Subject: Worst historical movie ever!
Posted by: Cymruambyth
Date: Dec 09 11
'Alexander', starring Colin Farrell, and Mel Gibson's 'Passion of the Christ' tie for first place on my list.
Posted by: Cymruambyth
Date: Dec 09 11
'Alexander', starring Colin Farrell, and Mel Gibson's 'Passion of the Christ' tie for first place on my list.
37 replies. On page 2 of 2 pages. 1 2
Upstart3 
|
I find Carry on Cleo ridiculous Reply #21. Dec 18 15, 3:28 PM |
supersal1
|
I enjoy that one as well. Reply #22. Dec 18 15, 6:00 PM |
Blackdresss
|
What was historically wrong with "The Passion Of The Christ" and "Pearl Harbor"? This is an interesting thread, and I read through it probably too quickly, but these are the two that leaped out at me. I have to log off, but I'll check back in the next couple of days to see if answers await! And I really, really do want to know. Reply #23. Dec 18 15, 9:41 PM |
Jabberwok
|
I found this, from a couple of archaeologists discussing 'The Passion of Christ' https://www.archaeological.org/pdfs/papers/Comments_on_The_Passion.pdf I tend to regard many historical films as storytelling, with all the liberties that are involved with creating a good narrative. It's only annoying when the director/actors and the rest don't acknowledge that, and pretend that it's actually an authentic account. Hollywood Medieval is a genre all by itself! :) Reply #24. Dec 19 15, 2:20 AM |
namrewsna
|
I think most people's issue with Pearl Harbor is not with historical accuracy (though it was far from perfect in that regard, it actually was ok with a few allowances for standard hollywood embellishment...like fighter pilots participating in a bomber mission so that the stars could remain central to the plot in both segments. ) so much as with the quality of content. You can always find historical purists willing to harp on every miniscule detail, but really here the issues were mostly minor The Japanese strafing the hospital and shooting up the pretty nurses to sell more drama, the aforementioned fighter bomber switch, Roosevelt standing up. None of this ever happened. Probably the biggest historical flub was claiming the Doolittle raid had huge strategic significance when it did not (it was a morale booster for the Americans both fighting and on the homefront) but there was nothing horrendously wrong with the accuracy of history. Aside from objections to specific actors mentioned by others It just left a bad taste in my mouth to make it a love story. Yeah I know life goes on even during war. I don't even care if it is mentioned..it cant all be explosions and fighting...but the quest for Kate Beckinsale was WAY to much of the focus here. . Reply #25. Dec 19 15, 5:55 PM |
paulmallon
|
The re-make of "Ben-Hur" Reply #26. Sep 16 16, 5:36 PM |
Mommakat
|
Most re-makes are poor, Paul. Reply #27. Sep 16 16, 8:40 PM |
Mixamatosis
|
I can forgive films that are not accurate if they capture the spirit of a story of an age, if someone has obviously put some love into them (by which I mean taken time and trouble over them and put some heart into them), and if they are enjoyable. For those reasons I did enjoy "Troy", "Spartacus", and "The Vikings" (the latter two starring Kirk Douglas and Tony Curtis). Reply #28. Oct 02 16, 10:45 AM |
C30
|
Most of them! Reply #29. Oct 02 16, 10:59 AM |
boxjaw
|
"The Lord of the Rings" trilogy as well as "The Hobbit" trilogy. So much relevance was left out. Then there is the issue of fictional additions that weren't at all needed. Enjoyable nonetheless. I just missed some of the characters that made the real Middle Earth so rich. No filming of The Scouring of the Shire! "The Hobbit" was stretched out so terribly that the fiction it was portraying became bad fiction. Legolas in "The Hobbit"? Nonsense. Reply #30. Oct 14 16, 11:34 PM |
| Mixamatosis
|
Lord of the Rings is not a historical movie you know, so I'm not sure how it fits into this thread, but I think it's hard for any film to do full justice to a book. That's why reading is still such a great experience. The Lord of the Rings books had lots of songs and poems that were not featured in the films. I can understand why. There was no time. Books can take days or weeks to read. Films have to allow people to go home to eat, sleep and do other things. Reply #31. Oct 15 16, 7:01 AM |
shipyardbernie
|
Most historic movies that are made in Hollywood. We get "The Hollywood Version". You would think they would get stuff right that actually happened in America. Some of the westerns that I have seen have some characters who never actually met in real life. Reply #32. Oct 15 16, 2:51 PM |
jolana
|
A Hollywood version of Three Musketeers was horrible. They made Richelieu get drowned :) Reply #33. Oct 15 16, 5:14 PM |
JonPunk
|
I like a lot of the movies that are historical that many don't seem keen on . Alexander , Troy , Kingdom of Heaven .... I treat them basically as entertainment . The thing that does wind me up is , say , a pre Norman invasion England ...ie Viking or Romano - British type , where they will have medieval armour from around 500 years in their future ....and not chain mail as they then would have had - I like historical accuracy in that sense . A fairly recent Robin Hood TV series in the UK ( NOT Robin of Sherwood from the 80's I hasten to add ) ..... had them wearing very different uniform/armour than would have been available then - even leather studded stuff for one of the main villian's . I can put up with some artistic licence in stories - but get the uniform right please . It should though in the end be entertainment and not taken too seriously ....an big element of truth , but a little licence to play . Reply #34. Apr 14 17, 4:00 AM |
| Mixamatosis
|
I saw "The Black Shield of Falworth" on T.V again the other day. I find it such an enjoyable film. Terrible on historical accuracy but it's fiction in a "historical" setting so I can forgive the inaccuracy and take it for what it is. It's like a great children's adventure story and it's fun to spot the historical bloomers. Reply #35. Apr 15 17, 3:29 AM |
varnish
|
I was clicking around the other day, and stopped to watch a little bit of the movie "Pearl Harbor", I noticed the sailors were smoking Marlboro lights, and started cracking up. If you want to see A LOT of historical inaccuracies, look up IMDB Pearl Harbor - goofs......Wow!! Reply #36. Apr 16 17, 12:15 PM |
| C30
|
varnish...never seen the film, but have seen clips of it, and the biggest glaring error IMO are 1960's period radar aerials on some ships. Reply #37. Apr 16 17, 1:10 PM |
37 replies. On page 2 of 2 pages. 1 2
Legal / Conditions of Use
|
|
: