"Historical" film that screws most with real history?

[Archae]

I was discussing this with my neighbor, and we agreed on "JFK" as the film that screws the most with real history.

Any others?

[autorank]

1. How so?

[Zen Democrat]

2. That's crap. JFK has more truth in it than almost any movie ever made.

Educate yourself.

[Archae]

33. I have.

"JFK" had Garrison giving this impassioned speech to the jury at the end of the trial.
He didn't.

And the jurors took about an hour, including lunch, to declare Clay Shaw NOT guilty.

"JFK" had Kennedy is such a crossfire, I'm surprised there was anything left.

Others listed below screw with history big time.
Most recent was "Pearl Harbor."
Example: Torpedo slams into side of ship, blowing up sailors painting said ship.
It was a Sunday morning, sailors wouldn't be painting the side of a ship.

[xmas74]

38. But when you look at a movie that way,

then A Beautiful Mind played around w/ fact also. The big speech that Nash gives at the end never happened (economists do not historically give speeches when they receive Nobel prizes. Even Nash agreed that it never happened).

[Seabiscuit]

42. "Impassioned speeches" in trial movies are Hollywood's way of

summarizing the essential arguments made by one of the parties in a lawsuit.

That part didn't bother me at all, because I'm not only a movie buff, but an attorney to boot.

"JFK" contained more truth about the Kennedy assassination than anything else Hollywood or the government has produced.

The only places you can find for more information on the JFK assassination are certain history channel documentaries and, of course, the web.

"JFK" basically told it like it was (take it from an aging JFK conspiracy buff who was 18 at the time JFK was killed and whose youthful idealism took a serious blow as a result).

[Zen Democrat]

129. Oliver Stone said at the beginning ...

that he combined some scenes and characters involving Garrison and his investigation -- but the facts of the JFK assassination, the questions, the testimony of witnesses ... all of that was fact.

The Donald Sutherland character was Col. Fletcher Prouty -- and he was interviewed by Mark Lane. Some of the Dallas witnesses on the bridge were interviewed by Mark Lane. But Mark Lane was working for Garrison during his investigation, and it didn't take anything away from the FACTS as stated by the witnesses whether they were told to Garrison or Lane.

True, Garrison didn't make the speech at the end of the trial, that was done by an Asst. DA, but Garrison made the speech during opening remarks. Stone moved it around for effect.

Stone stated loudly and clearly that the Garrison end of the story was "based" on fact. The fictional Kevin Bacon character "Willie O'Keefe" was a combination of several informants in the Garrison investigation, but Stone created O'Keefe in the interest of moving the story.

The point is this ... everything pertaining to the assassination and cover-up WAS and IS fact, based on eyewitness testimony. And not all the Garrison stuff was made up -- the Dean Andrews business was spot on. Read his Warren Commission testimony.

[mondo joe]

3. Braveheart is a contender.

[leftofthedial]

21. Braveheart is almost pure fiction

it has some historical names and he did die drawn and quartered

everything else is pure hollywood

[NewJeffCT]

75. I thought he died from an arrow from a long bow?

I guess I was mistaken... but, I haven't read up on the real William Wallace in a while.

[CBHagman]

94. No, he got a ghastly death.

I first read about that 20 years ago and later visited Stirling, where some of the battles took place.

I was very disappointed in the film Braveheart. And I'll bet the real William Wallace didn't have hair extensions, either.

[LostinVA]

108. And, he would have worn a Great Kilt that had more than two

yards of fabric. That always drives me nutso... but then, he probably wouldn't have even worn a kilt... maybe trews or a leine.

[LostinVA]

110. Girl with a Pearl Earring

"Creative license" doesn't describe what they did to Vermeer's personal life... although I greatly enjoyed both the book and the movie!

[BlueIris]

46. Gotta jump on this bandwagon.

I hate "Braveheart." So much. Gross historical inaccuracy is actually my smallest complaint about its content. The rest can largely be summed up in two words: Mel Gibson. Yeah, I know he's come out and criticized Iraq recently, but in the meantime, he made "The Passion" and stirred the Jesus zombies in this country into a frenzy in an election year, as well as condemned both the ethics and the science of stem cell research. And acted like an asshole about it. And don't even get me started on how overrated "The Passion" is.

[Rob H.]

105. The real William Wallace was well over 6 feet tall, too

That was mentioned on a PBS special I saw last year. The estimate was based on the length and weight of Wallace's sword--he would've had to be at least 6'6" to have wielded it, which must have been doubly terrifying to the average English infantryman of the time, who would've been around five feet tall.

