ADN

in the spirit of raum's "oliver stone don't care about the black folks" thread, here's something that's a real bug bear of mine. hollywood producers altering the depiction of key historical events to better market their latest flick. case in point would be u571 the movie about u.s. sailors recovering an enigma machine from a nazi sub. except, in real life this was one of the proud moments for the british navy, not the americans. many of the sailors are still alive today so the decision to erase them from history was a special little kick in the nuts.

another, admittedly less immediately relevant, example would be braveheart - or, "how william wallace boned the queen of england"! there were so many changes and loopy decisions taken it was amazing, though probably the most interesting was not to have the pivotal scottish victory of sterling bridge take place on a bridge at all, but rather in a normal field battle scene. presumably the producers thought the original battle was too much like a simple ambush rather than a glorious endevour and so went for something different - and entirely unbelievable. they might have shown wallace wearing the skin of the english herald as a sword belt as well, but i guess that wasn't quite the image they were going for. this movie ticks me off if you couldn't tell! and don't even get me started on mel-jews-are-great-gibbson's other historical travesty "the patriot"....!

obviously i've mainly noticed historical inaccuracies that apply to my own country, probably because i'm more sensative to them. but what sort of changes have really got your goat?

I'm not really surprised by what they did with U571. America always have to Americanize everything. Look at the movie The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. For some reason they felt the need to throw in that secret sevice agent... he was redundant, an exact replica of Sean Connery's character. lol The story may not have been based on historical events, but it still shows you how America has to Americanize everything... lol

After reading your post, I think Braveheart would have been much better if they had included what you said they left out.

Doesn't the world revolve around America? sssssshhhhhhhhh... don't speak too loud or Brains will hear us. /wink.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid=";)" border="0" alt="wink.gif" />

It always says BASED on a true story. That just means the general outline of the story was based on true events.

Braveheart was tripe.

Enigma was a trash novel, with little accuracy.

but the REAL piece of shit is Alexander...

Movies like Alexander and Kingdom of Heaven, I never watch those for their historical accuracy. I just watch them because they're entertaining. It's pretty much guaranteed that the story is gonna be fucked...

Shit, I remember watching Night of the Living Dead for the first time, and them saying that it happened for real...Blair Witch, same thing...

Usually when I see 'movie' that's all there is to it...