Historical Accuracy in TV and Film

[Queequeg]

Wheren't they charging out of a wooded area pretty close to the guns? Some of the horses surviving doesn't seem impossible.

[Valmy]

Wheren't they charging out of a wooded area pretty close to the guns? Some of the horses surviving doesn't seem impossible.

No just the opposite, they were charging through an open field towards a wooded area where the Germans had their machine guns hidden.

[Tamas]

Please people that is the most ridiculously cheesy movie ever made, do not discuss it as it was worth wasting breath on.

[Valmy]

Please people that is the most ridiculously cheesy movie ever made, do not discuss it as it was worth wasting breath on.

Fair enough.  I was just bringing it up for the hilarious language thing.

[Razgovory]

I have long since given up on expecting historical accuracy on the History Channel, let alone a historical movie.

[lustindarkness]

I have long since given up on expecting historical accuracy on the History Channel, let alone a historical movie.

What? Now you'll tell me that Ancient Aliens is not historical accurate?

[Admiral Yi]

My biggest beef with historical inaccuracy is with tactics rather than hard ware.  Two roman armies march towards each other, then they break up into groups of two and start dueling each other.

[Valmy]

I have long since given up on expecting historical accuracy on the History Channel, let alone a historical movie.

At least there is no pretense on the history channel anymore. 

[grumbler]

what is there to like in Warhorse, srsly? Apart from Spielberg making the parody of his own life`s work himself.

I can see it not translating well to a non-English-speaking audience, but if you thought the movie a parody, maybe you might not want to watch English-language films at all.  Monty Python would blow your mind.

[Razgovory]

I have long since given up on expecting historical accuracy on the History Channel, let alone a historical movie.

What? Now you'll tell me that Ancient Aliens is not historical accurate?

It's like the opposite of history.

[grumbler]

Please people that is the most ridiculously cheesy movie ever made, do not discuss it as it was worth wasting breath on.

So not worth your breath that you post about it repeatedly? 

I didn't care for the movie, but I think you missed its point entirely.  It isn't even close to the cheesiest movie ever made, though it was pretty cheesy.

[KRonn]

My biggest beef with historical inaccuracy is with tactics rather than hard ware.  Two roman armies march towards each other, then they break up into groups of two and start dueling each other.

Yeah, agreed. They fought in formation as much as possible, which is one factor why the Roman armies were so effective. Same thing for other ancient armies of course. But in some movies they show formations and it not only looks right, it makes perfect sense as to the reason for using them. The movie 300 showed use of formations which is good but for me that movie fell apart with all the uber moves by individual Greek soldiers when not in formation.

In the beginning of the movie "The Eagle" a badly outnumbered Roman force formed testudo, turtled up, and that showed a very effective tactic. So movies do very well if they can portray some proper tactics as the tactics the ancient armies used were often so very effective. I cringe whenever I see well trained armies devolve into individual fighting at the start of battle.

[Agelastus]

Option 3, with, as has been mentioned, Braveheart being the classic example of a film that does things the wrong way.

And stupidly so to.

For example, in a film where they portray the English as being generally stupid, arrogant and borderline evil...they filmed the battle scenes for Stirling Bridge with no bridge in sight.

Stirling Bridge is a classic example of stupidity and arrogance on the English side ("Hey, let's cross this bridge two at a time with the Scottish Army drawn up in plain sight and waiting for us over there on the other side.") It's not something that has to be made up, or interpreted, or otherwise twisted as so much else was in that film, it really happened and fitted with their general portrayal of the English. And they ignored it.

Admittedly, I am trying to think of a historical film that actually does things right. Television tends to be much better at making acceptable "historical" historical series.

[Razgovory]

For example, in a film where they portray the English as being generally stupid, arrogant and borderline evil...they filmed the battle scenes for Stirling Bridge with no bridge in sight.

And?

[Admiral Yi]

Admittedly, I am trying to think of a historical film that actually does things right.

A Bridge Too Far.