Most Accurate Historical Movies?

[RJMooreII]

What history movies or TV shows show the greatest accuracy and fidelity? So far I, Claudius has been quite good, although it integrates many gossip-hound elements these elements are taken straight out of classical sources and thus reflect what people at the time thought was at least plausible.

The Tudors and Rome (Showtime) are both basically shows about sex and resemble Dynasty more than either of their subject matters. Tudors gets better in the second season as far as accuracy goes, but there are tons of missing characters (Henry had two sisters, not one) and so forth. Rome is full of bizarre and pointless anachronisms, missing characters, ahistorical and impossible events and not to mention that they take the roles of historical characters and then change their names for no apparent reason. Rome does get some of its ethnics better than others, but that's small consolation considering that most of the cast is white anyway.

I know TV is entertainment yadda yadda yadda but frankly I find it more entertaining if it actually depicts what I am interested in (the Tudor dynasty) and no some rehash of a soap opera with a bigger budget.

 

[bombshoo]

The Battle of Algiers was pretty accurate. Some of the actors were even present at the real events.

 

[RJMooreII]

Sounds interesting, that's the Algerian revolution, right?

Also, I just have to mention Gladiator. That movie could have just as easily been based on an alien planet ruled by men in metal suits; as it had nothing to do with the history, personalities or geography of anyone or anything in Rome or the classical world at all. The only remotely historical character is Marcus Aurelius and he's in the movie for like ten seconds.

 

[Dachs]

Echoing the comment about Battle of Algiers here. Also, LTC Mathieu was friggin' awesome in that movie.

Also, I just have to mention Gladiator. That movie could have just as easily been based on an alien planet ruled by men in metal suits; as it had nothing to do with the history, personalities or geography of anyone or anything in Rome or the classical world at all. The only remotely historical character is Marcus Aurelius and he's in the movie for like ten seconds.

Well, Commodus' death could be loosely said to have been inspired by true events or something. And at least that time they got the period for lorica segmentata right. It wasn't that terrible.

 

[bombshoo]

Sounds interesting, that's the Algerian revolution, right?

Yes, it's based on events during Algerian War. It's an amazing movie. Really worth seeing. Probably very influential as well, as it actually influenced other leaders in later revolutions. The fact it was made less than a decade after the events (I think it was made in '66, when the mentioned battle took place in 1957) led to a lot of controversy. It was banned in France for years after its release.

Also, I just have to mention Gladiator. That movie could have just as easily been based on an alien planet ruled by men in metal suits; as it had nothing to do with the history, personalities or geography of anyone or anything in Rome or the classical world at all. The only remotely historical character is Marcus Aurelius and he's in the movie for like ten seconds.

Things like having fictional characters in historical settings don't really bother me in movies like this. I don't really think the movie really pretended to be historical. It's just a period piece.

 

[RJMooreII]

Well, Commodus' death could be loosely said to have been inspired by true events or something. And at least that time they got the period for lorica segmentata right. It wasn't that terrible.

As a movie it was okay for Hollywood, I am just saying that it was more or less arbitrary saying it was in 'Rome' instead of the Planet Neptune.

A last one I'll mention is 300. Artistic licenses aside, the movie manages to so glorify what was essentially a Nazi slave state that it comes off as fascist propaganda.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Well, Commodus' death could be loosely said to have been inspired by true events or something. And at least that time they got the period for lorica segmentata right. It wasn't that terrible.

Commodus' death seems "close enough for Hollywood" (he was at least killed by a Gladiator, just in entirely different circumstances that weren't close to those in the movie). Still, in retrospect, that would be like saying Inglourious Basterds is "close enough for Hollywood."

 

[bombshoo]

A last one I'll mention is 300. Artistic licenses aside, the movie manages to so glorify what was essentially a Nazi slave state that it comes off as fascist propaganda.

I am not a fan of Frank Miller and his blood fetish by any means, but I thought the same thing almost the entire movie, then the last fifteen seconds, where they explained it was that sole survivor telling the story of the battle and that made it somewhat more redeemable. I actually like the idea of some soldier making up some crazy stories about his experience, but I'm really not sure that this was the intention of the movie at all.

Still, in retrospect, that would be like saying Inglourious Basterds is "close enough for Hollywood."

I have to admit, I laughed quite hard when they shot Hitler full of holes. That really caught me off guard, which I think was the intention. The whole movie I was thinking "This is ridiculous. I wonder what hoops they are going to jump through to try and reconcile this whole thing?" then they kill everyone and end the war, completely and shamelessly throwing history out the window. I suppose if you're going to go stupid, you might as well go full stupid.

 

[Masada]

A last one I'll mention is 300. Artistic licenses aside, the movie manages to so glorify what was essentially a Nazi slave state that it comes off as fascist propaganda.

Eh, the director more or less admitted he did it deliberately, and didn't himself take the movie in the least bit seriously. If I remeber correctly he expressed bemusement that people we're taking it seriously.

