Historical movies

Chat about anything here

Moderator: FSAirlines Staff

Post Reply
Ionathan
Captain
Posts: 494
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 11:41 pm
Location: Athens, Greece

Historical movies

Post by Ionathan » Mon Oct 15, 2007 10:57 am

I have had recently a discussion with a friend of mine about historical movies. Not necessarily movies which left history behind but movies dealing with historical events, or at least based on them. Do you think that the creator of such a movie should stay to the historic detail of the events as those are officially presented or do you believe he/she has the right to create a fictious story based on the era of historical events actually altering them?

I am in favour of the second as we are talking about art and fiction is part of it, provided of course that it is clearly mentioned that the movie is not supposed to be a documentary, in order to avoid "miseducating the innocent children". I will not mention here anythign about historical truths and lies which would make things even more complicated.
CEO
Ionathan Airlines

Image

User avatar
Tomesk
Ticket Agent
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 2:34 am
Location: New Haven, CT

Post by Tomesk » Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:11 am

Personally, I think "Historic" movies should be obligated to stick as closely as possible to historical events. The director's views/stances obviously may skew, etc... but that is to be expected.

Look at some War films:

Factual
"Downfall" - the most compelling WWII film (or any for that matter) I have seen to date.
"Das Boot"
"Stalingrad"
"Schindler's List"
"The Piano"
"Saving Private Ryan" - the most Hollywoodized of the bunch, but still great

They all tell amazing stories based on historic fact. "Downfall" is essentially a dramatized documentary.


Pseudo-Factual:
"Pearl Harbor" - typical Hollywood BS
"Flyboys" - entertaining but certainly Hollywoodized

They are based on an historic event, but stray from facts.


I have yet to watch "Pearl Harbor" or "Flyboys" a second time, while the others are in a constant rotation for movie night.
Image
Image

User avatar
cmdrnmartin
FSAirlines DB Admin
Posts: 1343
Joined: Thu Dec 22, 2005 5:54 am
Location: CYWG

Post by cmdrnmartin » Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:15 am

I disliked Pearl Harbour immensely, but I loved Flyboys...

Go see "Flags of our Fathers" and "Iwo Jima" Great in my opinion.

Windtalkers falls in between Saving Private Ryan and Pearl Harbour.
Image
Image

User avatar
Tomesk
Ticket Agent
Posts: 36
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 2:34 am
Location: New Haven, CT

Post by Tomesk » Wed Oct 17, 2007 6:30 am

cmdrnmartin wrote:I disliked Pearl Harbour immensely, but I loved Flyboys...

Go see "Flags of our Fathers" and "Iwo Jima" Great in my opinion.

Windtalkers falls in between Saving Private Ryan and Pearl Harbour.
"Flags of our Fathers" and "Iwo Jima" were definitely both great - should have included them in the list. I really liked "Flyboys" but the whole love interest thing kinda annoyed me. Just not necessary, IMO, and simply trying to appeal to a wider audience (that probably could care less anyways).
Image
Image

Ionathan
Captain
Posts: 494
Joined: Mon Nov 28, 2005 11:41 pm
Location: Athens, Greece

Post by Ionathan » Wed Oct 17, 2007 1:01 pm

Well, I surely admire sticked to the facts historical movies and Shindler's List is one of my favourites (not only historical but overall). What I'm saying is I find it is ok to stray provided it is "labeled" as a fictious story based on a real story.
For example "300" cannot be seen as an historical one although it is based on historical events. Persians did not have trolls in their army but a wall of dead Persians was built. Spartans were only 300 but Persians were not trillions. It is clearly a fiction (actually fantasy) movie although based on History.
I would also accept "what if" kind of historical movies like what if the Germans had conquered London or what if Romel was not defeated in Africa.
CEO
Ionathan Airlines

Image

HS1

Post by HS1 » Fri Oct 19, 2007 12:35 pm

Yeah, I don't see any problem in setting a film in a fictitious historical setting provided that this is made reasonably clear. Just as films set in the future will not necessarily accord with what will actually happen, so films set in the past do not have to accord with the reality.

User avatar
flightsimer
Chief Pilot
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:35 am

Post by flightsimer » Fri Oct 19, 2007 8:39 pm

um brige over the river kwai, good movie, but completely WRONGE, the brigde want even wood, it was steel...

it depend which Pearl Harbor movie ur talkin about, the one that was 5 hours long (i believe that was how long it was) no, but i own one that is based all on facts and isnt ficionalized. the battle of Midway is a good one also. i think that was the name, it might just be Midway. there is another one that i really like but, i cant think of it???
Owner/CEO
North Eastern Airways

Image
Image

User avatar
flightsimer
Chief Pilot
Posts: 1815
Joined: Tue Oct 09, 2007 3:35 am

Post by flightsimer » Tue Nov 13, 2007 2:42 am

tora tora tora was a good one
Owner/CEO
North Eastern Airways

Image
Image

Independance
Ticket Agent
Posts: 46
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 9:22 pm
Location: EPWA / LZTT
Contact:

Post by Independance » Tue Nov 13, 2007 9:13 am

Battle of Britain :wink:

User avatar
sp762
FSAirlines Support
Posts: 160
Joined: Thu Jul 05, 2007 4:19 am

Post by sp762 » Tue Nov 13, 2007 9:57 pm

Don't forget "Memphis Belle" - both versions.

Probably the later one was more accurate...
Mike Wilson
Image

Miikoyan
Chief Pilot
Posts: 831
Joined: Mon Feb 12, 2007 5:33 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Post by Miikoyan » Wed Nov 14, 2007 1:12 am

Haha yea dude, I LOVE Memphis Belle!
GoUS Executive Chairman
World Alliance Board of Directors
Image
Image

Post Reply