BS: Ten films that got it wrong

Subject: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Victor in Mapperton
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 05:40 PM

Found this, thought it may be of interest. So what other films got it wrong ?

10,000 B.C.
Director Roland Emmerich is usually a stickler for realism (sending a computer virus via Macintosh to aliens in Independence Day). So we hate to inform him that woolly mammoths were not, in fact, used to build pyramids.Woolly mammoths weren't even found in the desert. They wouldn't need to be woolly if that were the case. And there weren't any pyramids in Egypt until 2,500 B.C or so.


Gladiator
Emperor Commodus was not the snivelling sister-obsessed creep portrayed in the movie. A violent alcoholic, sure, but not so whiny. He ruled ably for over a decade rather than ineptly for a couple months. He also didn't kill his father, Marcus Aurelius, who actually died of chickenpox. And instead of being killed in the gladiatorial arena, he was murdered in his bathtub.


300
Though this paean to ancient moral codes and modern physical training is based on the real Battle of Thermopylae, the film takes many stylistic liberties. The most obvious one being Persian king Xerxes was not an 8-foot-tall Cirque du Soleil reject. The Spartan council was made up of men over the age of 60, with no one as young as Theron (played by 37-year-old Dominic West). And the warriors of Sparta went into battle wearing bronze armor, not just leather Speedos.


The Last Samurai
The Japanese in the late 19th century did hire foreign advisers to modernize their army, but they were mostly French, not American. Ken Watanabe's character was based on the real Saigo Takamori who committed ritual suicide, or "seppuku," in defeat rather than in a volley of Gatling gun fire. Also, it's doubtful that a 40-something alcoholic Civil War vet, even one with great hair, would master the chopsticks much less the samurai sword.


Apocalypto
This one movie has given entire Anthropology departments migraines. Sure the Maya did have the odd human sacrifice but not to Kulkulkan, the Sun God, and only high-ranking captives taken in battle were killed. The conquistadors arriving at the end of the film made for unlikely saviours: an estimated 90% of indigenous American population was killed by smallpox from the infected Spanish pigs.


Memoirs of a Geisha
The geisha coming-of-age, called "mizuage," was really more of a makeover, where she changed her hairstyle and clothes. It didn't involve her getting... intimate with a client. In the climatic scene where Sayuri wows Gion patrons with her dancing prowess, her routine - which involves some platforms shoes, fake snow, and a strobe light - seems more like a Studio 54 drag show that anything in pre-war Kyoto.


Braveheart
Let's forget the fact that kilts weren't worn in Scotland until about 300 years after William Wallace's day and just do some simple maths. According to the movie, Wallace's blue-eyed charm at the Battle of Falkirk was so overpowering, he seduced King Edward II's wife, Isabella of France, and the result of their affair was Edward III. But according to the history books, Isabella was three years old at the time of Falkirk, and Edward III was born seven years after Wallace died.


Elizabeth: The Golden Age
In 1585, when the movie takes place, Queen Elizabeth was 52 years old - Cate Blanchett was 36 when she shot the film - and was not being courted by suitors like Ivan the Terrible (who was dead by then). And though the movie has her rallying the troops at Tilbury astride a white steed in full armour with a sword, in fact she rode side saddle, carrying a baton. She was more of a regal majorette than Joan of Arc.


The Patriot
Revolutionary War figure Francis "The Swamp Fox" Marion was the basis for Mel Gibson's character, but he wasn't the forward-thinking family man they show in the flick. He was a slave owner who didn't get married (to his cousin) until after the war was over. Historians also say that he actively persecuted and murdered native Cherokees. Plus, the climatic Battle of Guilford Court House where he vanquishes his British nemesis? In reality, the Americans lost that one.


2001: A Space Odyssey
According to this film, in year 2001 we would have had manned voyages to Jupiter, a battle of wits with a sentient computer, and a quantum leap in human evolution. Instead we got the Mir Space Station falling from the sky, Windows XP, and Freddy Got Fingered. Apparently the lesson here is that sometimes it's better when the movies get the facts all wrong.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: autolycus
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 05:47 PM

i recall having a conversation with a host at talksport (UK commercial radio station) [when it was still called talkradio].

he was insisting that people could legitimately learn history from Hollywood films. He wasn't having it when I said that they are not supposed to be historically accurate.

