# how well are different periods of time portrayed in movies?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-well-are-different-periods-of-time-portrayed-in-movies/343874>\
**Category:** Cafe Society\
**Created:** [February 10, 2006, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-well-are-different-periods-of-time-portrayed-in-movies/343874 "2006-02-10T16:38:44Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 8\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![cactus\_waltz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/74df32/32.png) [@cactus\_waltz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cactus_waltz)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2006, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-well-are-different-periods-of-time-portrayed-in-movies/343874/1 "2006-02-10T16:38:44Z")

</div>

Movies these days can take place in any sort of setting and it does not appear strange to us, whether it’s the medieval times, ancient times, the 1900’s, the 1950’s or five years ago.

My question is: do you find that different periods of time generally are well portrayed? Are they true to the source material, so to speak?

Born in the 1980’s, my experience of anything that takes place earlier than, say, 1995 is sort of dim to me. I will have to rely on others visions to gather a good mental picture to see what things were like. But I realize that it easily happens that periods of time are made into caricatures so people will be more likely to say “Oh, that’s how it was!”, making their own image skewed.

Thoughts?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zeldar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/b77776/32.png) [@Zeldar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeldar)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2006, 5:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-well-are-different-periods-of-time-portrayed-in-movies/343874/2 "2006-02-10T17:28:33Z")

</div>

A knee-jerk response to the OP is that the only fair representation of a period will be a documentary or “real time” filming done during the period in question. That keeps anything older than, say, 1880, from being “accurate.”

The next best gauge of accuracy will be those supposedly “current day” things which don’t attempt to represent past or future periods. For instance a 50’s movie about the 50’s, a 30’s movie about the 30’s, etc.

Using things like older photos or representational art as the basis for a “movie” like the Civil War series Ken Burns did can have a flavor of the period but will lack the essence that movement can give.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2006, 5:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-well-are-different-periods-of-time-portrayed-in-movies/343874/3 "2006-02-10T17:38:13Z")

</div>

Hubby has said numerous times that he doesn’t like to watch movies with me that have a historical setting, because I’m likely to suddenly spit out, “They didn’t wear that! She would never have done that-- it was totally improper! That armor is way too shiny!” For me, inaccuracies in sets, costumes or mannerism jarrs me out of the experience.

I think _Deadwood_ is probably one of the better modern examples. They (generally) get things right. (If you look back at last year’s thread on the show, you’ll see me in there bitching about a detail or two.) _Rome_ is pretty good, too, but my eagle-eye has spotted a few discrepancies here and there. (Timeline notwithstanding-- I’m talking about period costumes and sets.)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2006, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-well-are-different-periods-of-time-portrayed-in-movies/343874/4 "2006-02-10T18:00:55Z")

</div>

It depends on the movie. A Knight’s Tale was horribly inaccurate while Monty Python and the Holy Grail supposedly did a pretty good job.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![anyrose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/54ee81/32.png) [@anyrose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/anyrose)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2006, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-well-are-different-periods-of-time-portrayed-in-movies/343874/5 "2006-02-10T18:01:11Z")

</div>

Hollywood has definitely gotten better at approximating the style of the period they are filming  
Period pieces made in the 50s and 60s (and perhaps before that as well) had, in particular, the women wearing hair and makeup of the day (1964 for example) not of the period being filmed (ie 1780 or whatever)  
Also the costumes often had more elaborate detailing or more vibrant colors than was historiaclly accurate  
I’m not saying they get it exactly right nowadays. I’m just saying they’ve gotten much better at it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2006, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-well-are-different-periods-of-time-portrayed-in-movies/343874/6 "2006-02-10T18:09:08Z")

</div>

Hollywood never bothered much with accuracy of historical detail. But the false assumption is that accuracy of historical detail is important. It’s second to telling a good story.

A good example is the film **Hans Christian Andersen** , which is an entertaining little film tying together many of Andersen’s stories into the story of his life. But the movie says right off that it’s not history: it’s a fairy tale about the fairy tale teller. Making it accurate would probably have made it less entertaining.

Anyone who is upset about the trivial details being portrayed in basically an anal retentive who is unable to see anything but the trivial details. Very sad.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![yojimbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yojimbo/32/232_2.png) [@yojimbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yojimbo)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2006, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-well-are-different-periods-of-time-portrayed-in-movies/343874/7 "2006-02-10T18:21:52Z")

</div>

I believe Kubrick’s _Barry Lyndon_ was very good. It captured tyhe look off the period 1754-1763. very well down to the way rooms were lit by candle light. He also used a lot of real clothes from the period.

It’s also a very good movie 🙂

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\
**Post date:** [February 10, 2006, 6:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-well-are-different-periods-of-time-portrayed-in-movies/343874/8 "2006-02-10T18:34:43Z")

</div>

To make the past more realistic, make it look like the poorer parts of the Third World.

Poor sanitation, insects, poverty, malnutrition, disease & deformity.

True. ☹
