“Game Change” author: “Totally pleased” with HBO’s adaptation of his book

posted at 4:50 pm on March 12, 2012 by Tina Korbe

According to Townhall.com’s John Hanlon, HBO’s much-hyped “Game Change” was “everything conservatives feared it would be,” but author Mark Halperin is still pleased with it. It’s not only a faithful adaptation of the book he co-authored with John Heilemann, he said, but it’s faithful to history. Heh.

At the premiere in Washington, D.C. on Mar. 8, CNSNews.com asked Halperin, who works for Time magazine, if he was pleased with the adaptation of “Game Change,” the book he co-wrote with John Heilemann, and if the film is an accurate and fair portrayal of the former Alaska governor. (Heilemann is a reporter for New York magazine.)

Halperin said, “Totally pleased with it. It’s faithful to the book, which pleases us. But more importantly, it’s faithful to history, which is a big part of our motivation and our drive in working with HBO because they’ve got such a record of caring about not just entertainment — the film’s entertaining — but also accuracy.”

CNSNews.com then asked Halperin, “Which issues do you agree with Sarah Palin on, if any?”

He said, “On policy issues? I’m a reporter, so I think it’s my obligation to keep my positions private and to cover people without regard to whether I agree with them or not. So, I agree with her that America is a great country.”

If Halperin really does have such a noble sense of his obligation as a reporter to strive for objectivity, then good for him. It’s hard not to be skeptical, though: Did Halperin refuse to name an issue because he doesn’t agree with Palin about anything? I wonder.

It certainly seems strange that such a conscientious reporter would be unperturbed by the scenes that occur in the movie that aren’t recorded in the book — even scenes that the principal players say never happened. He also says he’s OK with HBO’s decision to focus narrowly on a single section of the book and to eliminate the story of the 2008 Democratic primary entirely. Halperin gives the impression that HBO could have done whatever it wanted with his work and he’d be completely content — because, you know, it’s HBO.

P.S. Please don’t confuse Mark Halperin with Mark Helprin, the conservative commentator and talented novelist whose work you should read before you check out “Game Change.”


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

A leftist with a leftist agenda writes a book trashing Repulicans, gets a movie deal to trash republicans, and comes to the conclusion that the movie is an accurate reflection of his book.

Duh!

BMF on March 12, 2012 at 6:31 PM

SD Tom on March 12, 2012 at 6:22 PM

**********************************************

Please don’t publicly acknowledge your tea party participation. Based on your last foolishness, you only play into the LSM caricature of the tea party as consisting of stupid, knuckle dragging neanderthals. If you actually think that Palin was only a “distraction” in 2010, then you really are beyond all hope.

ljmesq on March 12, 2012 at 6:34 PM

It certainly seems strange that such a conscientious reporter would be unperturbed by the scenes that occur in the movie that aren’t recorded in the book — even scenes that the principal players say never happened. He also says he’s OK with HBO’s decision to focus narrowly on a single section of the book and to eliminate the story of the 2008 Democratic primary entirely. Halperin gives the impression that HBO could have done whatever it wanted with his work and he’d be completely content — because, you know, it’s HBO.

Well, it’s all in pursuit of a higher truth, donchaknow….

tom on March 12, 2012 at 6:35 PM

Ew. I guess I kind of touched a nerve.

Well, in a very tiny nutshell because I tend to be repelled by cult-of-personality fanatics and try to ignore them — she’s a money grubbing opportunistic divisive attention wh0re who gives the appearance of a patriot but literally has done nothing whatsoever but enrich herself and her family via gullible halfwits (television evangelist comes to mind)

Why are her activities so bad? She was hired as a political commentator by FNC, so she comments on political matters. She gives speeches at venues that have asked her to speak. Some are paid gigs, some aren’t. She wrote two books to set the record straight. Shame on her. Have you forgotten her role in 2010?

— and she’s been nothing but a complete distraction for the GOP in the elections ever since she threw in the towel and just quit when the heat in the kitchen got turned up a trifle.