As I'm not at heart an American-basher, I don't pursue that thought with arguments - don't want to be misunderstood.

Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 05:51 PM

The only thing that really surprised me on your list was that Roland Emmerich was not responsible for ALL of it.

After all, he made Independence Day and I still think it was about the worst movie I have ever seen. Period. No mistake that man made would surprise me.

I didn't know about the kilts, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Sorcha
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 05:53 PM

Ben-Hur, 10 Commandments, The Robe....I could go on.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: PoppaGator
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 05:54 PM

Nice list of insights. "2001" is my favorite.

The most recent "historical fiction" film I saw was "The Other Bolyn Girl." I've read that it features many inaccuracies, but I don't know exactly what was true and what was false. I love to see a ctrique of thisd film similar to the ten listed above.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: GUEST,lox
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 06:00 PM

Film Starring Errol Flynn and (yup) Ronald Reagan in which they play US army cavalry bluecoats, whose job it is to heroically round up the Brown Family, in particular that notorious terrorist John Brown, for causing all that trouble over a few slaves ...

Of course they win and of course they are representing American values and not capitulating to extremists ...

And they may well have set the benchmark for the hearty healthy swarthy manly grin in the process.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 06:13 PM

The German admiral Gunther Lutjens was portrayed as a fanatical and sycophantic Nazi and Hitler-worshipper in the 1960 film "Sink the Bismark". Although the film was quite fair and accurate in most respects, it was dead wrong in its loopy portrayal of the supposed fanatic Nazi Gunther Lutjens. In real life Lutjens was pretty much the diametrical opposite of the man portrayed in the movie. He was simply a capable and loyal career soldier in the German navy, a rational and reasonable man who did his duty as best he could under the Nazis but harkened back to a previous age in Germany, and he was not a very enthusiastic Nazi-backer (he went out of his way to protect the lives of a number of Jewish people that he knew or who were in his general vicinity during the war). He was no Nazi fanatic. It is a shame that the movie slandered an honorable man in the way it did.

The revision of his character was probably done so that English and American audiences would feel some emotional satisfaction in seeing a great ship and over 2,000 men go down to death and destruction in the cold, cruel sea.

They erred, I think. It would have been an emotionally much more gripping film if the deaths and the courage on both sides had been dealt with as what they were: not political events, but the terrible tragedies that happen to brave young men on both sides of a conflict in time of war.

They got some other little details wrong here and there. The explosion and sinking of the Hood was impressively done, but not too accurate in a visual sense...as they did not show the ship breaking in two before it sank. They just showed some large explosions, a hell of a lot of smoke...and then no Hood in sight anywhere. The real ship took over 1 minute to slip beneath the waves following the fatal hit that blew up its rear ammunition magazines, and its forward hull towered skyward like a tall building before it sank...a dramatic sight which one wonders how they could possibly have neglected to put in the movie!

They showed at least one smaller British ship, a destroyer, getting sunk by the Bismark the night before the final battle. That never happened.

Again, it was probably done to imbue the audience with a greater sense of urgency that the Bismark must be sunk ASAP.

They didn't (in my opinion) give enough lines to the Bismark's captain Lindemann...another good naval officer who happened to have the bad luck to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, but did the best he could under the circumstances.

These are minor points of criticism, however. On the whole the movie "Sink the Bismark" was exceedingly well done, and mostly quite accurate as well...rather typical of most British war films of that era.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Leadfingers
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 06:14 PM

Just about ALL the Hollywood films about the Second World War - Clark Gable in Burma - An American ship getting the Enigma machine etc etc etc .

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Victor in Mapperton
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 06:24 PM

What about the ten worst films ever made !

