Is Charles Van Doren really at fault?

When a person does something wrong, they should be punished. In this movie the criminals are the people who choose to take the money and lie to public about what they really know. That is selfishness and evil. But who of us has never contemplated something similar? "He is without sin, should cast the first stone..."

I'm glad that in the movie Van Doren finally confessed what he did. Should he have been fired and publicly humiliated? In compassion, I say, no. In the end, Herbert Stempel seemed to understand this too. His actions led to not only Van Doren's humiliation, but also his family's.

Punishment is complicated. We, as a nation tend to rake celebrities and politicians across the coals for things that we do every day. We think little of abusing them or "bringing them down". But, how do we know we'd act differently in their situation? We might just do the exact same thing. Sometimes, I think that's why we are so self-righteouss about it, because at the end of the day, we're all the same. We're all selfish.

When Goodwin says he wouldn't have done it, it really seems impossible to believe. In that instance, though, maybe he would be able to just walk away. But surely he has some price. Everyone does, don't they?

To conclude: he's at fault and I would say the punishment fit the crime very well, though I wouldn't wish it on anyone. This movie reminded me so much of Reality TV. Is is really "reality" or do they script most or even everything on the show? I wonder, wonder ,wonder...

The question is a good test of ethics: the correct answer is "yes". I don't for a moment think I'd not take the same advantage, given the chance. So I suppose my honesty scores higher than my ethics.

What I had in mind was boxing the compass.

Well, it was wrong for him to play the rigged games, yes, as the film says. But what was also wrong was that only he suffered, not the people in charge. Everyone else got away clear. Even Barry and Enright came back to TV with more shows, like The Joker's Wild (hosted by Barry), Tic Tac Dough (a newer version with Wink Martindale), Bullseye, Hot Potato, and Play the Percentages. I got the last one from reading a book that lists game shows, by the way, although I do remember watching it. I just didn't remember they were behind it. It is sort of like the little people suffering while the king lives in luxury, paraphrasing from Snoopy's It Was a Dark and Stormy Night.

Of course he should have been held accountable. I think that HE even thought he should be held accountable. He knew that what he was doing was wrong, and even said as much later on in the film.





God save Donald Duck, vaudeville and variety

To me it's a question of integrity or lack thereof. I don't see any grey areas here. Van Doren was responsible for his own actions. He payed with the damage to his and his family's reputation. What would I have done in his place: expose the ruse in any way I could. He still would have had damage to his reputation, the media would have seen to that, but it may have been easier for him to live with himself. A conscience is a good thing to have.

I'm not sure how what he did is any different than acting, I see nothing wrong with it...

Do you think Charles Van Doren should or should not be held accountable for his actions? why?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Van Doren was a college professor, and he knew that going along with the suggestion by the game show guys to answer questions he knew in advance was unethical. He wonders what Kant would make of it, and when he at first refuses, he says "it just doesn't seem right." So we know full well HE knows it's wrong at that point.

When he's asked the question on the show about General Halleck he'd been asked in the interview, that was where he decided he'd take part in the deceit.

He was "held accountable" by being fired from Columbia, and that was about conduct unbecoming, not because he'd broken any law.

He also had to deal with the embarassment and shame he'd brought on his family's name just for faking it all those weeks and accepting money for "winning" a rigged game.

He could and should have refused, but he chose to go along and for weeks was the most important part of the grand deceit. Not ALL his fault, but mostly his fault because it never would have happended had he just done the right thing and told the truth.

I see quite a few posts about how Van Doren did nothing "illegal," but this was about ethics, ie, right and wrong, not legal or illegal.

You do the right thing because it's the right thing, not because you can be arrested or jailed if you do anything other than the right thing.

Hank Azaria's character makes an interesting comment--"It's entertainment. Everybody knows the lady doesn't really get sawed in half."

But 21 was not presented as a magic show, it's presented as a contest of one intellect versus another.

Van Doren is a college professor as well as a Van Doren, so he's held to a much higher standard of ethics than a game show huckster like Azaria or another contestant like Herbie.

In Allie McBeal's cameo when Van Doren and Goodwin first meet, they're talking about Ode to a Grecian Urn--"Beauty is truth, truth beauty," – that is all Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.

That was a nice touch, as well as a major theme in this flick.

van doren didn't go looking for a rigged quiz show. he wanted to play a game. they asked him if he wanted the answers he said no. they ambushed him with them anyway on live tv, what was he to do? what would you have done and remember, this is the 50s and you're on live television sweating your balls off

i think most people miss the whole point of the movie

it's not jews vs gentiles

it's not van doren vs stemple or van doren vs goodwin

it's not van doren vs the world or smart vs dumb

the point of the whole movie is "big money" has the world by the balls. it's "big money" vs. the rest of us

watch the scene where the NBC president is in the elevator asking why goodwin is the one sweating or when the NBC president is talking about playing golf with the congressman right before the whole "hearing" started which was all theater to begin with and at the very end watch as van doren gets into the cab looking back at goodwin and what's being said inside