My perspective on "The Terry Fox Story" is different than many other folks'. This is because I am a cancer survivor and the portions of the film dealing with that kicked up a lot of feelings and I felt like, at times, it was handled very poorly...rather ham-fisted at that.
The story is based on the life of Terry Fox, a Canadian who inspired millions and became famous with his run across Canada to raise money for cancer research. Because Fox had died towards the end of his inspiring run, the filmmakers had to find a one-legged actor to play Fox and newcomer Eric Fryer (in his only film) took the role.
Apparently Terry Fox's family did not like the way he was portrayed in the movie. He did seem a bit like a jerk at times and they really objected to this...and I can see why. My objections were not about this but the way the film portrayed cancer---with a ridiculous and seemingly fake scene in the hospital that made me angry as it seemed exploitive and over the top.
What the film did get right later in the story was the inspirational nature of Fox and his 'never say die' attitude. Of course, it is inspiring...but also incredibly sad.
So is the film any good? Not really. Much of it is because although it's an HBO production, the quality of the acting is mostly poor and often very melodramatic. So, you have a good story but also one that isn't handled all that well. While I've never seen the later version of Fox's life, "Terry", I can't help but think it has to be better. Perhaps much of this is because this was the first film made by HBO and the quality of their productions soon improved.
The story is based on the life of Terry Fox, a Canadian who inspired millions and became famous with his run across Canada to raise money for cancer research. Because Fox had died towards the end of his inspiring run, the filmmakers had to find a one-legged actor to play Fox and newcomer Eric Fryer (in his only film) took the role.
Apparently Terry Fox's family did not like the way he was portrayed in the movie. He did seem a bit like a jerk at times and they really objected to this...and I can see why. My objections were not about this but the way the film portrayed cancer---with a ridiculous and seemingly fake scene in the hospital that made me angry as it seemed exploitive and over the top.
What the film did get right later in the story was the inspirational nature of Fox and his 'never say die' attitude. Of course, it is inspiring...but also incredibly sad.
So is the film any good? Not really. Much of it is because although it's an HBO production, the quality of the acting is mostly poor and often very melodramatic. So, you have a good story but also one that isn't handled all that well. While I've never seen the later version of Fox's life, "Terry", I can't help but think it has to be better. Perhaps much of this is because this was the first film made by HBO and the quality of their productions soon improved.