I guess that’s why all of the candidates “borrow” her words and adopt them as part of their political rhetoric. Are you upset because she believes that people voting in the late primaries should have a voice?
Are you upset because she has advised the candidates to stick with the important issues rather than attacking each other?

Other than that, I’m sure she’s a fine lady — albeit, detestable.

P.S. I’m not required by any rule or law or any other mandate to worship Sarah Palin just because I am a member of the Tea Party. K? Thanks. Bye.

SD Tom on March 12, 2012 at 6:22 PM

No one suggested that you should worship her. I just think detest is a strange word coming from a TPer. You obviously know very little about her. I guess that’s the difference between you and us “Palin worshippers. We know what she is and we stand behind her. BTW, you still didn’t say who you support.

NoNails on March 12, 2012 at 6:41 PM

Green eyed Lady on March 12, 2012 at 5:14 PM

Julianne Moore is also butt-ugly, compared to Palin. She has British teeth.

slickwillie2001 on March 12, 2012 at 6:41 PM

I have always understood why they fear her. She emboldens us to take action by way of her example. They fear that. They also fear her as a symbol of everything that is wrong with the woman’s movement, abortion and gun control.

They fear her solutions to energy issues as well.

SparkPlug on March 12, 2012 at 4:55 PM

Palin is an existential threat to the Obama mystique. We’re not even necessarily talking about the politics at this point. They worked hard to build up Obama’s image as supercool, above it all, and larger than life. Along comes Palin and very effectively takes him down a few pegs without any media help. (Styrofoam Greek pillars! A mayor is kind of like a community organizer, but with actual responsibilities!) The squawking commenced immediately, and they have loathed her ever since.

The only really unexpected part of it all was how much help they had from “moderate” Republicans. Like Romney supporters.

tom on March 12, 2012 at 6:47 PM

“I have the president’s back, and it’s up to us as African-Americans to show that we have his back also.”
J_Crater on March 12, 2012 at 5:15 PM

You sadden me Lovie

Ditkaca on March 12, 2012 at 6:49 PM

tom on March 12, 2012 at 6:47 PM

Yep. I have long maintained that from the moment the “Greek Columns” burn escaped her lips, as far as the left was concerned she had to be destroyed. Everyone, including McCain, had been walking on eggshells up to that point, afraid to criticize Obama. Then out of nowhere comes this dynamo who drives a stake through the heart of Obama’s carefully crafted bullsh*t image with a single line.

Kataklysmic on March 12, 2012 at 6:54 PM

“you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska.” -Sarah Palin

Even when you get the quote right, it does not give her gravitas. Takes it away.

hanzblinx on March 12, 2012 at 5:17 PM

She said that as an indication of just how close Russian and Alaska are. Two things to note here.

1) It’s true.
2) It’s relevant. That is, it really does show just how close Russia and Alaska are.

tom on March 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

For once Maverick gets it right: McCain Blasts HBO’s ‘Game Change’: ‘Based on a Book That’s Completely Biased’

Gladtobehere on March 12, 2012 at 7:00 PM

I read the book…only 11 pages dedicated to Palin.

Ridiculous

Redford on March 12, 2012 at 7:02 PM

Yep. I have long maintained that from the moment the “Greek Columns” burn escaped her lips, as far as the left was concerned she had to be destroyed. Everyone, including McCain, had been walking on eggshells up to that point, afraid to criticize Obama. Then out of nowhere comes this dynamo who drives a stake through the heart of Obama’s carefully crafted bullsh*t image with a single line.

Kataklysmic on March 12, 2012 at 6:54 PM

I thought the tipping point was when, in her convention speech, she said she wasn’t going to Washington to garner the favor of the media, she was going to represent the people.

NoNails on March 12, 2012 at 7:02 PM

She said that as an indication of just how close Russian and Alaska are. Two things to note here.

1) It’s true.
2) It’s relevant. That is, it really does show just how close Russia and Alaska are.

tom on March 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

Look up-thread. I included her complete answer that included those words. Hanzblinx has offered no rebuttal.

