Does it bother you when a period movie changes history ?
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Thank you for the recommendation of an historically accurate movie. I love period movies. Do you know of any others ?Also any movies based on a book that was accurately depicted the book?
Kingdom of Heaven did well on actual history. The normal small stuff, such a command of "fire" for archers to let loose and two handed sword styles etc. I can't recall any books to movies that I felt did the books any justice. The worst of the worst for butchering the books has been ALL of Hollywood's attempts at Tarzan. Every single one has been a pathetic and imbecelic portrayal of good written stories.
An older movie that was pretty historically accurate, at least as far as government and public attitudes toward the Indians in the 1870s is Soldier Blue. It is based on the Sand Creek massacre in Colorado of Black Elks people, and did well in its portrayal of the brutality and blood drunkenness (and whiskey) of the "militia".
No. I watch movies for entertainment. If it is a period piece, and I am not familiar with the history I will research it after the movie to see what is what.
George Macdonald Fraser, well regarded author of the Flashman series,(and an exc. WW2 autobio), authored The Hollywood History of the World which is a very funny look at how history and Hollywood agree and otherwise.
You know I'd just wonder if most here would think they are indeed getting 'truth' in the films that they believe tells it 'like it was'. I just think there really is no 'truth' as such just approximations based on what we know already about what's being presented on the screen.
I mean really all we are getting is an 'interpretation' regardless of who is making the film. How can it be any other way? I guess that's why I made my peace with those crazy Miller films on 'heroic' Greek history. Way out but based a bit on fact and fiction with a dash of visual style. I originally looked at it as getting 'history' but really with stuff like that the presentation gets confounded with the drive to 'entertain'. Certainly no problem in that but if you want 'truth' you will ultimately never ever get it there.
Um, the First Avenger was a World War 2 film and there really wasn't integration between whites and blacks in the different battalions at that point. There was one or two black guys in the Howling Commando unit that Captain America created. If the First Avenger was staged in say Afghanistan or Iraq, you would have a point. The issue is that for the time period, it actually works.
I was using the classic definition of white wash. To put a coat of paint over the ugly truth, not the modern urban dictionary definition.
You know I'd just wonder if most here would think they are indeed getting 'truth' in the films that they believe tells it 'like it was'. I just think there really is no 'truth' as such just approximations based on what we know already about what's being presented on the screen.
I mean really all we are getting is an 'interpretation' regardless of who is making the film. How can it be any other way? I guess that's why I made my peace with those crazy Miller films on 'heroic' Greek history. Way out but based a bit on fact and fiction with a dash of visual style. I originally looked at it as getting 'history' but really with stuff like that the presentation gets confounded with the drive to 'entertain'. Certainly no problem in that but if you want 'truth' you will ultimately never ever get it there.
I understand what you are saying . That only those who were really there know for sure what happened and even then 10 different people witnesses to history will have 10 different versions to tell. It is also true that in war often the winning side writes the history. Still, I would appreciate it if they at least made the effort to research the facts put them on the screen. Otherwise it starts to seem so fake I lose interest.
In both the TV movie and in Red Tails for some reason they renamed Gen Benjamin O. Davis Jr. He was not just another pilot or just a group commander in history. He and the Tuskegee Airmen were so unique that it would be like doing a movie on a Confederate Army unit and giving Gen Robert E. Lee a staged character name.
It is also true that in war often the winning side writes the history
You know in the context of that and the post above on Robert E Lee I'd think it would be very interesting to see a film done today criticizing Lee for his handling of the Southern cause in that lost war which tore the country apart. Would it be 'true' if it pointed completely on the negative? I guess true to the extent that if on on side you may have say hagiography it can follow that there could also be disillusion with the general view of his historical veneration.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.