But, since Gibson wanted to play the part and he was the director....

[BlueIris]

134. Damn.

Seriously. Somebody take Mel and show him some of the kids dying of diseases that could be cured by stem cell therapies. Then ask him what kind of Christian he is. Then tell him how much taller William Wallace was than he is. Literally and figuratively. Then slap him. That might make up for it.

[Tom Kitten]

4. U-571? Inchon?

Any war movie with an agenda?

[Lautremont]

83. I sure agree with U-571.

History rewritten the way (some) Americans would have liked it.

[Hobarticus]

98. U-571 sucks historical ass....

But, Jon Bon Jovi gets knocked off pretty quickly.

[Dave Reynolds]

125. That was a big plus for me. /nt

[gordianot]

5. All the President's Men

Worthless without the identity of Deep Throat.


JFK was speculation, who knows what reality really is in that sad chapter.

Just about any war movie ever made.

[Seabiscuit]

44. "Worthless without the identity of deep throat"??? LMAO!!!

We still don't know who "Deep Throat" was.

The movie was well done and highlighted what happened during the Washington Post's exposure of the Watergate fiasco.

One of my all-time favorite "quasi-documentary" movies.

[gordianot]

49. Woodward was fed specific information to destroy Nixon.

Given Woodward's close relationship today with Bush WH is a cause for suspicion. Someday we may find out. If Deep Throat really is Poppy that in itself is the biggest political story of the 20th century. LMAO is a good way to lose weight.

[Seabiscuit]

97. An obsession with Deep Throat's identity can understandably blind one

to the important qualities of that film. Since no film could possibly give you your answer, of course you were disappointed in it to the point of calling it "worthless". Did you think the film was going to spill the beans on Deep Throat's identity before you watched it?

[gordianot]

106. I knew it wouldn't identify Deep Throat. Myth of Liberal Media

My problem with the film is the same one I have with the book. It is written by the participants and does not show the motives of Woodward and Bernstein. They come across as noble journalist out to slay the crook Nixon. A really enjoyable movie. I'm sure this inspired many toward journalism. Now years later there are or should be questions about the motives of destroying Nixon. Make no mistake I despise Nixon and in no way am I a Nixon apologist. Look at what Woodward gained with book and movie. Look at how Woodward went after Clinton. Look how Woodward is now giving Bush, easily the shadiest character to walk on two legs, a pass. This movie created a Myth, the crusading journalist, and reinforced reputations that are questionable in light of current events. Where are those inquisitive journalist today or have been swallowed up by corporate media? Maybe they are posting on blogs and the Internet?

All the Presidents Men has the same problem as Churchill memoirs. The story of World War II cannot be told without ULTRA. The story of Nixon's downfall cannot be told without knowing Deep Throat. Today an informer can vent a CIA agent and get by with it in the name of protecting journalistic sources. Wouldn't it be great to face your accuser in court, maybe even Nixon deserved that? Wouldn't it be great if Valerie Palme or possible CIA contact could face those who have placed their lives in danger?

If anyone does not think history matters read links here on DU that suggest Clinton's impeachment was retaliation for Nixon. All the Presidents Men was dishonest as a book and as a movie. Maybe reputations will someday be rehabilitated when the whole story is told.

[Seabiscuit]

119. I don't get it. Why are you now obssessing over what you imagine to be

some deep, dark, hidden "motives" of Woodward and Bernstein to "slay"/"destroy" Nixon? You say you're no Nixon apologist, but your words come across as if you were.

First you don't like the film because it doesn't disclose Deep Throat's identity, now you say you don't like it because you have your own personal (and I think completely unwarranted) suspicions about the motives of the young Washington Post journalists who cracked the story.

They were young journalists, and they discovered the story one small piece at a time as it developed. The only "motive" they needed was to to a good job, and they certainly did. The story they unraveled led to the conviction of numerous Nixon aides for the crimes they committed, and to Nixon's impending impeachment and ultimate resignation.

I don't see why you have a problem with what they did or why you search for "motives" for why they did it. And I think the movie did a very fair job of showing what they did and how the story developed.

You seem to think Woodward was only in it for the money???? I don't think so, Tim. And Woodward and had nothing to do with the unwarranted attacks on Clinton - those were led by right-wingers pissed off not that Woodward and Bernstein "destroyed" Nixon, as you put it but because Clinton deprived George Bush of a second term and disrupted the neo-con agenda. And Woodward has hardly given Dubya a "free pass".

I will agree that Woodward and Bernstein aren't the journalists they were during Watergate. They really should be a lot tougher on Dubya. And I agree the only journalists with integrity left today are for the most part on the internet.