NoNails on March 12, 2012 at 7:05 PM

tom on March 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

So, the fact that you can see a Russian island from an Alaskan island is relevant to what exactly? I can see the moon and Venus from my back yard–I have yet to have any major trade discussions with them.

Rusty Allen on March 12, 2012 at 7:06 PM

So, the fact that you can see a Russian island from an Alaskan island is relevant to what exactly? I can see the moon and Venus from my back yard–I have yet to have any major trade discussions with them.

Rusty Allen on March 12, 2012 at 7:06 PM

For one, the moon or Venus doesn’t have The Strategic Air Command, Alaska does..:)

idesign on March 12, 2012 at 7:12 PM

tom on March 12, 2012 at 6:57 PM

So, the fact that you can see a Russian island from an Alaskan island is relevant to what exactly?

It’s relevant to the point she was making, of course: that Alaska is very close to Russia. For the implications, I highly suggest you read the whole interview in context as NoNails posted it.

But even on its own, without the surrounding context, it was a perfectly sensible thing to point out that Russia is so close to Alaska that you can actually see parts of Russia from parts of Alaska, and so the governor of Alaska rather obviously would on occasion have to deal with Russia directly.

What’s truly mystifying is why anyone would nitpick this statement. It was simple, clear, and on point. Yet somehow it gets cited as proof of vapidity.

It’s a lot like children giggling up their sleeves at something that isn’t even funny.

I can see the moon and Venus from my back yard–I have yet to have any major trade discussions with them.

Rusty Allen on March 12, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Yeah. Being able to see the uninhabited moon from hundreds of thousands of miles away is totally the same thing.

You’re making yourself look empty-headed at this point.

tom on March 12, 2012 at 7:17 PM

So, the fact that you can see a Russian island from an Alaskan island is relevant to what exactly? I can see the moon and Venus from my back yard–I have yet to have any major trade discussions with them.

Rusty Allen on March 12, 2012 at 7:06 PM

Look up-thread. I included her whole answer, much of which ABC edited out.

NoNails on March 12, 2012 at 7:19 PM

For those who are interested in the true story of Sarah Palin, Reelz Channel is doing an encore presentation of “The Undefeated” tonight at 10pm ET/ 7pm PT.
http://www.reelz.com/undefeated/

If you do not have Reelz Channel via your cable or satellite provider, you can watch it online at
http://www.filmon.com/tv/htmlmain/#Reelz-Channel.

As to “Channel Change” … I meant “Game Change:”

Vetting HBO: The ‘Game Change’ Rap Sheet (Updated)
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Hollywood/2012/03/08/game-change-evidence-rests

See also:

http://campaign2012.washingtonexaminer.com/article/real-bias-game-change/421531

john.frank on March 12, 2012 at 7:43 PM

This post is far to kind to Mark Halperin.

http://www.politico.com/arena/perm/Michael__Goldfarb_6BCAF159-02FD-4524-BBDF-6E07620037EF.html

john.frank on March 12, 2012 at 7:45 PM

I remember being a HUGE admirer of Sarah before John McCain ever picked her to run with him. I used to watch her on cspan during the Goveners Ass.meetings. I STILL admirer her, More so!

lisa fox on March 12, 2012 at 7:45 PM

Michael Goldfarb Chairman, Center for American Freedom; Deputy director of communications for McCain-Palin ’08 on “Game Change” and Halperin:

I can’t speak to the film, because I can’t bring myself to watch it.

Other loyal McCain staffers I’ve spoken to have had the same reaction. While a few senior aides from the McCain campaign collaborated with the authors of Game Change and painted a picture of John McCain and Sarah Palin as so craven or ill-informed or incompetent that no handler could have gotten them elected, the reality is that John McCain was the better man and would have made a better president.

