This topic was posted by somebody on another message board I frequent, and I thought it was good enough to bring over here.
Preface: Yeah, yeah, I know, Hollywood screws everything up. Fact of life. But if they get the broad strokes more or less right, while messing around with details – say, Amistad, for example – it’s still a useful exercise. There are lots of great tales just waiting to be discovered by moviemakers, but, if you’re a purist, you may want to avoid this discussion, because you’ll just grind your teeth thinking about how Merriweather Lewis carried his journal in his coat pocket, not in his pack like the goddamn movie that couldn’t get it right grrr snarl snort – um, well, actually I don’t know that as a fact, I’m just making a little fun of the extremists’ view. Sorry.
Anyway, back to the topic. Good example: the Shackleton expedition. It’s an incredible story of survival, and it’s amazing to me it languished for so many years before Hollywood got around to it. (Wolfgang Petersen, director of Das Boot and most recently The Perfect Storm, is currently working on it.) If they even get it halfway correct, it’ll be amazing.
Another phenomenal survival story is in the book Arctic Grail. (If you’re a fan of history, and you haven’t read this, you must, must, must. Spectacular.) I don’t remember the names of the participants, but there was one expedition where a group of people got separated from their ship and drifted on an ice floe for several weeks. As I was reading, I kept thinking, holy crap, how come more people don’t know about this? If I ever get to be a moviemaker, I’m putting this one on my slate; it’s simply incredible. (In fact, on the other message board, I mentioned that the whole book Arctic Grail would make an amazing miniseries, a la HBO’s “From the Earth to the Moon.”)
The thing about historical events in movies is that they work best when they revolve around a single person. The recent Thirteen Days fictionalized and synthesized a minor character in order to give us an identifiable protagonist, and while the historians didn’t like it, I thought it was an intelligent and effective dramatic compromise that made the history more accessible. Other good examples of historical films that center on a main character are Lawrence of Arabia and Patton, of course, but for a better example of how a limited viewpoint can make a story work better, see Glory, which takes a complicated slice of history and focuses it down to the relationship between the commander and a couple of his men.
Also consider this year’s Pearl Harbor. Its huge historical canvas wouldn’t work very well as a straight movie (see Tora Tora Tora, which is interesting but dramatically fairly dry), so they made (in my opinion) the correct choice to create characters through whom we would experience the event. Unfortunately, of course, they did it really badly, and the movie stunk – but the approach, I think, was right.
By the same token, there are historical events that are so broad that they’d have to be significantly narrowed in order to work as a movie story. Take, for example, The Crusades. Which one do you do? Actually, which part of which one? Who’s the main character? What’s the arc?
So with all of this in mind, history buffs, what real-life events would you like to see on the big screen? Either because they’re just plain cool (they’re working on the Battle of Marathon right now, trying to capitalize on the success of Gladiator), because they’re important (likewise, somebody’s doing a biography of Alexander the Great), or because there’s some little-known incident that deserves to be brought back into the public spotlight (e.g. Sayles’s Matewan).