If we had the kind of journalists around today that we had with Woodward, Bernstein, and their boss, Ben Bradlee during Watergate, Dubya wouldn't have gotten away with any of the dozens of creepy things he's been responsible for.

You're reading evil motives into characters who neither deserve it, nor appear to be hiding any. You mostly seem upset that they helped take Nixon down. Well, Nixon deserved what he got and more. Woodward and Bernstein were just two players among dozens who unraveled and exposed Nixon's criminality and the criminality of those closest to him. Why should that bother any but the most ardent Nixon supporter????

The bottom line is that the film did a very good job of chronicling the Watergate story as it developed from the beginning. The story of Nixon's downfall has been told in many ways, beyond that film, quite well, with no need to know the identity of Deep Throat. I personally don't think it makes any difference who Deep Throat was - the entire history of Watergate is laid out in numerous sources for all to see.

Most importantly, this film didn't "screw" with history - which is the topic of the thread. The historical development of the unraveling of the Watergate mess is very accurately portrayed in the film.

[gordianot]

142. Mythology of the press

A Pulitzer seems like good payment to me if you want a motive. A Movie deal with royalties would not be bad either. How about access to the White House while Bush plans his war? Given that Bush does not allow kids with Kerry T-shirts close to him why would he allow a journalist who helped sink a Republican President?

see link: http://www.edwardjayepstein.com/archived/watergate.htm

The natural tendency of journalists to magnify the role of the press in great scandals is perhaps best illustrated by Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward's autobiographical account of how they "revealed" the Watergate scandals. The dust jacket and national advertisements, very much in the bravado spirit of the book itself, declare: "All America knows about Watergate. Here, for the first time, is the story of how we know.... In what must be the most devastating political detective story of the century, the two young Washington Post reporters whose brilliant investigative journalism smashed the Watergate scandal wide open tell the whole behind-the-scenes drama the way it happened." In keeping with the mythic view of journalism, however, the book never describes the "behind-the-scenes" investigations which actually "smashed the Watergate scandal wide open"-namely the investigations conducted by the FBI, the federal prosecutors, the grand jury, and the Congressional committees. The work of almost all those institutions, which unearthed and developed all the actual evidence and disclosures of Watergate, is systematically ignored or minimized by Bernstein and Woodward. Instead, they simply focus on those parts of the prosecutors' case, the grand-jury investigation, and the FBI reports that were leaked to them.

The result is that no one interested in "how we know" about Watergate will find out from their book, or any of the other widely circulated mythopoeics about Watergate. Yet the non-journalistic version of how Watergate was uncovered is not exactly a secret-,the government prosecutors (Earl Silbert, Seymour Glanzer, and Donald E. Campbell) are more than willing to give a documented account of the investigation to anyone who desires it. According to one of the prosecutors, however, "No one really wants to know." Thus the government's investigation of itself has become a missing link in the story of the Watergate scandal, and the actual role that journalists played remains ill understood.

[Richardo]

51. "ATPM" is also on my top five of all time.

One of the truest 'dramatised' portrayals of history on film.

[SaveElmer]

6. I agree

JFK was a complete POS!!!

[Seabiscuit]

45. If you can say that you must be too young to have lived through it

and researched it.

"JFK" was spot-on about the facts surrounding JFK's assassination.

[Fenris]

7. Braveheart

[Zen Democrat]

8. Do you think the Warren Commission is "real history"?????

[Seabiscuit]

43. My point eggsactly!

Unless you buy the presposterous notion promoted by the Warren Commission that Oswald was a lone assassin of JFK, and you have never seen the Zapruder film, there is only one conclusion: there was a "consiracy" to kill JFK, because, as the Zapruder film proves, there had to be more than one rifleman at the time of the assassination.

"JFK" merely expounds on that fact, with other facts.

Any objections to other things done in the "JFK" movie are really mere objections to stylistic presentation. Which I find silly.

[Robeson]

47. Nicely said.

[enlightenment]

9. Elizabeth, Braveheart,

almost anything done in the 1950s -- that horrible thing with Charlton Heston as Andrew Jackson springs (unwillingly) to mind. I have to admit I'm out of the loop. After 'Elizabeth' I refused to see any others.

As an historian, I think all 'historical' films should come with a mandatory 'boring, but more or less correct' after-film.
Movies are entertainment, and as so many students say, history is not entertaining (my classes are, of course :woohoo: )

[rockymountaindem]

13. History is always entertaining.

I'm a second year history student myself! All my friends like my impromptu lectures, or so they say.

