Historical Films And Accuracy...The Best And The Worst (1950s, JFK, France)

[euromutt]

The worst would be anything on the Third Reich,Hitler,or the german point of ww2.

[chilaili]

U-571 was horrendously wrong about so many things, they even had to add a disclaimer/apology at the end of the movie to avoid protests and possible lawsuits

Does anyone here go to the film webpage of the Guardian newspaper's website (www.guardian.co.uk)? Every week they analyse a well-known movie for its historical accuracy. Some of the reviews they've published are absolutely hilarious !

[quiet walker]

I would agree with previous posters regarding Tora, Tora, Tora and Midway. Two great films that compliment each other.

A film I like is Disney's Great Locomotive Chase (1956). I might have dismissed it earlier, but after spending time in and around Atlanta, and exploring the story, I found that this film is carefully researched and crafted, and faithful to actual events. The story is about the Andrews' Raid during the US Civil War. Northern spy James Andrews led a group of Union Army volunteers into the South with the intention of stealing a train and sabotaging the vital Western & Atlantic railroad while fleeing north.

I found a lot of the history of that event still exists, indeed The General, the locomotive stolen by the raiders now is displayed in a museum not far from where it was taken during the raid. The rail line is still there, now part of the CSX system. Somewhat of a railfan I was amazed at the size of the engine - it is massive and not what one expects from those old funnel stack locos. The locomotive that eventually caught up to the out of steam raiders, The Texas is on display in Atlanta's Cyclorama Civil War Museum. I bought two Civil War interest journals with comprehensive discussion of the Andrews Raid and they described the making of the Disney film. One of the writers having spent a lot of time in research with descendants of the original participants, ended up marrying one of the granddaughters

Great Locomotive Chase - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Great Locomotive Chase (film) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Southern Museum of Civil War and Locomotive History - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[BlackShoe]

Since my general opinion is that almost every film made about the American Indian wars is either bad or awful,will mention a couple that I consider quite good from a historical standpoint.The first is a Canadian production called "Black Robe" set in French Canada in the 1630's about the Jesuits work among the Indians.Very authentic and accurate according to experts of the period.No flinching or coverups about the hardships of life among the natives.
The second film may be a bit more controversial;some may regard it as just another Western,but it is quite another thing.The film is "Ulzanas Raid",at first it might seem as the usual cavalry vs. Indians flick,but not so.Does have some stereotypes;the idealistic green young officer,the weary very wise old scout,the cynical veteran sergeant,and so on.However,this film captures something that other films do not;the absolute brutality of the Apache wars,and most important,how the Apaches may have thought and acted.Apaches in the film acted the way Apaches actually did in historical times.Most will have never seen the original theatre version,which had an R rating.When shown on tv today,we get a sanitized PG version,and that is a bit of a problem.Understand that R rated cuts are very hard to find today,and that is too bad,because they do enhance the mood of the film,and the PG tv versions do lose something because of the deleted scenes.Even so,this film gets a thumbs up for accuracy from this viewer.

[mofford]

Originally Posted by Trudy Rose

I agree about DWW... but while we are on the subject.. What about "Jeremiah Johnson"? I know the characters were based on historical figures..For those who know about this era.. was that an accurate portrayal of Mountain Men??

I saw an episode of Wild West Tech the other day about revenge killings and John Johnson (liver eating Johnson) was mentioned. Checked around a little and this is the man portrayed as the "Jeremiah Johnson" character in the movie. His real name was not Jeremiah Johnson, or John Johnson, but John Garrison born in New Jersey. He joined the navy in the Mexican American War, and deserted after striking an officer and then changed his name to John Johnston. I don't think he ever went by the name of Jeremiah.

He did indeed become a mountain man after the war and the Crow killed his wife like the storyline in the movie. Guess he took a break from his 20 years of revenge killings to join the union army in St. Louis 1864, and he received an honorable discharge in 1865. He ended the feud with the crow in 1872 and later became a deputy sheriff and marshal of Red Lodge Montana. He died in 1900 at the veteran's hospital in Los Angeles at the age of 76.

The man really got around back in the day, and you can't find a tougher guy than liver eatin' Johnson in my book. I enjoyed the movie "Jeremiah Johnson" and would say it ranks high on my list for Robert Redford films.

[Grandstander]

Originally Posted by quiet walker

I would agree with previous posters regarding Tora, Tora, Tora and Midway. Two great films that compliment each other.

A film I like is Disney's Great Locomotive Chase (1956). I might have dismissed it earlier, but after spending time in and around Atlanta, and exploring the story, I found that this film is carefully researched and crafted, and faithful to actual events.

