Kennedy mini-series canceled. But why?

Divia · Post by **Divia** » Sun January 23rd, 2011, 4:00 pm

I wasn't sure where to put this..TV or here because I want to start a debate on it.

First let me say that I think it is stupid that the new mini series is canceled because some find it not historically accurate, oh you mean like every other flipping historical movie out there? I mean common. Did anyone watch the Joan of Arc Mini that came out 10 years ago. The inaccuracies that were in there were way too many to count.

So, here we have a not so nice look at Kennedy and everyone gets their knickers in a knot. Look, the man wasn't perfect but the idea that Kennedy family members have to protect the womanizing freak show is a bit much.

Babyboomers seem to have a special place in their heart for Kennedy. I will never understand it. I often wonder if it was the fairy tale everyone fell in love with that helped to make him what he is today.

That being said, I still cannot understand why this mini series cannot be shown and its annoying as hell. I wanted to watch something that wasn't a perfect protryal of the Kennedys and let me decided how I feel about it.

LoveHistory · Post by **LoveHistory** » Sun January 23rd, 2011, 5:49 pm

Was the Joan of Arc miniseries on The History Channel?

It is kind of strange for them to not show it. Didn't they look at the script when they ordered it? How could they not know in advance that it wouldn't fit with their brand? If that's the problem why did they go ahead and show it in Canada? Canada doesn't deserve historically accurate programming?

Some other networks/channels are looking into buying it, so maybe you'll still get to see it on TV, and it will be on DVD eventually.

Divia · Post by **Divia** » Sun January 23rd, 2011, 7:58 pm

No the Joan of Arc one was on CBS.

OH! That is interesting that it was shown in Canada! Hmm! Again I think it goes back into not wanting to tarnish the Kennedy image.

MLE (Emily Cotton) · Post by **MLE (Emily Cotton)** » Sun January 23rd, 2011, 8:24 pm

JFK's doctor published a book a few decades back, detailing JFK's lifelong struggle with Addison's Disease and how they kept him functioning while in the white house by a cocktail of methamphetamines and other stimulants. Just reading it scared the willies out of me when I think how very close we came to WWIII on his watch. And the Bay of Pigs incident was incredible hubris. For those who don't remember it, the US tried to remove Castro from Cuba on the reassurance of several Cuban exiles that the people would rise up in support. No research was done to discover how wrong that assumption was. This was the beginning of Castro's regime, and the Cuban people didn't know how bad he would be, but they sure knew that the exiled upper class had been horrible. Well, the popular uprising didn't happen and the US got its butt kicked and internationally humiliated.

Actually, Kennedy got almost nothing positive done while president. His claim to fame, other than projecting a certain glamorous image, is that somebody shot him.

Celia Hayes · Post by **Celia Hayes** » Sun January 23rd, 2011, 11:50 pm

Be fair, MLE - Jackie did redecorate the White House very tastefully!

LoveHistory · Post by **LoveHistory** » Mon January 24th, 2011, 12:27 am

[quote=""Divia""]I think it goes back into not wanting to tarnish the Kennedy image.[/quote]

The Kennedys do a pretty good job of that all by themselves.

Celia--you are funny!

I read once that his womanizing may have been partly due to lack of self-control as a side effect of some medications he took for his back pain. That could be the stimulants there.

MLE, have you seen Thirteen Days?

Divia · Post by **Divia** » Mon January 24th, 2011, 1:26 am

[quote=""Celia Hayes""]Be fair, MLE - Jackie did redecorate the White House very tastefully![/quote]

And she wore those adorable pill box hats!

Michy · Post by **Michy** » Mon January 24th, 2011, 3:37 pm

[quote=""MLE""] His claim to fame, other than projecting a certain glamorous image, is that somebody shot him.[/quote]

I totally agree -- I was born after Kennedy's death, so I have never been caught by the Kennedy mystique (although as a fashion lover I have admired Jackie's style). I agree that it was his assassination that has kept his legend alive. That, and Jackie -- not only was she largely responsible for the glamour, but I read once that she invented the whole "Camelot" analogy after his death.

Had Kennedy not been killed in office (and at such a young age), he would have just been another so-so, forgettable president.

[quote=""LoveHistory""]I read once that his womanizing may have been partly due to lack of self-control as a side effect of some medications he took for his back pain. That could be the stimulants there.

[/quote] Um, actually I think it was just a family trait among the Kennedy men. Daddy (Joe) Kennedy was a major womanizer -- obviously his sons adopted his behavior.

LoveHistory · Post by **LoveHistory** » Mon January 24th, 2011, 4:29 pm

Good point Michy, but something in me likes to think there was more to it. "Why on earth would anyone have cheated on Jackie?" is pretty much my thinking.

Michy · Post by **Michy** » Mon January 24th, 2011, 4:39 pm

I think it's the same reason why many famous and powerful men cheat on their wives -- it's all about the power, the headiness of having so many women willing and available, the inability to be satisfied with just one woman.

As an example -- he had Marilyn Monroe singing a breathless "Happy Birthday" to him in a skin-colored dress that she was poured into. (There's probably a good reason why the photos of the occasion only show her from the back). Pretty tough competition for Jackie.