It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Should historical movies be accurate?

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 12:36 PM
link   
I like some history. I really like great historical movies. some take quite an artistic liberty, however.

Now I always say that movies should be strictly entertainment. But the problem is, many people still use them to gain information, and take the information at face value.

Do you think writers are obligated to make movies more historical accurate? Or if not, have a statement saying so?

I watched The Other Boleyn Girl the other night, and was surprised at it's flaws.

What are your thoughts?




posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 12:55 PM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


Check out the biographies made in the 1930s to the 1950s. Hollywood highly fictionalized them to the point that there was very little fact in them. The idea was to entertain and sell tickets.

I believe the start of the 1970s did see some actual research go into the accuracy of the movies, but some people did not like some of the truth, especially when it came to historic Western figures.

If the movie is supposed to be about a person or their life, I would want it to be as factual as possible. However, if it is fiction that takes place with historic persons of the past, the film makers can take liberties with them, as long as it is noted in the movie credits.



posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


If the movie makes the attempt to claim that it is the "true" story than it should make every effort to do so, histoically speaking. One of the issues that I have with historically based films is that there is always one side told disproportionately to the other/ good guy-bad guy type of things. History itself is up for questioning in many cases, but when we've got the facts and it's a more recent story that can be verified, tell the truth, imo. Adding characters or scenes that accentuate that story are ok, as long as the story's main points remain.

ColoradoJens



posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 09:10 PM
link   
You both have good points.
Thank you for your responses.



posted on Jan, 11 2009 @ 10:54 PM
link   
I think that is someone is making a movie the story itself could be fictionalized, but the event of the time should be historically accurate. An example would be The Patriot with Mel Gibson. The story and some of the battle can be not real or truth stretched but keep the major battle and historical issue correct. There should be some accountability for a degree of accuracy.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 12:54 PM
link   
reply to post by nixie_nox
 


I have just seen the movie "The Illusionist" with Edward Norton. It is a work of fiction set in the Austro-Hungarian Empire. Crown Prince Leopold was a real person, and he is a major character in the story. While it is a good movie, I do wonder how many people will think it is what really happened, instead of the fiction that it is.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 09:20 PM
link   
Mel Gibson and Braveheart. Some people were alive that weren't, the outfits they wore weren't around then, bleh. Perfect Storm? Uh, they got the name of the boat right... 300? Well, they got the fact that there were Spartans right... I like how they did the Prestige, done in a certain time, and show a rivalry between Edison and Telsa.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join