My list.
Pearl Harbor.
Batman and Robin.
Cocktail.
Apollo 13.
Aliens.
Saving Private Ryan.
Titanic.
Gangs of New York.
Waterworld.
Pretty Woman.

Well that's coming from someone who's favourite list includes the original "League of Gentlemen" with Jack Hawkins. "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot" and "The Lavender Hill Mob".

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 06:31 PM

I don't think it's the point of movies to get it right. The point of movies is entertainment. Look at "10,000,000 BC" -- Farah Fawcett looks fetching in a brief leather costume, but Homo was not yet Neanderthalis, much less Sapiens, back then AND dinosaurs were long extinct.

I could go on, but I'll only give a few more examples: Birth of a Nation; Tora, Tora, Tora; In Harm's Way; Sands of Iwo Jima; Apocalypse Now; Full Metal Jacket; The Longest Day; The Alamo; El Cid; Lion In Winter; A Man For All Seasons....

Some of these are very very good movies, but they are not factual history. They are entertainment.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 06:52 PM

At last someone got it right. All of these historical films (and I'm surprised no one mentioned 1940's 'One Million BC') are entertainments, not documentaries. License is taken for dramatic effect. If you want history, read a book on the subject. Thank you, Rapaire.

BTE, I believe the move you are referring to is 1966 movie "1 million Years B.C." starring Raquel Welch, altho' Farrah would have been good too.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 06:55 PM

Last line again:
BTW, I believe the movie you are referring to is the 1966 movie....

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Victor in Mapperton
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 06:57 PM

Good point. They do entertain, but the younger generation today read less books (which tend to record history with a little more accuracy) and tend to acquire their historic knowledge from the silver screen (or DVD)

It takes as long to include the historical facts as it does to create glamorous lies !

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Slag
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 07:06 PM

Wow! This thread is like a great big giant bulls eye painted on the broad wall INSIDE the barn! Can't miss. A better question would be "When did Hollywood ever get it right?" Answer:   seldom!

re 2001: A Space Odd-at-sea (or Idiocy, etc.). Well, 2001 AD has come and gone and here we sit Earthside and the only people in space are just a handful of scientist aboard a low orbit laboratory. And yet the movie did get somethings right and for that I applaud them. Sound in space? There is none. No air ( the medium ), no sound! That was one of the most glaring error of the Star Wars series. Ridiculous spaceships that sound like jet fighters for the most part, replete with Doppler effect and all. When they turned they didn't pivot as you would in space, they banked as you would against a wall of thick atmosphere. On and on. The glaring errors are too numerous to mention.

And in regards to human presence in space, do any of you remember the X- program? The Bell X-1 and 2 which showed the way beyond the sound barrier and culminated with the X-15 rocket plane? It was launched from a high flying B-52 and reached a top altitude of 50+ miles? That's IS space brother! It just didn't attain orbital velocity. Do we remember who those pilots were? Sad and why? All because Eisenhower (the original PC'er) didn't want the taint of the military on the fledgling space program. Remember the stupid Vanguard program? Explosion after ridiculous explosion trying to get a US satellite into orbit all the while the Jupiter C and other capable rockets of the military, tried and true, were kept out of the picture. When the ridicule of Ike became so great in the World press, he finally relented and allowed the Jupiter to take our first satellite into orbit. And even then, like a petulant child, Ike continued on with the Vanguard ( not really a civilian-sounding name is it?) throwing millions into it until they finally got it to place an object into orbit. And then the program was scrapped.

Do any of you remember the X-20 "Dyno-Soar"? It was a proposed space shuttle of the early 1960's using technology derived from the X-15. That got scrapped because it was essentially military. Well, this may be big time thread drift but the point I'm trying to make in this little rant is that but for idiots like Eisenhower we WOULD have had a presence on the Moon and possibly even Mars by the mid 90's. Should I mention the moanings from the "Great Society" which decried the exorbitant cost of our Apollo program (which amounted to about $5.oo from every American citizen). No, I thought not. Well, 2001: A Space Odyssey got it RIGHT. It's just that America didn't.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: John on the Sunset Coast
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 07:27 PM

Victor, it is not the fault of filmmakers that (young) people don't read as much as those of the past...but that's another discussion.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 07:27 PM

They are entertainment.