Perhaps because I dislike most things Disney, and perhaps because Disney took enormous liberties with other historical events and figures such as Davey Crockett or the Sons of Liberty, I forgot to consider The Great Locomotive Chase. You are absolutely correct in saying that the Disney version was a factual accounting. I could not find a single scene which failed to square with the first hand descriptions from the record.

If some other studio was remaking it today, they would invent all sorts of hair raising stunts to ramp up the thrill factors. We would see Fuller clinging to the undercarriage of a locomotive at high speed, the General running into and destroying barricades thrown up on the tracks by Confederates, the Texas clamping open its shut off valve so that it could overheat the engine (with someone serving the Scotty part.."Mr. Fuller, you can't! The engines gonna explode!") in order to build up enough speed for the locomotive to leap a river whose bridge had been destroyed by Andrews. (This would be the slow motion, multi angle payday stunt.) We would also be getting some god awful subplot, probably one where both Andrews and Fuller were in love with the same woman before the war so that the whole thing took on a personal grudge tone.

[Dd714]

Originally Posted by Grandstander

Perhaps because I dislike most things Disney, and perhaps because Disney took enormous liberties with other historical events and figures such as Davey Crockett ...

I see you mentioned the remade "The Alamo" on the first post and I quite enjoyed that movie and appreciated the historical accuracy. Ironically, that was a Disney production.
All the characters were accurately portrayed, particularly Davey Crockett who became an accidental hero of sorts. Billy Bob Thorton was really excellent in that movie as Davey. Santa Anna was portrayed as a ruthless b*stard because, from all accounts written in history, that was what he was in real life.
You just had to get past Dennis Quad's over-acting.
I don't beleive Crockett survived the Alamo to be executed after the battle, but it's possible.

[catman]

cpg35223: I remember Longitude. I thought it was excellent! Very entertaining too, not dry at all.

I thought The Boat (Das Boot) was a very good one, as well as Stalingrad. I don't know historically accurate they were in detail, but they seemed to capture the feeling awfully well.

[Grandstander]

Originally Posted by Dd714

You just had to get past Dennis Quad's over-acting.
I don't beleive Crockett survived the Alamo to be executed after the battle, but it's possible.

I agree about Quaid. Everything I've read describes Sam Houston as a drunken blowhard with a theatrical personality, but all of it also says that he was an extremely likable drunken blowhard with a theatrical personality. There was little to like in Quaid's portrayal.

They did show us the aspects of the Travis personality which caused people to find him insufferable, but Patrick Wilson chose to play him as sort of sweet and not so sure of himself. None of the images which have come down through the accounts or cinematic portrayals has ever truly satisfied me. Something made a lot of rugged individualists, men who were older and tougher than Travis, agree to accept his leadership. Travis had no previous military experience, had no previous command or leadership experience, and his reputation was one of hot headed political agitator. And he was just 26 years old. There had to be more to him than what has come to us through history, there had to be aspects to his character which led men to conclude that he was worth following. This was the age of hyper bombastic rhetoric, so maybe Travis was respected highly because he was so bombastic and overly dramatic. I don't know. Travis remains an enigmatic figure, historians aren't even sure that the single image of him which has survived, is actually Travis.

As for the means of Crockett's death, the available evidence, especially since there are two independent sources for the story, suggests to me that it is certainly possible that Crockett surrendered and was executed. I've kept up on the scholarship on this question and it is something like a sports engagement where the momentum keeps constantly shifting. The most recent effort I've read sides with you in disbelieving the story, but I would add that this author side stepped some of the more relevant points raised by the previous scholar who was arguing for the opposite. Unless new evidence is found, I'm content to adopt a "not sure" position.

It's been an interesting battle, the center of the storm being the authenticity of the Jose Enrique de la Pena memoirs. It seemed to appear out of nowhere in 1955 and slowly gained legitimacy over time. Then a scholar discovered that the handwriting was different in some passages. Another scholar argued that this was common for an officer to be dictating to different clerks and that explains the handwriting changes. Then some other scholar argued that Pena's grudge against Santa Anna was sufficient to cause him to invent the story so as make Santa Anna personally responsible for the death of a legend. Then someone else (I think it was James Crisp) organized some omnibus examination of the papers which had anthropologists, handwriting experts, chemists, historians..threw the whole academic kitchen sink at the problem...and concluded that the memoirs were authentic.

However, with such heavy focus placed on Pena's account, these scholars have glossed over the fact that there is a second source, an account which matches the theme if not all the details from Pena. This was taken from an unnamed Mexican officer who was captured at San Jacinto and interrogated by his captors.

I cannot embrace the story without reservations, nor can I feel confident that it cannot be true.

[jtur88]

Not very heavy history, but the movie "Eight Men Out" was one if the first attempts to show the 1919 Black Sox scandal in a fairly accurate light. Few published works (if any) before that movie made any effort to research the facts associated with the event with any kind of even-handedness.