[enlightenment]

22. I am delighted to see you feel that way!!

Personally, I love history -- and after a semester with me, most (not all) of my students say that they've come away with a new perspective on the subject.
But, in the beginning (and yes, I ask!) most say that they 'hated' history in high school.
I say history is like building a house -- it needs a foundation, a frame, a roof, walls, windows, and doors. Those are the basics. What you put inside -- how you decorate the house -- is what makes it interesting. For me, all that decorating is the "why" of history; the who, what, when, where, and hows are the outside of the house.

It also helps if you're a real ham, as I am. Teaching is performance art, after all!

PS -- I'm from CO myself. Wish I was there . . .

[rockymountaindem]

23. Where from?

I'm from Colorado Springs (oy).

[enlightenment]

27. 18 years in Denver (and Aurora)

and then another 6 in Grand Junction. My dad was AF -- retired there when I was 16. He was born in Paonia. We had a cabin down by Pagosa Springs (southeast of there) until a few years ago. We spent almost every summer there.

I sure do miss the mountains.

Colorado Springs is a pretty place -- despite all the conservatives.
Hang in there
:thumbsup:

[RubyDuby in GA]

88. I'm delighted to see you both feel that way

BA in History here :hi:

[LostinVA]

109. And WHY did they change "Elizabeth"??? The real story

Is GREAT.

Cate blanchett was still great in it. She rocks!

[enlightenment]

146. Because the reality isn't sexy enough

The movie-makers always have to find a way to get people down to -- or out of -- their skivvies.
I've never considered myself a prude, but I'm getting tired of gratuitous sex and violence in EVERYTHING.
16th century folks were pretty 'earthy' but Elizabeth's sex life (or lack thereof) just isn't the story.

[sundog]

10. Birth of a Nation

:puke:

[Fenris]

11. aka "The Clansmen"

Classy, D.W. Classy.

[norml]

29. They did a remake of The Clansmen in 1939.

[mark414]

12. seconded

i just had to sit through that mess for my black history class

"revolutionary" film or not, it's a pile of shit, for the obvious reasons

[RoyGBiv]

35. Yup ...

That's at the very top of my list.

[On the Road]

70. Bingo!

I was going to propose Mississippi Burning,, but I can't think of anything that would top Birth of a Nation.

[fishwax]

99. gag! no doubt

:puke:

[ironflange]

14. History of the World, Part I

[VelmaD]

15. You mean Torquemada didn't really...

wear wingtips? I'm devestated. ;)

[LostinVA]

111. No, he wore Ghillies. A common mistake, I warrant.

[Radical Activist]

16. Hidalgo

Disney said it was based on a true story. They didn't stick to the original story, which was most likely a fraud that never happened anyway.

[Radical Activist]

19. On second thought: Anything by Disney

Cartoon or film.

[Bridget Burke]

52. Hidalgo was a tall tale.

And it was just about one man's adventure--true or not. It wasn't really an account of any Great Historical Event.

[Radical Activist]

93. Disney said it was "based on a true story"

Which is why I brought it up, even if it wasn't really a true story.

[kodi]

17. "how the west was won"

myths, lies, and manifest destiny

[norml]

18. I think not. JFK presented many things that I'd seen before

and that are independently verifiable. Even though the film was very long, they had to leave out some of the evidence, for time's sake. Right wing media whores fixed on the fictional Donald Sutherland character, who explained it all, with Generals XYZ, so that they could call the JFK movie a fiction. They don't want examination of the facts presented in the movie. I strongly disapprove of your choice of JFK, as the historical film that most screws with history. For that title I suggest you remember The Alamo, the one with John Wayne.

[norml]

25. Remember The Alamo?

[Hatalles]

20. Shakespeare's History Plays.

[tjwmason]

59. Seconded

Especially Richard III and Macbeth - the former was nasty Tudor propaganda the latter nasty Stuart propaganda.

Which simply illustrates that throughout history (if you'll pardon the pun), people have used the arts (think Bayeux Tapestry moving beyond dramatic arts) to manipulate (intentionally or otherwise) history to fit their perspective/own ends.

[FreedomFry]

24. Just about any biopic of the 1930s and '40s

But fun to watch, anyway.

[Hardrada]

41. Words and Music

A complete misrepresentation of the life of Lorenz Hart.

[Zen Democrat]

26. John Wayne's "The Alamo", John Wayne's "The Green Beret"

John Wayne's just about everything.