But there's no clear line between entertainment and propaganda. Birth of a Nation had some very powerful results, for example in giving the Klu Klux Klan a new lease of life.

I don't see 10,000 BC having any equivalent effects, but there are still films where it matters that they should be basically truthful.

So far as woolly mammoths go, it might be nonsense, but it's not self-contradictory nonsense to have them in Egypt. after all, elephants aren't native to England, and I've seen a good few here in my time. And the car I drive was made in France.

Though if they'd wanted to use pachyderms to build pyramids a few thousand years early, there were still elephants in North Africa in those days, who would have been easier to obtain.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Victor in Mapperton
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 07:57 PM

Yes I fully understand the point your making John, but in my opinion (not that it's worth a lot) I do feel if a film maker goes to the bother of taking a major event in history which the majority of us are aware of it tends to lead you to believe it's going to be a reasonably accurate account. they should tell it as it happened, if not then give it another title.
I enjoyed JFK ad Nixon, I felt both were reasonably accurate.

There will be a block buster within the next decade recalling the events of September the eleventh 2001. I imagine it will be a historically accurate account of the events of that day. (I know a few low budget films have already been made about it) directors know people today do expect more than they did a decade ago.

Hope this makes sense to you !

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 07:59 PM

10 WORST films ever??? That's tough. I can only go on what I've actually seen, and I've probably managed to avoid seeing the 10 worst.

Well...of those I have seen, how about for a start...

Independence Day
Pretty Woman
Heaven's Gate
Pearl Harbour
Godzilla (I mean the one that was set in New York where he doesn't even look like the traditional Godzilla at all...man was it AWFUL!!!)
The Alamo (John Wayne's attempt to do the story)
The Postman (has to be sat through in its entirety to be believed...)

Titanic? In one way (the blasted love story) it was one of the worst movies ever. On the other hand, it was a rather good technical rendition of the ship hitting the iceberg and sinking and all that...so I can't call it one of the 10 worst films ever...just not one of the best either.

I liked Gangs of New York. Liked it just fine.

Quest for Fire was pretty clumsy in some respects, but not a total waste of time...

I liked Aliens too.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Maryrrf
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 08:08 PM

"The New World" starring Colin Farrel as Captain John Smith (the story is set in Jamestown) potrays a romance between John Smith and a very sexy and voluptuous Pocahontas which according to all evidence was not the case. She was a little girl of around 10 years old when she supposedly saved Smith's life when he visited the Indian settlement. There is no indication that they were ever lovers.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Victor in Mapperton
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 08:29 PM

Just a thought, what about a thread "Ten World Leaders who got it wrong"

Only thinking out loud.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Micca
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 08:35 PM

One of THE GREATEST balls ups is .....
Ta Da


" Krakatoa, East of Java"......


EVERYONE knows that Krakatoa is WEST of Java!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Big Mick
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 08:39 PM

Here is one of the best essays on the real history of the kilt that I have seen. So many things in the Celtic/Gaelic history of Ireland, Scotland, Wales, and England are subject to what we want them to be as opposed to what they were. I include the dress, the customs, the religious practices, and the druids in this. These films just entertain based on what the public wants to believe of the times.

All the best,

Mick

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Victor in Mapperton
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 08:51 PM

Excellent article. I once heard the Scots who are renowned for the bagpipes actually copied them from the Irish. And the Irish who are famed for the harp actually copied the French.

I have probably got this wrong as I usually do, so no shouting at me please, I stand to be corrected.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 09:12 PM

Victor, did you get up on the wrong side of the bed today? Does anyone actually take movies seriously? Not very often. Schindler's List, maybe. Most of them, no. Go reread what Rapaire said earlier. He got it right.

