Films That Get History Wrong (1 Viewer)

[Guy Martin]

As Matthew said, most of the historical criticism of Patriot was on sociological rather than technical grounds. In terms of technical details like the cannons, guns, uniforms, etc it's supposed to be quite accurate (as it should be; the Smithsonian museum of American History consulted on these matters). Where it rings utterly false is in its depiction of race, as Matthew points out. Mel Gibson has free blacks, working on his plantation for a fair wage, in South Carolina, in 1776. Yeah Right!

Also many have suggested that the portrayal of Tavington as a bloodthirsty war criminal was to put it mildly, way off the mark. In fact the mayor of the town in Enlgand where the real-life Tavington came from supposedly was incensed enough to challenge Mel Gibson to a fistfight. No word on whether Mel took him up on it. For example, and even Emmerich and Devlin admitted to this, the burning of the Church with people still inside never happened, they borrowed that incident from a Nazi action in World War II.
- Guy

 

[Danny R]

In Revolutionary America, you never would have seen whites and slaves socializing and dancing together on a beach somewhere.

Ever.

Errr, wrong answer.

There are several documented cases of black/white socialization happening in a recreational atmosphere. And the black communities of the barrier islands certainly existed, and were NOT totally segregated.

While the idea of full and equal rights would likely be totally foreign to someone in Mel Gibson's shoes, not everyone was so racist that they would not even socialize with others of a different race.

Likewise there were farms where blacks worked as freemen rather than slaves. And this was certainly present at that point in time. Several founding fathers freed their slaves upon their death, most notably Georgia Washington. Many of these slaves continued to work the same land as employees after the fact, even receiving a pension.

Admittedly it was rare, but not so foreign a concept that it couldn't have happened.

 

[DeeF]

Films set up the rules for themselves.

I would never have expected Braveheart to be historically accurate. It isn't that kind of film. It's an adventure, heroic-epic kind of film. I would almost expect it to play fast and loose with the facts.

But A Beautiful Mind, Apollo 13, JFK... these people are still alive. I would expect these movies to approach the facts with respect for the living.

U-571 is a terrible movie, filled with cliche moments from every old submarine movie. Das Boot is superior in every way.

1776 is great, and not exactly factual. It's a poetical and imaginative way of presenting an incendiary moment in history. There were no minutes or notes taken during that Congress, so what went on there must be imagined. Peter Stone was taken to task for some of his choices, but for the most part, historians allowed him his imagination, because we don't know any different. And his imagination created scenes of great depth and suspense, on a subject that we know the outcome.

This is quite different than JFK.

 

[Ben Osborne]

It turns out that makers of "The Hurricane" were sued for slander for their portrayal of Carter's boxing opponent, Joey Giardello:
Boxer sues Hurricane's makers
Giardello wins fight to restore his good name
Unfortunately the movie's portrayal of that bout is the least of its lies:
Top Ten Myths About Rubin Hurricane Carter and the Lafayette Grill Murders

 

[Nick_Scott]

Perhaps AMISTAD could be added to the list?
Personally, I liked the movie, and thought it was fairly accurate, but I remember alot of historical groups were mad as heck.
Apparently, the producers had a clever scheme to get an audience- They mailed "informational" packets to teachers, so they could use the movie as a teaching aid for the students.
The packets had study guides, tests, and such, but the problem was that it assumed the movie was 100% accurate- Including fake background information for the fictional characters, and memorizing excersises for the fictional speeches.
I remember reading articles about the hoopla in all the major magazines back then, and it seems like the kinda of thing that might help your paper. (so head down to the library, and dig through the micro-fiche... )
-Nick

 

[Ken Chan]

In Enigma, I was pretty sure the guy/girl stuff was all made up. But what about all the guys sitting in the room waiting to break the code? Actual event, or they never did anything like that, or somewhere in between?

//Ken

 

[Greg_S_H]

Also many have suggested that the portrayal of Tavington as a bloodthirsty war criminal was to put it mildly, way off the mark. In fact the mayor of the town in Enlgand where the real-life Tavington came from supposedly was incensed enough to challenge Mel Gibson to a fistfight. No word on whether Mel took him up on it. For example, and even Emmerich and Devlin admitted to this, the burning of the Church with people still inside never happened, they borrowed that incident from a Nazi action in World War II.