[alphafemale]

39. Add to that probably nearly every western/war movie pre 70's or so. nt

[Az]

28. Patton always drove me nuts

Its not that the events were historically inaccurate. Its the damn tanks they used to shoot the movie. Both sides were using Patton tanks throughout the movie. ! :wtf:

I used to study WWII armor and it just drove me nuts. Sitting there watching tanks named after the guy that was riding around in them on both sides of the battle. Arrrrrggg.....

Give me Kelly's Heroes any day over Patton. Screw historical accuracy. At least they had Tiger tanks against Shermans. And they got the tactics right too. A freaking Sherman can't do a thing to a Tiger unless it gets point blank on its rear.

[eyepaddle]

102. As a sidebar

you really see a lot of that. If I remeber correctly in the film they are using M-47s--which are also used in the dreadful "Battle of the Bulge"

However in Hollywood's defense they tend to just use what is cheap and available. This is why almost every military helicopter they show is STILL a Huey. They've already bought those and they ain't planning on picking up Blachawks until those Hueys are just flat-out used up.

Kelly's Heroes, ah yes, drinking some wine, eating some cheese.....

[6000eliot]

30. "Mississippi Burning" most offensively

Here's a clue, the FBI were not the heroes of the Civil Rights movement.

[sniffa]

58. my choice as weLL

[LostinVA]

112. Oh yeah! Definitely... give me a break

[WMliberal]

122. of course the FBI wasn't. Gene Hackman was!

[6000eliot]

124. "I and the Village?"

[WMliberal]

130. yeppers

I like to rotate which Chagall I keep in the sig. I'm open to suggestions for my next one. I was thinking of Le Promenade.

[6000eliot]

131. Nice

I wish I could insert graphics, but I don't know how on DU. Chagall is one of my favorites, along with Dali and Magritte.

[WMliberal]

143. here

use brackets: (< insert url of the picture here >) and voila, it's done.
You can do it in your message or, like me, in your sig line in your profile

[6000eliot]

144. Thank you so much!

:yourock:

[Maddy McCall]

137. Yes.

Probably the worst offender.

[HeeBGBz]

31. Most cowboy and indian westerns

Prior to 1965 or so.

[norml]

32. They Died With Their Boots On

[imenja]

34. agreed, it's a piece of shit

But people who never bother to read history take it as fact.

[two gun sid]

36. The Ten Commandments....

[RoyGBiv]

37. All of them?

I have yet to see a historical film that doesn't screw with history in some major way, so it'd be hard to pick one that did so the most. I guess one could give credit for the producers/writers trying to get it right, but that's fairly rare.

If we weed out the ones with a historical theme and concentrate just on those that are portrayed as presenting history, my top pick would have to be _Birth of a Nation_. It's wrong in just about every way imagineable yet was marketed as a film depicting actual history.

Other top contenders are _The Ten Commandments_ and anything with Mel Gibson in it.

[Hardrada]

40. Shenandoah, How the West Was Won, The Fall of the Roman Empire

Three massive clunkers from the Sixties. O and Cleopatra too. The most expensive clunker.

[onager]

48. The Patriot

If we had depended on people like Tiny Mel to win the Revolution, we'd still be subjects of the Windsor Family. Script by Robert Donat, also responsible for "Severing Ryan's Privates." The British complained, rightfully, about the horrific scene of churchgoing civilians being burned alive. Banastre Tarleton was an evil character...e.g., he didn't take prisoners...but not THAT evil.

(And he wasn't the only one who didn't take prisoners. Read a little about the Revolutionary battle of King's Mountain.)

"The Messenger:" what the hell were they thinking?

"Gladiator:" about as historically accurate as "Cleopatra." No Roman general would be dumb enough to fight a battle like that opening scene, unless he was going for a re-play of the Teutoberger Wald. (History Geek Reference...)

The stirrup hadn't been invented yet, asshats. Neither had the German Shepherd, which wasn't bred until the late 19th century.

[Bridget Burke]

57. "Where are my eagles?"

Yes, I know what happened at the Teutoberger Wald.

That quotation is from "I, Claudius"--which was just a little TV series based on books that were just ways for a poet to make some money. And there was more historical "truth" in that witty, scandalous production than in most lumbering "historical" epics.

[fudge stripe cookays]

62. Thank you!

I sat through that piece of shit movie, and thank goodness I didn't pay anything for it because it SUCKED! And this was even before I knew Mel was an out-and-out religious loon.

The acting was awful, the dialog sucked, and it had nothing to do with historical fact whatsoever! Unbelievable.

[LostinVA]

113. I know alot about the Carolina Campaign, and that movie

was crazy. OMG. Just about pure fiction.