They do entertain, but the younger generation today read less books (which tend to record history with a little more accuracy) and tend to acquire their historic knowledge from the silver screen (or DVD)

That's quite a broad generalization, and I have to respond: Not the young people in my house, or a lot of houses. I've taught my kids to view these critically and not accept whole what they're viewing. Their friends seem to have picked up the same message at home--this is what I am aware of when I hear them talking about films.

LH, Independence Day is a campy hoot, and it's so busy casting nods to other films of the genre that though I haven't seen it all the way through, despite it's almost constant airing on the satellite channels, I have to laugh at it. Let me ask--what part of it did you believe, that makes the rest of it so offensive to you?

I can't say one way or the other whether little girls grew up wanting to be streetwalkers so they could encounter the Cinderella story of Pretty Woman. It's a dopey story. Sometimes if I pass over when flipping channels I'll watch bits of it. The clothes are fabulous, once the movie gets going. Julia Roberts in that red dress--I suspect that is what keeps people going back to watch it.

Films made from books and short stories come under scrutiny for their similarities and differences to the original written word. This is good and bad--the liberties that film makers take to give sad books happy endings is a form of bowdlerization, as far as I'm concerned. But to be fair and realistic, you simply can't take the flexibility and internal thoughts from a book and make it work on the screen without materially changing the way in which you convey the message. You're using two dimensions and sound versus ink on paper. The result needs to be judged on its own merits. A case in point, To Kill a Mockingbird. Both are excellent productions, but they are different in many ways. They had to be, because of the different mediums where they occur. Are they factual? They're fiction, set in a period. I suppose when it comes to Mel Gibson films, it's buyer beware. :)

On a kind of related note, I detest the programs turning up now on various History channels that have inserted modern actors in costume to portray these historic figures. I feel like they are liable to get it wrong, or build in cultural biases by doing it that way, when it is supposed to be "fact."

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Rapparee
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 09:19 PM

Actually, the most accurate movie I ever saw was "Mars Attacks."

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Victor in Mapperton
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 09:33 PM

There you have it. That's me told off !

No, I got out of bed on the same side as I normally do. Walked to the newsagent got my papers came home fed the birds, did my crosswords went to the local market and bought a few things, Oh sorry, I almost forgot I allowed people to express an opinion and exchange their points of view. Fairly average day really.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 09:39 PM

You asked! It's silly to pick out some of those items from the sea of "wrong things."

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Padre
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 09:50 PM

Slag:

The X-1 pilot was Chuck Yeager (retired BG, USAF) - and Scott Crossman piloted one other of the X series aircraft

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: freightdawg
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 09:50 PM

Victor,

wassup with Apollo 13 and Saving Private Ryan?

If you read "Lost Moon" the movie was practically spot on. SPR was not supposed to be a documentary - just tell a good yarn. Spoke volumes about the waste of war, even a just war fought to eliminate a tyrant bent on destroying the world.

Just my two one hundredths of a dollar.

Freightdawg

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: John Hardly
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 10:05 PM

Rapaire,

Do not be telling me that cave women did not look like Raquel Welch and Daryl Hannah (clan of the cave bear). What is there left to believe in?

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 08 - 10:18 PM

Hey, Stilly, I realize that Independence Day was a campy hoot, as you put it, but it still totally annoys me from beginning to end. Everything in it annoys me. I think it expresses too many quintessentially American myths that just want to make me gag...even if they are doing it tongue in cheek.

Anyway, it was absolutely not what I want to see in a science fiction film. I should have read the reviews first, found out what it was like, and saved myself the ticket price, obviously. ;-) I would not have minded so much had I not spent 10 or 12 dollars on it!

As for Pretty Woman, it's not just dopey, it's totally creepy. It's downright sick and I can feel my gut lurch just thinking about that movie. It expresses something so completely ugly about humanity and life that it makes me truly and deeply angry.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 06:33 AM

"I don't think it's the point of movies to get it right. The point of movies is entertainment."

I just KNEW someone would say that! One of the most miserable, wrong-headed cliches ever! In my opinion there is room for 'poetic licence' but no excuse whatsoever for ignorance and stupidity!

