# Historical Inaccuracies in Movies **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [March 16, 2003, 6:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745 "2003-03-16T06:30:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 15\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![ruadh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d2c977/32.png) [@ruadh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ruadh)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 11:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/41 "2003-03-17T11:51:02Z")
_Michael Collins_: [ul] [li] the Auxiliaries did not drive an armoured car onto the Croke Park pitch on Bloody Sunday[/li][li] car bombs had not been invented yet[/li][li] nobody seriously believes that De Valera had anything to do with Collins’s assassination[/li][li] Kitty Kiernan was no Julia Roberts.[/li][/ul] Good film, though. ---
**Author:** ![RikWriter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/49beb7/32.png) [@RikWriter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RikWriter)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 11:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/42 "2003-03-17T11:53:40Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Max Torque \* > \*\*I’m in complete agreement. Strange, I never knew that Vietnam looked so much like southern California… \*\* I believe We Were Soldiers was filmed in North Carolina. And BTW, have you looked at pictures of the battle sight? Read the book perhaps? It looked a lot like where they filmed it. Vietnam isn’t all rain forest and rice paddies, ya know? ---
**Author:** ![G.Cornelius](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/b782af/32.png) [@G.Cornelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/G.Cornelius)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/43 "2003-03-17T13:41:33Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Neurotik \* > \*\*…_Braveheart_ had them fighting the Battle of Stirling Bridge with no bridge! Especially when the bridge was such an integral part of the English defeat. And that business about inventing really long spears to take down the horses?.. \*\* Yes, the bridge was indeed the most important feature of the battle and it does seem ludicrous to leave it out. AFAIK the bit about the long spears was accurate.[Battle of Stirling Bridge](http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/2653/battleofstirlingbridge.htm). Essentially to Scots re-invented the phalanx, but it was an inovation at the time and affected medieval tactics for some time. ---
**Author:** ![Shade](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2bfe46/32.png) [@Shade](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shade)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/44 "2003-03-17T13:59:22Z")
Why do we get upset? If the movie loses self-consistancy. In crouching tiger, hidden dragon, we expect people to run up walls. If a movie is a historical romp, no-one cares. But if it’s mostly accurate, anachronisms are as glaring as someone running up a wall. ---
**Author:** ![Neurotik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/91b2a8/32.png) [@Neurotik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Neurotik)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 3:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/45 "2003-03-17T15:02:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by G. Cornelius \* > \*\*Yes, the bridge was indeed the most important feature of the battle and it does seem ludicrous to leave it out. AFAIK the bit about the long spears was accurate.[Battle of Stirling Bridge](http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Aegean/2653/battleofstirlingbridge.htm). Essentially to Scots re-invented the phalanx, but it was an inovation at the time and affected medieval tactics for some time. \*\* You’re right. I thought that Wallace was just using the schiltron tactic that was already in existence. Apparently, he was credited with its invention. My mistake. ---
**Author:** ![AvidReader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e47774/32.png) [@AvidReader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AvidReader)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/46 "2003-03-17T17:56:10Z")
Re: John Wayne war movies of the 40’s and early 50’s: **The Sands of Iwo Jima The Fighting Seabees Flying Leathernecks Desert Command They Were Expendable Back to Bataan Flying Tigers**…and others but these will suffice. Now, I realize that these movies were made during a time of world conflict and because of this these movies were as much propaganda as they were entertainment vehicles calling for some “stretches” when it came to conceptual plotting, dialog, scenery, etc. Also, the strict censorship code of that era makes our current code pale to insignificance. The inaccuracies both historical and general are many. The pressed and starched uniforms (with creases!!!) in the midst of battle; the sometimes “dummy” rifles; the stilted, pristine dialog; nary the use of obscenity (this among seasoned combat soldiers); the condescending attitude of officers towards entlisted men; the potrayal of officers as intelligent, well educated, urbane, and sophisticated counterpoints that of the enlisted man as a naive, gullible, “aw shucks”-“gee whiz” type of person. And by far the greatest irony was John Wayne himself. He rose to super stardom by his portrayal of the gruff, stalwart, resolute, super patriotic, swaggering military character in these movies; yet Wayne successfully used every legally available avenue to escape the draft and remain stateside while other stars such as JImmy Stewart, Tyrone Power, Ronald Reagan, and many others **volunteered** for military service. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/47 "2003-03-17T19:35:19Z")
Actually, all Reagan did was make propaganda and training films, IIRC. Although he did make claims that he was there when they liberated the camps, I think. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Miskatonic](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mr.miskatonic/32/310_2.png) [@Mr.Miskatonic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Miskatonic)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/48 "2003-03-17T21:14:19Z")