[NewJeffCT]

73. I agree on this one...

Gibson's "the Patriot" makes his "Braveheart" practically look like a literal word-for-word translation.

[Aristus]

81. There were plenty of innaccuracies in "Gladiator", which didn't

diminish my enjoyment of the film; and I'm a NUT on Ancient Rome. Commodus was not killed in the arena; he was strangled to death in his bath by a wrestler named Narcissus. Not exactly a Hollywood ending there. And he DID fight in the arena from time to time. We know this for a fact; but the fights were almost certainly staged to make him look good.

One thing "Gladiator" did well, although probably by accident, was to explicate the system of succession fostered by the Emperor Nerva. Find a talented conscientious military leader, adopt him as your son, and have him succeed you as emperor. Nerva did it with Trajan, Trajan adopted Hadrian, Hadrian adopted Antoninus Pius, and Pius adopted Marcus Aurelius. Marcus Aurelius allowed his own son to succeed him, but the movie let's us believe that he was going to continue the adoption of a general like his predecessors. (Like Trajan and Hadrian, Maximus in the film was a Spaniard.)

[LostinVA]

114. I know alot about Ancient Rome, and I thought "Gladiator"

was okay. No, far from perfect, but it got alot of stuff very, very right.

[Taxloss]

50. U-571, Braveheart ...

there must be hundreds.

[Aiptasia]

53. You're forgetting Reefer Madness

I swear i'm going to take a dump on Harry J. Anslinger's grave one day.

[LostinVA]

115. WTF??? I've ALWAYS acted like that when I've gotten stoned!

[CO Liberal]

54. "Forrest Gump"

Remember how they had Tom Hanks in film with JFK, LBJ, and Nixon?

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

55. "Gladiator"

And I know I'll get flamed for this, but I suspect "The Great Escape" is bullshit too. I have a hard time believing the Nazis ran their prison camp like a friggin resort club.

[Bridget Burke]

60. POW camps for Allied airmen were run by the Luftwaffe

And they were, indeed, pretty good as POW camps go. This was a remnant of the previous War, when flyers respected their "enemy"--knights of the air & all that. I believe things changed as the War dragged on--& Germany began losing.

I don't know the true facts of "The Great Escape" but have read several books of escapes & escape attempts from these camps.

[CBGLuthier]

91. There was an excellent Nova the other week about Great Escape

Major point.

Americans did help dig the tunnels.

But all Americans were transferred out before the escape so none of them took part.

The 50 were indeed murdered.

Only a few, 3 I think, weren't caught. And there was one group of 12 or so that was caught at the Chezkoslavakia border who weren't murderd with the 50. Probably because the Gestapo didn't get them in time.

The part about the tunnel being short and the Air Raid getting them caught were true.

[LostinVA]

116. The "great Escape" was pretty accurate

[CBGLuthier]

120. More so than most anyway

If you throw out the roles played by James Garner, Charles Bronson and Steve McQueen anyway.

James Coburn played an Australian so he doesn't count as an American in that movie. :-)

[lpbk2713]

63. The Steve McQueen character was pretty much fictionalized.

If anything it was made as a composite figure. The motorcycle dash at the end was pure fiction but was allowed to be a part of the film because McQueen insisted on doing the stuntwork himself to showcase his biker skills.

The part where the captured escapees were executed by the SS was all too true, however.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

67. Yeah, I buy that.

I just find it really hard to believe that these guys pretty much got away with anything up to that point. The Nazis weren't a forgiving bunch.

[Generic Other]

139. "Le Grande Illusion," 1937

Hate to break it to ya, but Hollywood has been ripping off good foreign films for some time. I was amazed at how many scenes from this movie had been lifted.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0028950/

[On the Road]

74. "Gladiator" Was Not Supposed to be History

but concerned a fictional character in a historical setting. I actually thought the treatment of ancient Rome was surprisingly well done.

One problem I had with Gladiator: Initially, I could not believe that the movie would be so preposterous as to depict a Roman emperor fighting a gladiatorial match in the Coliseum.

So after seeing the movie, I did a search on Commodus, and, lo and behold, he DID fight gladiatorial matches -- a lot of them. The upper classes were horrified and ashamed, but the working class loved it. Commodus even kept his costume and weapons in the throne room. And he won all his matches.

[Nicholas D Wolfwood]

78. Yeah, Commodus was quite a shithead in real life.

And I believe Maximus was a real-life general too. And that's the problem with the movie - you're taking real life people and creating a fictional world around them. That's nice if you make it perfectly clear, but you're distorting history if you don't.

[On the Road]

95. Oh, That I Didn't Know

I thought Maximus was a fictional character. Now I understand the criticism. It would have been better with a fictional general.

