And the time line isn't the only difference. Throughout In Love and War , much ado was being made of not much. Certainly, the rambunctious young Hemingway was clearly enamored by the attractive, older Agnes. But it's hard to imagine much romance actually occurring between a kid in bed with his leg in a cast and a very busy nurse in a hospital overflowing with war wounded. It's also clear from published source material that In Love and War adds a lot of material with little basis in fact.
Nobody knows if the first event ever occurred, and everybody knows the second event never did.
That's the sort of convenient, sentimental dramatic license frequently found in old Hollywood movie biographies. The most winning aspect of In Love and War is Bullock's spunky, effervescent portrait of Agnes. She's depicted as a thoroughly modern, free-spirited woman whose sense of dedication is matched by a desire to enjoy life. The actor bears an uncanny resemblance to the young Hemingway, which helps. He also has a youthful exuberance, which seems appropriate.