 

[RJMooreII]

One thing about many of the ancient movies we see, including 300 and Gladiator, is how the fighers break ranks constantly. That defeats THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF A PHALANX/MANIPLE. You're supposed to use coordinating and covering movements. The sort of looks-order fighting they show in these movies is something that would only occur if a unit had been broken and, if this happened, they were probably on the verge of being routed. The only people who would ordinarily be fighting like that would be auxiliaries or barbarian mercenaries.

 

[aelf]

Eh, the director more or less admitted he did it deliberately, and didn't himself take the movie in the least bit seriously. If I remeber correctly he expressed bemusement that people we're taking it seriously.

That hardly excuses him. The movie was terrible and not at all cool (unlike, say, Troy), unless one is a 15 year-old-kid or something. Somehow the comic was better.

One thing about many of the ancient movies we see, including 300 and Gladiator, is how the fighers break ranks constantly. That defeats THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF A PHALANX/MANIPLE. You're supposed to use coordinating and covering movements. The sort of looks-order fighting they show in these movies is something that would only occur if a unit had been broken and, if this happened, they were probably on the verge of being routed. The only people who would ordinarily be fighting like that would be auxiliaries or barbarian mercenaries.

Well, because a shoving match is not interesting to watch from a Hollywood perspective?

 

[RJMooreII]

Well, because a shoving match is not interesting to watch from a Hollywood perspective?

Which is funny, because Hollywood keeps spending more and more to get less and less returns. They don't seem to realize that people are sick of their contentlessly slick Top Gun aesthetic.

 

[Masada]

That hardly excuses him.

Yes it does. It's like freaking Starship Troopers. People should not be taking it seriously.

The movie was terrible and not at all cool (unlike, say, Troy), unless one is a 15 year-old-kid or something.

Troy was not coool. It was nigh-unwatchable.

 

[RJMooreII]

Yes it does. It's like freaking Starship Troopers. People should not be taking it seriously.

For some reason, I can't suspend disbelief for 'utterly ********'. If a story makes no sense it's not really a story, is it? A series of CGI scenes does not entertain me.

Troy was not coool. It was nigh-unwatchable.

Yeah, Troy was atrocious.

 

[aelf]

Yes it does. It's like freaking Starship Troopers. People should not be taking it seriously.

Even not taking it seriously, it was just bad in every way.

Troy was not coool. It was nigh-unwatchable.

Why so serious?

 

[sophie]

Even not taking it seriously, it was just bad in every way.

Even so, it's a classic.

 

[Masada]

For some reason, I can't suspend disbelief for 'utterly ********'.

I don't think he's asking you too. That's kind of the point, the whole thing is an overwrought homo-erotic quasi-fascist fantasy fap for over-sexed 15 years olds and the director made it to be. That it is, doesn't stop the director pointing this out for the more intelligent bears amongst the audience and having a laugh alongside them.

If a story makes no sense it's not really a story, is it?

Er, no. And I'm not much bothered by plot anyway.

A series of CGI scenes does not entertain me.

That's fine but that isn't the point I was making.

Even not taking it seriously, it was just bad in every way.

The best thing about starship troopers is that you can share it with people and learn a lot about how they think from what they get from the movie.

 

[RJMooreII]

Er, no. And I'm not much bothered by plot anyway.

Plot is the only reason I watch a movie. Even if it's a crazy plot (like Commando), there has to be some sense to it. Sometimes a movie will be that magic blend of terrible that makes it awesome, but usually it's just terrible.

The best thing about starship troopers is that you can share it with people and learn a lot about how they think from what they get from the movie.

I've never been able to finish the movie. The acting was terrible, the special effects were terrible, there was no logic to the storyline, nothing but an arbitrary series of fight scenes that make the troopers look like tactical retards and they took out the best aesthetic element of Heinlein's book, the power armor.
Paul Verhoven should have hung up his hat after Robocop.

 

[aelf]

I don't think he's asking you too. That's kind of the point, the whole thing is an overwrought homo-erotic quasi-fascist fantasy fap for over-sexed 15 years olds and the director made it to be. That it is, doesn't stop the director pointing this out for the more intelligent bears amongst the audience and having a laugh alongside them.

The issue is it was not worth the money watching it in the cinema. I should've known better

The best thing about starship troopers is that you can share it with people and learn a lot about how they think from what they get from the movie.

I don't have any major problems with Starship Troopers. Back then everyone I knew hated it, but I could appreciate its campness.

I've never been able to finish the movie. The acting was terrible, the special effects were terrible, there was no logic to the storyline, nothing but an arbitrary series of fight scenes that make the troopers look like tactical retards and they took out the best aesthetic element of Heinlein's book, the power armor.
Paul Verhoven should have hung up his hat after Robocop.

Then it seems you may not get Paul Verhoeven.

 

[RJMooreII]

I know that Robocop is one of my favorite movies of all time, and that I don't even like anything else he made.