Presumably, a movie that got its facts right would not be entertaining?

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Folk Form # 1
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 06:49 AM

I grew up in the 60s watching blackand white films made in the 50s how Britain single-handly won the war against Germany. Scarse mention is made of the Americans, who made up the bulk of the D-Day invasion, and no mention of at all of the Russians who, probably, more than anyone, defeated the Germans. Leaving things out is sometimes as misleading as putting wrong things in.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Folk Form # 1
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 06:50 AM

The worst film ever made is The Deerhunter. Racist and stupid. What was deNero thinking?

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 07:20 AM

Silly, Do you not think your comment towards Vic was a little harsh ?

He is entitled to his opinion. It comes across somewhat pompous, arrogant and a touch self-righteous.

Shimrod, I could not agree more. Excellent post.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 07:50 AM

Yeah......LOL.........These threads always run the same way. Its the beauty of the entire BS section. Everybody gets to bring out their own ox and other can gore at will and then the fun really starts as everyone falls all over each other to take a stab. Kinda' like watching a Demolition Derby..................

Oh yeah......All you guys picked sucky films.....Mine are all great works for the ages. And remember, books always get the history right!!!



Spaw---NASCAR Voter

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 08:15 AM

We watched "Pan's Labyrinth/El laberinto del fauno" last night. Wonder where a film like that one falls in the ox goring? Since the thread has that sort of Spanish thing going for it, as catspaw points out...

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Peter T.
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 08:18 AM

Roland Emmerich a "stickler for realism"!!

Today's horse laugh. Remember Stargate? (Erich von Danigen lives......) and the sheer ridiculousness of "The Day After Tomorrow" (completely bogus history).

("There can only be one RA!! HAHAHA).

yours,

Peter T.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: ard mhacha
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 08:34 AM

The film Enigma was another parcel of lies, this film had the good old Yanks recovering a German Enigma code machine from a submarine which led to the deciphering of the German secret codes.
We all know they had nothing to do with it, the source of the code breaking was the result of a break through in Bletchley Park in England.
Rocking Reeler did you ever see the part played in the second world war by some Hollywood actors, the biggest shirker of all was the mighty John Wayne.
Hollywood was the home of twisted history.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: autolycus
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 08:46 AM

Shimrod, there's a vast gulf between "ignorance and stupidity" and "not getting it right". The film makers often know what they're doing. They use factually correct and incorrect; which just depending on what they need for the film they're making.

Can't you hear the Hollywood director/producer saying,"We can't have (something factually correct).Who's going to (want to) watch (whatever)?" e.g. ugly women in 10.000 B.C. (or practically ever)


The following is a citation about film saved by inaccuracy.

Someone is quoted saying "History is lame".
i www.cracked.com/article_15014_11-movies-saved-by-historical-inaccuracy.html - 51k -


btw, Sherlock Holmes never says in print "Elementary, my dear Watson."

I rhink it is the line everyone "knows" is because it's the last line of the first Holmes film, one audiences would have left the cinema remembering.

Inaccurate but potent.



Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: GUEST,Guest
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 10:07 AM

John Wayne the draft dodger.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: autolycus
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 10:30 AM

Taht should have read "Holmes sound film"

Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Rapparee
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 11:33 AM

"The Green Berets."

Film is theater (or theatre, if you prefer). Aristotle discussed this in his "Poetics" and it hasn't changed since. Tragedy, comedy (meaning non-tragedy), farce, spectacle -- it's all there and it's all here.

I think that the problem is that today we blur the line between entertainment, the catharsis of theater, with reality. More, we view reality through the lenses of our own prejudices and preconceptions which have been at least partially shaped by ubiquitous entertainment. Perhaps we should reserve entertainment -- movies, television, etc. -- for special occasions held only a few times a year.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 11:37 AM

Silly, Do you not think your comment towards Vic was a little harsh ?
He is entitled to his opinion. It comes across somewhat pompous, arrogant and a touch self-righteous.