[LostinVA]

117. Maximus was a composite fictional character, loosely based

on a few generals.

[bertha katzenengel]

56. "Amadeus" -- although it was never billed as historically accurate.

eom

[Bridget Burke]

61. As a play, "Amadeus" was more abstract & symbolic.

A meditation on God & Art--although the rumors about Salieri are very old. This was probably more evident on stage.

But the movie, with it's glorious setting & wonderful music, makes you think "this is real!" I'm quite glad to set aside the historical accuracy question & just enjoy the trip. Did I mention the music?

[BlueIris]

135. You know what's interesting to me, though?

I've spoken to three professors of music history (two who focused their courses largely on Motzart/Salieri) who don't care about the historical inaccuracies and actually defend some of the content. I expected them to laugh when I asked what their opinions were about how well it succeeded as a "period piece." Just a curiosity I ran into.

[bertha katzenengel]

145. I found the whole thing fascinating. I learned from it because it made me

curious about both mens' lives, so I read up.

And the MUSIC! Tom Hulce was so great in selling that role as Mozart. You can really imagine that all that mattered in the man's life was music and to hell with anything else. He was fantastic.

[DinahMoeHum]

64. "Pearl Harbor" (2001)

The second half of the picture is bearable, but still over the top.

The picture was like "Titanic"; it would have been a million times better if they didn't try to interpolate a fictional love story into a historical event. There were also plenty of real-life heroes that it was unnecessary to do phony over-the-top ones.

:evilfrown:

[curse10]

65. The Patriot n/t

[chickenscratching]

66. second that

[MrSandman]

68. Pearl Harbor...

Only Tora,Tora, Tora badly done.

[AngryAmish]

69. Dude, Where's my Car?

Don't get me started.

[Throckmorton]

71. Harold and Kumar go to the White Castle

I mean, all they had to do was stop by the Waldbaum's freeze case.

[AngryAmish]

72. In real life they were going to In-And-Out Burger

Totally f'n with the facts.

[catzies]

123. And in The Big Lebowski, after they went to In-N-Out, the cups they

were drinking from in the car are not what they sell drinks in at In-N-Out!

(who probably didn't want product placement anyway)

[Heidi]

76. Nearly every "historical film" ever made about Native Americans. (nt)

[ScreamingMeemie]

77. Disney's Pocahantas...a misleading piece of garbage...

that was pretty though.

[LostinVA]

118. The worst thing? They had a Native American consultant

Yeah, like they listened to HER! And like Tidewater, VA, has MOUNTAINS.

YET ANOTHER MEL GIBSON MOVIE, TOO!!!!!!

[WMliberal]

121. haha, yeah, the waterfalls of Jamestown.

and the craggy, snow-capped mountains just beyond Williamsburg :wtf:
:banghead:

[Mizmoon]

79. THE PATRIOT - ARGHHH!!

I HATE THAT EFFING FILM!

The American Revolution is full of fascinating, remarkable stories. So what does Gibson do, that weasel? HE MAKES THE WHOLE EFFING THING UP!!

Thank you for this chance to explode. Don't even get me started on U571.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

80. Not really a movie, but Shogun

During the days of its popularity, a group of professors at UC-Berkeley put out a booklet of about 100 pages called "Learning from Shogun," which listed all the factual errors and distortions in the series, with respect to both its portrayal of 16th century Japan and its portrayal of 16th century Englishmen.

And don't get me started on the original book...

[KFC]

82. Yes, JFK was dead silly

Surprising that some people bought into it.

[NEEDLE DRIVER]

84. The Patriot

Another vote for (against?) The Patriot. On the forums I hang out on The Patriot is spelled "The Patriot (spit)" as moron is spelled "moran" here at DU.

It's a shame. really. The material culture of Colonial America has never beeen better realized on screen, but the wretched plot and insulting, insufferable history shown make this a contender for Worst Ever.

[liontamer]

85. quills

the marquis de sade is not the most important historical figure, but that movie was pretty fake.

[ironflange]

86. 2001: A Space Odyssey

Man, is that one off the mark!

[TyeDye75]

87. Troy

The Iliad is of course a story but it is generally accepted that there was a Trojan war......anyway

In the film Both Agamemnon and Menelaus are killed, when actually in the Iliad they both survived the war.... Agamemenon returned home where he was murdered by his wife and Menelaus returned home with Helen and lived for many years.

PS.....U571 also

[skygazer]

89. Gods and Generals

God, I hate historical fiction! I watched about half of that movie for one reason and one reason alone - because it dealt with the battle of Fredericksburg. When they got to that point, and they focused on the Irish Brigade, I had to turn it off in disgust.