But this is what is so ridiculous about the argument. Tavington and Martin were not real! It doesn't matter that it was reported they were originally supposed to be Tarleton and Marion. They ended up fictional characters, so how can we say how these fictional characters are supposed to act? And, as for Tarleton, there are contemporary accounts of Tarleton and his men (Tories, by the way, so most of the "villains" weren't even British) slaughtering helpless colonists, including a woman who's unborn baby was ripped from her body. These accounts may not be true, but they were written in diaries during the war. Also, a church might not have burned, but there were similar incidents that did happen. Not necessarily in the southern theater, but elsewhere. Cherry Hill?

 

[Colin-H]

I wonder if there will ever be a feature film on the man who was the key element in breaking the enigma, Alan Turing. He led a pretty interesting life. Laid the groundwork for much of modern computer science theory, broke the enigma, was arrested for being homosexual, agreed to estrogen injections instead of going to prison, deteriorated mentally, committed suicide by eating a cyanide-laced apple.

Sounds a lot like Enigma, right? Except the only betrayal was the British government betraying one of the greatest geniuses of the 20th century.

And all Turing gets is a made-for-TV movie that probably will never be released on DVD.

 

[Dome Vongvises]

As Matthew said, most of the historical criticism of Patriot was on sociological rather than technical grounds. In terms of technical details like the cannons, guns, uniforms, etc it's supposed to be quite accurate (as it should be; the Smithsonian museum of American History consulted on these matters). Where it rings utterly false is in its depiction of race, as Matthew points out. Mel Gibson has free blacks, working on his plantation for a fair wage, in South Carolina, in 1776. Yeah Right!

So I guess the argument being made here is that there are certain artistic licenses that shouldn't be taken?
I don't think there's a problem with taking artistic license to that extent as long as we are able to recognize such things. Unfortunately, I know people who take stuff that happens in the movies as gospel truth.
What's interesting, however, is that a "realstic" portrayal might've made for a more interesting movie (eg. the real Francis Marion), but I think that for a popcorn movie, The Patriot didn't do that bad of a job, considering Benjamin Martin wasn't the perfect goody two-shoes either.
Edit: Spelling and whatnot.

 

[DaveZ]

One thing that bugged me is that many of the soldiers had they're bayonets fixed thoughout most of the movie. If you have a bayonet on a musket like that you'll scrape your knuckles every time you reload. They were only really used for charges, and still rarely I think. The movie was terrible though, I cringed through most of it.

 

[Seth Paxton]

As Matthew said, most of the historical criticism of Patriot was on sociological rather than technical grounds. In terms of technical details like the cannons, guns, uniforms, etc it's supposed to be quite accurate (as it should be; the Smithsonian museum of American History consulted on these matters

What about shooting a man dead with a ball pistol from horseback more than 100 yards away and about 20 feet higher while he is running away from you?
Yeah, that happened because we all know how accurate those balls were. Hell, they had to get right on top of each other with the muskets to do any damage. Accuracy was not that big with guns/ammo of the era.

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

RE: The Patriot
One has to look no further than the list of films the same producers have bankrolled in the past to find out what they had in mind for that film. It certainly was not for historical accuracy.
Prior to that, Dean Devlin and Roland Emmerich have produced Godzilla and Independence Day and is also now responsible for Eight Legged Freaks, which make me wonder whether all four films belong in the same league and made for one purpose only - and you know what that is.
~Edwin

 

[Christ Reynolds]

Almost forgot one more...Fargo.

dont know if i'd call this history, even though the 'true story' part in the beginning is barely true. from what ive read, it is loosely based on true events. i dont know many people who know much about the events in 1987 compared to WWII or something like that. maybe i'm just getting defensive about fargo, i think its the film of the 90s, with boogie nights and being john malkovich following closely behind. bill macy got screwed for an oscar! ok i'm done complaining.

CJ

 

[Christ Reynolds]

and about that test, i failed it big time. i dont want to say the score i got, but i never liked history, never paid attention. i am one of those college students who would fail and basic american history test, but i'd likely exceed their math and physics scores, so i'm not worried. i guess it depends on what interests you. history doesnt.

CJ

 

[Janna S]

How was "The Dish" for accuracy?

 

[Carlos Mendoza]

Wasn't there an issue with either the timeline of the events or the characterisations and facts in the movie A Perfect Storm which AOL Time Warner got sued for the misrepresentation?

 

[Todd Terwilliger]

Re: The Perfect Storm:
Nobody has any idea what happened in the storm itself - what the book and film try to do is present what could have happened.
Some of the other events of the film, while in reality not all occuring on one boat, are representative of the types of things that happen on fishing boats in general - to show, accurately I believe, what the life of a fisherman is like.