History is Not Boring discussion

It always bugs me when i see a film about an historical event, or a film set in a specific historical period, that gets it wrong. It's one thing to take one side of an historical controversy, or to choose the interpretation that makes for the best movie-- that i've got no problem with. It's the films that create events that never happened (and never could have happened, or introduce anachronisms to "connect with modern viewers" that bug me. 300, for example. Persians were into body piercing? Really? Braveheart has been mentioned several times in other threads as getting most of the names right, and not a lot else. What films have you seen that, for the most part, have gotten the history right?

I don't think 300 should be evaluated as any sort of historical document, at least no more than Superman documents American history. It's worth keeping in mind that it's an action movie based on a comic book based on a rather legendary bit of history. Anyway, you really know that the ancient Persians weren't into body piercing? If so, I'd say that the piercing falls into the category of changes that make for the best movie, as they reinforced the impression of Persian decadence.

Pretty Village, Pretty Flame seemed to get a lot of the historical detail right, although a lot of people felt the film's message inverted history. It seems to me that anyone who makes a historical movie (or posts on this thread) is sticking their neck out, as it's a lot easier to shoot down a movie as unhistorical than it is to prove it accurate in every point.

BunWat wrote: "...if the characters act and talk like people of their time, very few people are going to be able to connect with that. Movies are story telling, not re-enactments.

That last line seems to capture the message of Hayden White's Metahistory. With that thought in mind, it seems that war-related movies would be the most likely candidates for historical accuracy, since wars are one of the best- and most-documented of human endeavors (the French/Spanish account of the Battle of Trafalgar notwithstanding).

Certain details might be changed, events telescoped, or several historical persons might be combined to form one dramatic persona, but the history is still relatively fresh and participants would be unwilling to accept any movie which strayed too far from the truth.

Patton comes to mind, as does Stalag 17; another candidate might be Apocalypse Now: nobody knows how weird it got at Firebase Mary Ann before it was overrun.

The Band of Brothers mini-series closely parallels the history (this according to my father, who was with the 101st Airborne on D-Day) as does Go For Broke, the story of the 442nd Regimental Combat Team.

Anyway, isn't history based on a true story?

Try "The Life and Times of Harvey Milk."

I don't recall the TV series well, but I loved John Jakes Bicentennial series of books. It made me want to learn more about history, brought the times alive in a way a regular history book couldn't. Cold data, hard facts just don't convey what it was like for the people. Now I can read them & put them into a more human perspective.

"Far & Away" with Tom Cruise was another I liked. I'm not sure how historically accurate a lot of that was, but it sure gave me a better understanding of why my great grandparents left Ireland, Scotland & all.

"The Spirit of St Louis"
Even though most of the action takes place inside a cramped airplane and 40 something Jimmy Stewart is playing 20 something Charles Lindebergh, I really liked the way this film takes on the monumental nature of Lindeburgh's lonely crossing of the Atlantic ocean. The moment Jimmy Stewart's Charles Lindeburgh spots the coast of Ireland is heart stopping, you feel as if you made the trip yourself and you instantly feel a shot of adrenaline.

In the movie, the director decided he couldnt show Jimmy Stewart talking to himself, instead he has Stewart talking to a stowaway fictional fly, sort-of a part time companion that he can talk to and advance the narative. I thought it was very clever even though it never happened.

Well worth renting, if only for Stewart's acting ability itself. Its also a great story.

In the "made for TV" category - The Six Wives of Henry VIII, made for British TV in about 1970. This is excellent - I particularly like that they attempted to cast actors that looked as much like the people they were portraying as was possible. (Norfolk in particular is a dead-ringer, I think. As is the guy playing Archbishop Eyore, er, Cranmer.)

I found the take on Anne of Cleves interesting in particular.

I saw it when it was on Masterpiece Theater back in '72, and again on Netflix last year.

Susanna wrote: "In the "made for TV" category - The Six Wives of Henry VIII, made for British TV in about 1970. This is excellent - I particularly like that they attempted to cast actors that looked as much like ..."

