ( e.g. Fargo). The fact that this is actually based on a true story and that it uses the names of real people has no bearing on it's quality as a film, and that label should not cause anybody to be discouraged from seeing the film by others who complain about its innacuracies. This whole argument you pose is complete silliness. Herzog hasn't tricked anybody who's competent about films, he's never said it's a historical account of the events. It was based on a true story, so he said it was based on a true story, anything else would be a lie. Has this movie caused anyone to write essays slandering the real Debruin, has it caused rocks to be thrown through his family members windows. No. Nobody has been wronged because it's common sense that most things based on true stories aren't usually stricly factual. Anybody who cares enough about the movie to even remember Debruin's name a week after seeing it will likely look it up to see the true story it's based on. That's why it's good that his family has put out the truth about him online. That's fine. But this constant slandering of a very well made film is just wrong.

reply

Any movie ever made could put the label "based on a true story" on it and there would be absolutely nothing wrong with it ( e.g. Fargo).


Then why do many films have the disclaimer about coincidental representations of persons living or dead? Suppose, using your Fargo example that you, DilishW, were the Jerry Lundegaard character that the Coen Bros. were depicting in this "based on a true story" epic using your name. Only in fact, you had not arranged your own wife's kidnapping and ransom, but had merely asked your father-in-law for a loan and were turned down. Not much of a story there...hmmm maybe we can make this better....... Would you feel fine about that creative license? Incidently, according to snopes, http://www.snopes.com/movies/films/fargo.htm the "true story" reference is poppycock.

Has this movie caused anyone to write essays slandering the real Debruin, has it caused rocks to be thrown through his family members windows. No. Nobody has been wronged because it's common sense that most things based on true stories aren't usually stricly factual.


I disagree and would say that the DeBruin family has been hurt by a false characterization of Eugene. Are moviegoers going to actively impact the DeBruin family negatively? Most likely they are not. That's not the point. They can still be hurt by the film's portrayal that will still be seen by thousands if not millions of people. If a movie were made about an historical event with which I was tangentally or directly involved, and the film makers found it artistically expedient to portray me as something I was not (particularly negative) for the sake of a good story, you bet my family and I would be upset. If the names had been changed there would be no issue.

reply

Why don't you read what you quote? I know Fargo wasn't based on a true story, that's my point. And your point about Jerry has no bearing on Rescue Dawn. If Jerry was real and living and hadn't been convicted, that film would present a legal issue falsely : innocent until proven guilty right? Anyway Debruin wasn't accused of a crime or portrayed as a criminal. The Jerry thing still wouldn't really be illegal, I'd just take more of an issue with that than this being as, if it hadn't gone to court yet, the film could sway the jury.

Yes, I would expect you to be upset and I expect them to be upset, but the film is still a quality film from a masterful director. Put the truth out there. Making Rescuedawnthetruth.com should've been enough, but was it necessary to slander Herzog in the process. The truth is most people really don't give a damn about whether Debruin was good or bad( he wasn't really portrayed as bad) they just want to see a well done Nam flick. Why change the names? It's still the same character and the same people who will look up Rescue Dawn's factual aspects would find the same information about Debruin and probably connect the character to the real guy. I just don't see the point other than further adding to it's innacuracy and appeasing the family members, this would serve no purpose.

reply

The real Gene did not see it as a prison as IT WAS HIS ESCAPE PLAN!!!!!

Herzog's greater truth was to build up his hero at all costs.

reply

If you want to find the source of some of this misinformation about DeBruin and Dengler, Google "Duane Martin Laos" and look at the official Arlington Cemetery story on Dengler where the official citations for his medals are given. I also looked at the Google results for "Gene DeBruin" and found a trove of original source data. Check for yourselves; don't believe me or Rush Limbaugh for that matter.

reply