Guest Guest, I said nothing harsh or arrogant--that came ENTIRELY from the tone of voice you chose when you read my post. It was not included in my writing. So go examine your attitudes before you jump on one of many who have brought criticism to the initial premise of this discussion. You must have a fairly sour view of the world of you read my post in any way other than a frank statement of polite disagreement. It's a good-natured, silly, non-academic discussion where a few rays of erudition shine through. If you thought it was impolite, blame yourself and the voices in your head. I can't control those.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Jack the Sailor
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 11:47 AM

Independence Day was entertaining. I like a science fiction movie, with some humor that shows me things I haven't seen before.

Like wise "the Day after Tomorrow" was what if the same process occured to us that cause the intact Mammoths we have found. The science was a stretch but there wouldn't have been much drama had the icecaps taken 10 years to form.


The "Chick Flick" part of Titanic, with the Celine music was truly dreadful.

Three of my ten worst movies are Costner's

The Postman
the silly and tedious Waterworld.
the incredibly slow moving and disjointed "Dances With Wolves."

It seems that a lot of the choices for worst move here are over 2 hours long. I don't think that is coincidence. It takes a lot of material to fill two hours on the other hand the narrative of a good movie is simple and straight forward and there is a certain pacing required. For example in Titanic, we are waiting for the big moment we know is to come, and I don't mean the one where the peasant sketches the rich lady's boobs. Sappy music and too long, love scenes are a distraction, as are scenes of a cuckold trying to kill a man who will be dead in an hour or so anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: autolycus
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 12:07 PM

There's also little accounting for the naivete of swathes of populations.

Just as some will send baby things to a meedja station when a character in a soap opera has a baby, so people see films (and don't read books), and think what they're watching is true in every particular.

Ans to repeat what I said near the start, when I said to a national radio host that you couldn't rely on films for your history, he said you could.


   Ivor

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Sorcha
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 12:09 PM

Finally watched most of '300' last night....I laffed a lot! LOVED Xerxes 'get up' and the silver masks. Parts of it are almost farce. Pretty good flick tho.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: GUEST,Shimrod
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 12:26 PM

"Shimrod, there's a vast gulf between "ignorance and stupidity" and "not getting it right"."

Right. So we fall back on hypothesis B then:

The Film Industry is wilfully ignorant, has contempt for its audience and is happy to spread misinformation.

Perhaps that's why I don't find many films entertaining ... ?

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Little Hawk
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 12:59 PM

Spaw, when I read your post on this thread I was reminded of Woody Allen copulating with a Sicilian goat atop a seedy car rental place somewhere in New Jersey. Please be a good fellow and stop doing that, okay? I don't need those scenes in my head.

Jack, a man cannot technically be a "cuckold" when he is only provisionally engaged to a girl who can't stand him anyway and he hasn't even been with her yet. Not in my opinion, anyway. No doubt he thought he was a cuckold, but I believe he was in error about that. Be that as it may, your point about it being a useless distraction to the worthy plot of a movie about the Titanic is right on. ;-)

Strangely enough, I differ from your choice about the 3 lengthy Kevin Costner movies on one key point. I agree with you on the first two...but "Dances With Wolves" is one of my favorite movies of all time. I think it's absolutely wonderful, but then, I LOVE movies about American Indians...and maybe you aren't all that interested in them. Of all the movies about American Indians ever made, "Dances With Wolves" is my favorite.

Subject: RE: BS: Ten films that got it wrong
From: Bat Goddess
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 01:25 PM

Offhand I can't think of a single Hollywood product that had its history right. All the technical advisors and fact checkers are interested in is that they don't show something that will get them sued. As long as it passes Legal, everything's okay.

And I have to put up with Curmudgeon's ranting during films mostly about anachronistic weaponry, but also uniforms, clothing styles, not to mention the actual historical facts of the film. (It bothers me, too, but I only EXPECT entertainment. Plus his knowledge of historical weapons and uniforms, etc. is much more broad than mine.)

And it's not just history -- there hasn't been a single Dracula film that was even close to Bram Stoker's book. (Gawd, and we won't even mention other books.)

Linn