Of course I agree with you... and don't forget the Glenda Jackson Elizabeth

A wonderful production Susanna, its been years since I saw it, but they did portray each wife in sympathetic tones. Even poor Katherine Howard, comes across as more of a pawn of her powerful relatives than the adulterous she-devil portrayed in history.

By far the worst Tudor era movie I've ever seen was "The Other Boleyn Girl".
Made it all look like the divorce and the break with Rome were all Anne's idea.

Yes, Elizabeth R. is also excellent. The first episode also serves as a nice linkage with Six Wives - a number of the characters still living from Henry's time to Bloody Mary's are portrayed by the same actors.

Susanna wrote: "Yes, Elizabeth R. is also excellent. The first episode also serves as a nice linkage with Six Wives - a number of the characters still living from Henry's time to Bloody Mary's are portrayed by th..."

yes - I have been lucky enough to watch both projects several times, and add I Claudius and The Watermargin to that. Immortal Superbness.

It is because I teach history to high school students that I do not focus much on entire films but in certain pieces of information that history-inspired films can provide. These are some examples:

1) Films like "300" can help provide useful images of Spartan life.

2) "Kingdom of Heaven" can help create a better understanding of the issues involving the Crusades. Few people know about the Frankish kingdom of Jerusalem created after the First Crusade or about figures such as Saladin.

3) The opening sequence of "Gladiator" tells us much about the Roman warmachine and the Pax Romana.

4) The images of torture in "Goya's Ghosts" help us see the horrific actions of the Inquisition in Spain.

5) The HBO series "ROME" provide great visuals of life and politics in the capital of the Roman Empire.

6) The HBO series "John Adams" shows that the Founding Fathers were not always united and the the birth of nation demanded great sacrifice. It is a great picture of colonial life and early America.

7) "Black Robe" and "The New World" provide great images of the early encounters between Europeans and Native Americans.

8) The final fighting sequence in "Master and Commander" is excellent when showing how war was fought in the Age of Napoleon.

9) In "Legends of the Fall," there is a fighting sequence that is excellent when teaching the Great War.

10) The HBO series "Band of Brothers," "Black Hawk Down," and the opening sequence of "Saving Private Ryan" show war with great realism.

11) The most recent Spike Lee film, "Miracle at St. Anna," show WWII from an African American perspective.

12) The opening sequence in "National Treasure: Book of Secrets" is excellent when teaching about Lincoln's assassin!

13) The final days of Hitler's life are presented in "Downfall."

14) "All Quite on the Western Front" deals with nationalism and the realities of war. One of my all time favorites!

I do not believe that there is such thing as "historical film." I much rather say that the there are many great "history-inpired" films because most people often forget that the movie industry is constantly changing information for the sake entertaiment and profit. This is heavily influenced by the fact that we do not like reality very much and we want as much violence and sex as possible in the films and movies we watch.

For an older film (a silent, even!) I think The Big Parade is good at capturing part of the Great War experience.

I realized while watching a documentary this weekend about Belleau Wood that the main battle sequence in the film includes a forest probably because of that battle.

Some very good points Alex.
I think I would agree with your assesments on most of the movies you mentioned.

Even the portrayal of Spartan life in 300 is very interesting.

I happened to have seen "300" with a crowd of mostly teenaged boys.
I was concerned because most of them had no idea about who the Persians were or ARE.
They thought it was awesome when the decadent,spoiled,hedonsitic Persian(Iranians) got hurled into the sea during the battles.
Basically
Greeks good, Persians Evil

Dear Alex E who laudably fesses-up to teaching History to High School Young Adults, may I suggest that you do not use the phrase "This is heavily influenced by the fact that we do not like reality very much" to your classes. Many youngsters I have known really do like reality very much indeed - in fact too much. It is at this Too Much stage that history (if delivered correctly by competent staff) can really stick in their brains and mean something. A word to the wise - when talking about the Civil War expect Russian, Spanish, Irish et al answers as not eveyone buys into the UScentric view.

May I be so bold as to ask where you are in USA? and are you cognisant with James W Loewen.

