Historical Inaccuracies In Films...Why???

[Zorak]

I'll have to give this one to you Zorak.

It seems as though at first all Gladiators were slaves used to fight criminals. Then came volunteers and those that bought their freedom, though some historians refute that entirely.
It's an interesting subject, now I'm looking into it, there's a whole page about the inaccuracies on the wikipedias: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_deviations_in_Gladiator_(2000_film)

Did you see this one:

Like today's athletes, gladiators did product endorsements. Particularly successful gladiators (such as Maximus) would endorse goods in the arena before commencing a fight and have their names promoting products on the Roman equivalent of billboards.[6] Although originally included in the script, this practice was later rejected as not a fact the audience would believe.

So! Sometimes historical accuracy is left out for a reason. Your audience won't believe it anyway

 

[edgray]

Did you see this one:

Like today's athletes, gladiators did product endorsements. Particularly successful gladiators (such as Maximus) would endorse goods in the arena before commencing a fight and have their names promoting products on the Roman equivalent of billboards.[6] Although originally included in the script, this practice was later rejected as not a fact the audience would believe.

So! Sometimes historical accuracy is left out for a reason. You're audience won't believe it anyway

fucking sellouts, those Gladiators...

 

[Abcinthia]

Because it's a movie made for entertainment purposes. Made to be more dramatic to captivate the imaginations of the audience as to not depict how boring the even may had really panned out.
Entertainment is just that, entertainment, not a history lesson.
If you want an accurate history lesson sit through a University lecture and let the directors do their jobs

But that's just it, history IS entertaining and a lot of the time what really happened is tons better than the "dramatic" versions.

 

[itsmeJonB]

But that's just it, history IS entertaining and a lot of the time what really happened is tons better than the "dramatic" versions.

a movie based on a fictional character during non-fictional times is going to be exaggerated to make the lead role look like more of a hero.

Its not that hard of a concept. Its just a movie. Nothing more

 

[dt3]

My favorite movie of all-time is Apollo 13. I was amazed how accurate it was the first time I saw it. History can be entertaining without being faked.

 

[edgray]

My favorite movie of all-time is Apollo 13. I was amazed how accurate it was the first time I saw it. History can be entertaining without being faked.

awesome film, I remember leaving the cinema just spellbound.

 

[retro]

Thirteen Days was another movie that was remarkably historically accurate.

 

[Peter Parka]

Because it's a movie made for entertainment purposes. Made to be more dramatic to captivate the imaginations of the audience as to not depict how boring the even may had really panned out.
Entertainment is just that, entertainment, not a history lesson.
If you want an accurate history lesson sit through a University lecture and let the directors do their jobs

Whatever does it for you, I guess though personally I'd rather see a tactically well thought out battle than thousands of Scotsmen slapping their arses, guess you're just into stuff like that.

 

[Zorak]

Braveheart is a good example of why films don't have to be historically accurate I think.
You've got cool battles, an Aussie being a Scot, and bagpipe music for 3 hours. It's top stuff!

If it was historically accurate, Edward II would have lost the battle at Stirling Moss, but then Edward I would have come and slaughtered them all, and the film would be about an hour long

History will never make a film - 300 is one of the most historically accurate films I have seen yet. But it's easy to level criticism at, while it's a fun film; I think most people can admit it's cheesey rubbish.

 

[Peter Parka]

Braveheart is a good example of why films don't have to be historically accurate I think.
You've got cool battles, an Aussie being a Scot, and bagpipe music for 3 hours. It's top stuff!

If it was historically accurate, Edward II would have lost the battle at Stirling Moss, but then Edward I would have come and slaughtered them all, and the film would be about an hour long

History will never make a film - 300 is one of the most historically accurate films I have seen yet. But it's easy to level criticism at, while it's a fun film; I think most people can admit it's cheesey rubbish.

The story of William Wallace is far more interesting than Braveheart, he was fighting guerrilla warfare for several years while gradually amassing an army. The battle of Stirling Bridge (Stirling Moss is a racing driver, lol) was also far more interesting than a few thousand Scots slapping their arses at the English before both sides just ran across a field toward each other. It could easily make a film more than an hour long.

 

[Zorak]

no idea why i typed moss... maybe all this heat lately..

It's all subjective, but I'd rather watch a massive battle than 10 years of scots going to the toilet near each other and hiding in dark places.

Take a tour of Glasgow if you want that

 

[Tyler Durden]

This used to burn a lil with me too PP (yes I had tried the cream!)

But I was reliably advised that I was being a precious Brit and, I think maybe I was

Bloody racists!!

 

[itsmeJonB]

guess you're just into stuff like that.

why would i be into something like that?

no reference or example as to why it would apply to me, but whatever makes you chuckle to yourself I guess

 

[satinbutterfly]

I find it very funny that people get angry about Hollywood embellishing on history in films. It is in our nature as humans to want to change the truth and make it bigger and better. Why whine about it when you can just simply sit back and enjoy someone's version of a story?

 

[itsmeJonB]

I find it very funny that people get angry about Hollywood embellishing on history in films. It is in our nature as humans to want to change the truth and make it bigger and better. Why whine about it when you can just simply sit back and enjoy someone's version of a story?

because it wouldnt be OTz if we didnt have something to bitch about

 

[skyblue]

pearl harbours the one that makes me laugh......in reality not one american plane left the ground and the anti-aircraft gunners were cowering

and wasn't william wallace a french speaking welshman?

 

[Peter Parka]

I find it very funny that people get angry about Hollywood embellishing on history in films. It is in our nature as humans to want to change the truth and make it bigger and better. Why whine about it when you can just simply sit back and enjoy someone's version of a story?

If it was bigger and better, I could understand it but it's worse, especially when Hollywood changes history to give the Americans credit for others achievements, talk about insecure!:willy_nilly:

 

[Roxi]

If it was bigger and better, I could understand it but it's worse, especially when Hollywood changes history to give the Americans credit for others achievements, talk about insecure!:willy_nilly:

:homo:

And the fact that the English are made out to be the enemy in everything, don't get me wrong we have done a lot in History to give us a bad title but we are made out to be savage brutes and our enemy to be heroic innocent by standers.... Rather annoys me....

And not history related but we always seem to be baddie as well. Got to the point where I can see a movie that has a Englishman in it and I immediately am like "He did it" rotten really!!

 

[Zorak]

:homo:

And the fact that the English are made out to be the enemy in everything, don't get me wrong we have done a lot in History to give us a bad title but we are made out to be savage brutes and our enemy to be heroic innocent by standers.... Rather annoys me....

Like what films?

 

[Zorak]

pearl harbours the one that makes me laugh......in reality not one american plane left the ground and the anti-aircraft gunners were cowering

and wasn't william wallace a french speaking welshman?

Be fair, Pearl Harbour has a lot more problems than historical accuracy! :surrender



(And, Wallace was born in Scotland to Scottish parents, and if he did speak French - the film got that right)