The guy they had leading the charge of the Irish Brigade was a Lt. Col. of the 88th Pennsylvania. I've forgotten his name - real person; however, he was NOT the man who led the attack - I know this because the guy who did was my great-great grandfather, Robert Nugent, Colonel commanding the 69th NY which was the lead regiment in the attack (the 88th was fifth in line of battle).

Ol' grampa is not well known to the average person though serious students of the Civil War will be familiar with his name. He wasn't flashy or keen on getting his name in the papers but he was a good soldier and dedicated. He fought throughout the war, was nearly killed at Fredericksburg (in the attack that HE led), was sent back to NY to recuperate where he was in charge of the draft that set off the riots.

He lost his position with the 69th when the brigade was consolidated on account of the loss of men. He could have just gone home but instead he worked for months to re-recruit the brigade, re-form it and return to finish out the war. He re-joined the brigade in late 1864, was at Appomattox for Lee's surrender and was well thought of by Lincoln, Grant and Sherman, who had recommended him for his Colonelcy to begin with.

To see him dissed in that movie was more than I could handle.

[RoyGBiv]

133. Yes, and thank you ...

I LOATHE that movie and the novel on which it is partly based. (Jeff Shaara, trying to imitate his father and failing miserably, irritates me to no end.)

The funny part is that the director deviated from the novel tremendously and appropriated large segments of an actual historical study of Thomas "Stonewall" Jackson so that the movie focused primarily on him ... and he didn't even get that right.

I also loathe Maxwell as a director.

[CBGLuthier]

90. JFK isn't supposed to be about historical accuracy

JFK was about ALL of the theories. Even the ones that contradicted others. Somewhere in the mess is the truth.

[TrogL]

92. The Bible

[KamaAina]

96. Post from the future: The King Kamehameha movie starring... The Rock

apparently due out this year or next. Be sure to line up, Star Wars-style, for tickets right now! :sarcasm:

http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hp&cf=prev&id=1808502789

For starters, The Rock (Dwayne Johnson) is of Samoan and African ancestry, not Hawaiian. Then there's the working title: "King Kamehameha: Battle for Paradise". No, really.

http://starwars.countingdown.com/movies/3295182

From this site also comes word that the script is being rewriiten by Karen Essex, of "Kleopatra" fame*. Hoo boy.

It could all be worth it, though, if they find a way to film the climactic batle scene, immortalized by artist Herb Kawainui Kane (KAH-ne) thusly:



Lord of the Rings, eat your heart out!

[eyepaddle]

104. C'mon,

you need to feel the love and

SMELL WHAT THE ROCK'S COOKIN'!

On a serious note, I bet that is pretty dreadful. A pity, I kind of get a kick out of the Rock in his light-hearted stuff.

[LiveWire]

100. Bill and Ted's Excellent Adventure

I mean, george carlan as a time-travelling guitar player...thats stretching it a bit, dont you think?

[NoPasaran]

101. Texas Chainsaw Massacre

[lateo]

103. Monty Python's Holy Grail

And the life of Brian...

[baldguy]

127. They're truer than most "period" films from Hollywood.

[LostinVA]

107. Braveheart, Robin Hood

[baldguy]

126. All of the Star Wars movies

Vader was framed, I tell ya! FRAMED!

[maveric]

128. "The Untouchables"

Laughably innacurate.
Frank Nitty did not die from falling off a building. He committed suicide some 20 years after the Capone trial.

[Adenoid_Hynkel]

132. DC 9-11

Showtime's made for tv movie that depicts bush as a brave action hero won't "no terr'ist keep me out of the white house" on September 11th

[Maddy McCall]

136. Gladiator, Braveheart, so many of them do.

[BlueIris]

138. Though not strictly a "historical film," "A Beatiful Mind"

is right up at the top of my list of films that fucked with their subject matter too much to be able to claim any form of accuracy. WAY too much.

[Generic Other]

140. Troy

Brad "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" Pitt skipped a few chapters in his Homer.

The death of Agamemnon coming, not at the hands of his vengeful queen Clytemnestra, but at the hands of Brad Pitt's sexy slave girl made me choke on my popcorn.

[Merrick]

141. The Diddler on the Roof

I don't believe for a second what that piece of trash of a movie contends about that man. Like even if he did do such awful things he wouldn't have had the brains to go inside... or nobody would report him. what crap.

[SuperWonk]

147. The 10 Commandments

Although, Charleton Heston is pretty good...