LOL! Thanks for your comments Manuel. I had to explain the way each side was portrayed in the film because, as you know, Persian did not look anyting like Xerxes. I explained that this was one of those changes created by movie makers to show two different sides and that, unfortunately, real history is lost in the process. I remember the Iranian government critizing the film. I must admit that they had every reason. On the other hand, the book was published in 1998 and there were no issues then. I suppose this is evidence that people do not read as much.

Bettie: I have to correct myself when I said that people do not like reality. I also teach art history and realism is not the norm in art. After all, there are hardly any portrayals in art that we can considered realistic. Film, as I see it, is filled with idealization (given that it is a form of artistic expression). I live in the United States but I was not born here. Much of what I have learned has been in South America actually. I also have lived in Africa (Kenya, Somalia, and Egypt), the Middle East, Asia, and parts of Europe (Paris and Rome being my favorite places but I also served in Bosnia with the United Nations). On the other hand, if realism was the norm in films and movies, I do not think they would be nearly as profitable. I am not talking about reality from a historical point of view but to the fact that film is mostly for entertaiment. I am familiar with Loewen and I am also the type of educator that teacher all aspects of history (from the removal of Japanese Americans to camps in the mid-west to French participation in the Holocaust, to the genocide of Native Americans by the American Government, to the "Comfort Houses" program by the Japanese in WWII, to the Irish experience in the United States). I do not believe in UScentric views but in that all actions are a manifestation of human nature heavily influenced by factors such economics, geography, etc. Like the Greeks, I see history as a series of patterns that can be positive and negative. I work in a very poor area of NYC and I tend to remind my kids that history help us break from negative cycles if we are willing to listen. History is not about nations but about people and this is something people forget: HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF BECAUSE NOBODY WAS LISTENING THE FIRST TIME. I do not believe in nationalism, globalization, of overrated terms like cultural diffusion. I believe that we are better as human beings if we try to change a little of the world around us. Still, thank you for your observations and for allowing me to correct myself. = )

On the other hand, I am so glad I joined this group. There is something about sharing with educated people and lovers of history. Indeed, history is not boring!

I am reminded by this thread that there are really some very interesting essays about history and Hollywood in Past Imperfect History According to the Movies.

It was given to me as a birthday present a few years ago from a friend who loves the movies as much as I love history. (Perfect choice, really, wasn't it?)

I much rather say that the there are many great "history-inpired" films because most people often forget that the movie industry is constantly changing information for the sake entertaiment and profit.

In days past, when I hung out in the bars, dives and flop houses in the ports of the world - not that I was ever a drinking man - I would occasionally bet a fellow traveling man that he couldn't tell me who cut Samson's hair. I won quite a bit of money, because that old Hollywood profiteer Cecil B. DeMille had fed them what their preachers had not: a version of the story of Samson and Delilah that was imperfect. Of course, I always carried a Bible to prove my point....

The answer is at Judges 16, verse 19, if you're curious, and if you can make a few pennies that way, then, "Good on ya'"

Past Imperfect:History According to the Movies is a great reference.

Wind That Shakes The Barley is worth a look and covers the rather touchy subject of the Irish Civil War well.
I won't start ranting about Braveheart though...having been brought up with the story and ran around the hills...well, the Battle Of Stirling Bridge has no bridge in the film. Imagine Tora Tora Tora filmed with Pearl Harbour as a land engagement. It has that level of cultural significance to Scots, and the film has that level of disregard for the facts.

How about the Longest Day?

"A Bridge Too Far" was good, too. I think my favorite WWII movie is "Castle Keep" with Burt Lancaster & Peter Falk. Something about it just tickles me. So sad, so true & so funny in parts. I loved the 'Bug' scene.

I remember enjoying
"What did you do in the War Daddy?"

somewhat naughty when you're in 6th grade.

I recently saw "Black Book." Excellent film about the Dutch resistance. Highly recommended!

Bryan: "The Longest Day" is, in my opinion, one of the best WWII films ever created!

Well, if you like The Black Book, you should look up Verhoven's much earlier work, Soldier of Orange,which he made in Holland before coming out to the US to direct.

Thanks! I will look for it!