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.
Cross of Iron a bleak look at combat on the Eastern Front. This is historical only in the sense that it describes the real nature of the Eastern Front. Its not based on a specific historical battle.
If you liked Cross of Iron, try 'Come and See' (Иди и смотри) (Soviet, 1986). Plenty bleak Eastern Front in that one.
My nomination- The Right Stuff seems fairly accurate. Or did you mean war movies only?
Last edited by TropicalAussie; 12-14-2009 at 02:09 AM..
I can't remember the name of the movie, but Mel Gibson did one on the American Revolution. I was just a kid back in the 1980's then, but I remember a Junior high school history teacher saying it was done well. Probably not the video footage quality we have today, but historically accurate.
My family...a long line of Continental Soldiers who served in various battles, have historical accounts in their diaries that say such atrocities against the American's really happened like in the movie. One diary describes the carnage on Long Island as the British used chain in their cannons at Continental troops. (I am not saying the American side did anything nicer as it was truly war after all).
I remember the whippings of Mel Gibson and his boy, and the famous fox hunt scene where lacking real foxes, they used captured Continental soldiers. While my family diaries do not describe this per se, I suspect the movie writer got the idea from historical fact.
....all felt like they had spend some serious time and effort on looking historically accurate. Of course, aside from the story there always will be *something* wrong.
For example while the details of the "Titanic" sets were superb, they were lighted all wrong for historic accuracy. The ship was a bright as a modern day cruise liner inside and out, despite the fact that 1912 era light bulbs put out crappy light. The Titanic would have been much darker inside.
It just comes down to the fact that reality (historic or not) does not make ideal entertainment.
I can't remember the name of the movie, but Mel Gibson did one on the American Revolution. I was just a kid back in the 1980's then, but I remember a Junior high school history teacher saying it was done well. Probably not the video footage quality we have today, but historically accurate.
My family...a long line of Continental Soldiers who served in various battles, have historical accounts in their diaries that say such atrocities against the American's really happened like in the movie. One diary describes the carnage on Long Island as the British used chain in their cannons at Continental troops. (I am not saying the American side did anything nicer as it was truly war after all).
I remember the whippings of Mel Gibson and his boy, and the famous fox hunt scene where lacking real foxes, they used captured Continental soldiers. While my family diaries do not describe this per se, I suspect the movie writer got the idea from historical fact.
Don't forget the bit where the Limey scum locked the villagers in the church and burnt it down with the women and kiddies still inside.
I can't remember the name of the movie, but Mel Gibson did one on the American Revolution. I was just a kid back in the 1980's then, but I remember a Junior high school history teacher saying it was done well. Probably not the video footage quality we have today, but historically accurate.
My family...a long line of Continental Soldiers who served in various battles, have historical accounts in their diaries that say such atrocities against the American's really happened like in the movie. One diary describes the carnage on Long Island as the British used chain in their cannons at Continental troops. (I am not saying the American side did anything nicer as it was truly war after all).
I remember the whippings of Mel Gibson and his boy, and the famous fox hunt scene where lacking real foxes, they used captured Continental soldiers. While my family diaries do not describe this per se, I suspect the movie writer got the idea from historical fact.
'The Patriot' was riddled with historical inaccuracies. The burning church was perhaps the highlight, as that incident occurred during World War II and the perpetrators were Nazi SS troops.
Mel Gibson is a modern nationalist propagandist and his movies are as historically accurate as The Lord of the Rings both in terms of events and sets/costuming.
The Patriot was pretty phony and plays to American myths about the Revolution rather than it's realities. Ignored is the fact that the British Redcoats wore a simple, serviceable field uniform, wore their hair short, carried tomahawks and hatchets and were highly skilled in light and partisan warfare. The Redcoats could stand in line and blast you away with volleys AND sneak up behind you in the woods; whatever worked.
And Cornwallis was a younger and far more energetic man than portrayed in the movie and he was a pretty decent guy to boot; he was an enlightened and sympathetic governor of Ireland and of India too.
"Drums Along the Mohawk" by John Ford (1939) is a pretty realistic look at the Revolution as fought by Patriots, Indians and Torys on the frontier. And in the end the infantry, rather than the cavalry, comes to the rescue. It my also be the first picture in which a character says "It's quiet, TOO quiet, out there."
The Patriot was about as historically accurrate as Mad Max was.
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.