Historically based movies with gross inaccuracy

Very interesting, and now it makes sense to me. 10-Q veddy much!

Rule of cool.

Although there are many anachronisms in the 2010 Robin Hood, I did manage to get one of the IMDb “goofs” corrected. :-

Incorrectly regarded as goofs: Several characters speak of seed corn. Many viewers interpret this as maize which wasn’t introduced to England until the 15th or 16th century. However, the word corn in 1199 England was used for many different cereal grains (wheat, rye, oats, etc.), not the corn-on the-cob we think of today.

This is still true in England. When we speak of a corn field this could refer to any cereal crop. We call maize “sweet-corn”.

Bloody Sunday shows PIRA firing at the British Army, which we now know did not happen.

In the name of the Father, *a Solicitor *arguing in Court!!!

RealityChuck writes:

> There was actually a book out that discussed this: Future Imperfect: History
> According to Hollywood.

And History Goes to the Movies.

I’ve always been a fan of spaghetti westerns.

The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly is a lot of fun to watch, but um… No, the Civil War was not fought in what is supposed to be the American West.

Queen Catherine was a redhead too, but no one (except the BBC once) picks up on that.

The Long Ships (1964)The Vikings were never in possession of a 12-foot tall golden bell known as “The Mother of Voices,” and the Moors never forced people to “ride the steel mare.”

Not quite. There is one scene (I think it was at a party) where Nash and some guy exchange some pretty meaningful glances (or one glance). It’s very minor, but it’s definitely there, and it’s pretty clearly meant to be a gay reference.

Every movie made about the battle of the Alamo has sucked.

The fighting in that movie was actually based on a real incident in New Mexico. There is a monument to it or similar action in Albuquerque’s Old Town, but IIRC it scotched the Rebs’ ambitions of taking the war into the Southwest and maybe even California.

Ah yes, here we go: The New Mexico Campaign of 1862 by Confederate General Sibley, who I believe is mentioned in the film. A lot of Americans don’t realize how much of the war was fought west of the Mississippi or even in New Mexico.

The Perfect Storm chronicles the last voyage of the Andrea Gail, a fishing boat that is sunk during a massive weather catastrophe, and everyone on board drowns.

So how do the filmmakers know that the events on the boat (which, IIRC, has never been recovered) actually happened the way they are portrayed?

Its more or less impossible to make a historically based movie without filling in large gaps, unless you happen to be filming an event where more or less everything was recorded (Apollo 13, maybe?). I don’t really think those things are the same as gross inaccuracies though, which I’d associate more with additions that actually contradict the historical record.

Had the Andrea Gail in the movie happily steamed into port after the strom, then that would be a gross inaccuracy.

What? The Tudors ran all the way to Henry’s death. They occasionally depicted him having trouble with his leg, and they made him look a little bulkier with costuming.

And it is really hard to make Jonathan Rhys Meyers look unattractive. Even in the scenes where they were draining his boils I kept getting distracted by the fact that it’s still Jonathan Rhys Meyers lying there naked and sweaty with only a washcloth to protect his modesty. :o

Catherine of Aragon has almost never to my knowledge been portrayed by an actress who resembled her known portraits in the slightest; the historical Catherine was short, plumpish, very fair skinned, and strawberry blonde. They almost always cast tall, think, dark-haired types for her, though.

To each their own, certainly, but I disagree to an extent. Without knowing for sure what actually did happen, it’s certainly possible that the events portrayed ARE grossly inaccurate.

I think movie makers think that all Spaniards are stereotypically dark. Catherine of Aragon had English ancestry, through the house of Lancaster. Maybe the red-headed genes came from a common ancestor, as Henry and Catherine were distant cousins.

I think far more short, plump, very fair-skinned, strawberry-blond actors should be cast in movies. In fact, I think they should be cast in every conceivable part. You’ve got my E-mail address. Let me know when you’re ready to start filming.