We lost that campaign partly because of events beyond our control, and partly as a result of bad counsel given by the same people who are apparently so flatteringly portrayed in this movie. John McCain deserved better than to be betrayed by his own top aides, and true to form he has honorably stuck by Gov. Palin even as she’s been smeared in the press over and over again by the same self-serving former staffers. I only hope that the Romney campaign takes notice of what’s happened here.

Halperin and Heilemann have gotten a $5 million contract to do the same thing to Romney that they did to McCain, and they will no doubt be looking for Romney aides the same way a con artist searches for his mark – seeking the emotionally vulnerable, the weak, the insecure, the ones who value the approval of MSNBC analysts more than the respect of their own campaign staff. Unfortunately, every Republican campaign has them – and given the opportunity Halperin and Heilemann are certain to reoffend.
http://www.politico.com/arena/perm/Michael__Goldfarb_6BCAF159-02FD-4524-BBDF-6E07620037EF.html

P.S. To the Romney people in the McCain-Palin 2008 campaign who spoke to Halperin and “bashed” Sarah Palin, as well as those Romney supporters who are now running around “bashing” Sarah Palin, shame on you.

john.frank on March 12, 2012 at 7:50 PM

tom on March 12, 2012 at 7:17 PM

Maybe, but it won’t be uninhabited for long. Gingrich 2012.

Rusty Allen on March 12, 2012 at 7:52 PM

And my point was, she dealt with Russia almost as much as I deal with Venus. The debate is not about how close it is, but about how insignificant she was. And the only thing I’m doing to embarrass myself is talk about a 2008 Sarah Palin interview.

Rusty Allen on March 12, 2012 at 7:55 PM

SD Tom on March 12, 2012 at 6:22 PM

It’s pathetic enough that we have slime balls like Bill Maher degrade Republican women, but it is truly evil when the same type of filth comes from so called Republicans.

idesign on March 12, 2012 at 6:28 PM

With an accent on the “So-Called”…….. Just like anyone who Calls into a Radio Talk Show and says “I’m a member of The Military” — is LYING!! if they really WERE members of The Military – they wouldn’t HAVE to say it!

Similarly – ANYONE who posts on a Blog and HAS to say they are “Conservative” or “Tea Party Members” – OBVIOUSLY are NOT!!

THEY ARE LYING!!!

If they weren’t – they wouldn’t HAVE to say it!

williamg on March 12, 2012 at 10:17 PM

And my point was, she dealt with Russia almost as much as I deal with Venus. The debate is not about how close it is, but about how insignificant she was. And the only thing I’m doing to embarrass myself is talk about a 2008 Sarah Palin interview.

Rusty Allen on March 12, 2012 at 7:55 PM

You DO have a point – and, if you war a HAT nobody will notice it!

Read about Maritime Law – and LEARN something!

http://www.unesco.org/csi/act/russia/legalpro6.htm

http://books.google.com/books?id=Tn_OV0ECgMQC&pg=PA94&lpg=PA94&dq=Russia-Alaska+sea+transit+laws&source=bl&ots=PT-PE566RP&sig=jV3vHqHL_saHWHVZGIAYSSz46sI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=bK5eT9H6Lsfs0gH5hLCqBw&ved=0CE4Q6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=Russia-Alaska%20sea%20transit%20laws&f=false

http://www.mfa.is/media/Utgafa/Breaking_The_Ice_Conference_Report.pdf

williamg on March 12, 2012 at 10:24 PM

And my point was, she dealt with Russia almost as much as I deal with Venus. The debate is not about how close it is, but about how insignificant she was. And the only thing I’m doing to embarrass myself is talk about a 2008 Sarah Palin interview.

Rusty Allen on March 12, 2012 at 7:55 PM

You receive the occasional Venusian trade delegation?

I had no idea.

I also didn’t realize you commanded a detachment of military watching for military aggression from Venus, like Palin commanded the Alaskan National Guard. But I understand that sort of thing is kept pretty hush-hush, so that’s probably why I wasn’t aware.

tom on March 13, 2012 at 1:23 AM

Comment pages: 1 2