Even the best made historical movie is going to have some errors. In Richard Lester’s _Four Musketeers_ (along with 3M was accurate near to a fault). Milady dewinter hold a small pistol whose design and firing mechanism is decidedly 19th century. She tries hiding it a bit with her hand (they obviously wanted her to have an exotic assasins weapon and could find none suitable.) but in the next seen it is seen in the hands of the Duek of Buckingham. Oh well. I’ve learned to take it while mentioning it. I don’t think I’ve found perfection in a movie yet. I’d actually be scared if I did. ---
**Author:** ![vivalostwages](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/d07c76/32.png) [@vivalostwages](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vivalostwages)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/49 "2003-03-17T21:47:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Duke \* > \*\*FWIW, I talked about _Elizabeth_ just after it came out with my history supervisor, who didn’t like it. She thought the historical adaptation with the movie made it turn out all wrong! Just like **Baker** I guess…so maybe _less_ politics were needed. \*\* * * * It really bugged me when they started using some of Mozart’s music towards the end of the movie. It doesn’t mesh, given that he wasn’t even born when she was reigning–was he? And it made me think of **Amadeus** instead of Elizabeth. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/50 "2003-03-17T21:53:35Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Baker \* > \*\*The worst part about _The Sound of Music_ is that their escape just didn’t happen that way. The Von Trapps did not make a dramatic run for it, they just drove out of Austria. And Maria had had time to birth at least one child before their exile. Captain von Trapp was hardly the martinet he was depicted as either. I could go on, but their real story is just as interesting as the Hollywood version. \*\* Quite true. Moreover, some of the von Trap “children” are still alive and well (though quite old), and while they all profess to enjoy the Rodgers and Hammerstein musical, they all hasten to point out that, far from being a militaristic disciplinarian, their father was a very jolly sort of fellow. Maria, they say, was the real disciplinarian of the family (well, what would you expect from a former nun?). ---
**Author:** ![Nichol\_storm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/3ec8ea/32.png) [@Nichol\_storm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nichol_storm)\ **Post date:** [March 17, 2003, 10:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/51 "2003-03-17T22:25:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Miller \* > \*\*So, do y’all freak out when you go to see _Richard III_ and he’s protrayed as a hunchback? When you read the _Iliad_, do you get pissed off at all these clearly fictional gods being on the battlefield? \*\* You’re forgetting one thing – Shakespeare and Homer are a hell of a lot better than Randall Wallace and Ridley Scott. I’ll accept inaccuracies from Shakespeare and Homer, much in the same way I’ll accept sentences that go on for three pages from William Faulkner. If anyone else tried to pull that off, they’d be hanged by their toenails – but if Faulkner does it, it’s accepted. Why? For the same reason we accept Shakespeare and Homer’s “imaginative reworkings” of history – he’s talented enough to pull it off. By the way – wasn’t Richard III actually deformed? IIRC, it wasn’t a hunchback, but a slight stooping of his shoulders. .:Nichol:. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 3:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/52 "2003-03-18T03:56:06Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Nichol\_storm \* > \*\*By the way – wasn’t Richard III actually deformed? IIRC, it wasn’t a hunchback, but a slight stooping of his shoulders. > > .:Nichol:. \*\* As I understand, most references to his “deformities” were made after his death. At the time, evil was thought to be physically manifested. A deformed person had the “devil’s mark” and any phyiscal oddity was thought to be because of your sin, or that of your parents (such as being concieved in a “unnatural” sexual position.) So, after Richard died, rumors of his deformities spread. (Much as happened to Anne Boleyn.) IIRC, one painting of Richard was actually re-done later to make him appear hump-backed. (Sorry, I don’t have a cite.) ---
**Author:** ![Dr.Rieux](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Dr.Rieux](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dr.Rieux)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 10:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/53 "2003-03-18T10:47:37Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by RikWriter \* > \*\*I believe We Were Soldiers was filmed in North Carolina. And BTW, have you looked at pictures of the battle sight? Read the book perhaps? It looked a lot like where they filmed it. Vietnam isn’t all rain forest and rice paddies, ya know? \*\* When I saw Randall Wallace at a screening of _We Were Soldiers_ here last fall, he told us the Army base scenes were filmed in North Carolina and the Vietnam combat scenes were shot in central California. ---
**Author:** ![Cazzle](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cazzle/32/75_2.png) [@Cazzle](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cazzle)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 11:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/54 "2003-03-18T11:30:15Z")
Maybe I’m missing something… but I didn’t think Nicole Kidman was doing an English accent in Moulin Rouge. She sounded Australian to me - that’s how I sound too. ---
**Author:** ![RikWriter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/49beb7/32.png) [@RikWriter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RikWriter)\ **Post date:** [March 18, 2003, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745/55 "2003-03-18T11:48:56Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Dr. Rieux \* > \*\*When I saw Randall Wallace at a screening of _We Were Soldiers_ here last fall, he told us the Army base scenes were filmed in North Carolina and the Vietnam combat scenes were shot in central California. \*\* Ah, ok. I knew part of the film had been shot in Carolina…I didn’t know the Nam scenes were done somewhere else. My bad. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/historical-inaccuracies-in-movies/161745.md?page=2)