11 Movies Saved by Historical Inaccuracy
Every year, Hollywood pumps out "historical" epics so distorted, propagandistic and self-serving, you have to wonder just how stupid they think we are. But, try "fixing" some of those historical inaccuracies and you'll quickly realize what Hollywood screenwriters have known for years: History is lame. Here are 11 movies that make us glad no one gives a damn about trivial things like "what actually happened."
#11.
Gladiator (2000)
The Flick: Russell Crowe and Ridley Scott present the epic tale of Maximus, a Roman general who became a slave, a slave who became a gladiator, a gladiator who defied an emperor and an actor/director team who threw all the audience goodwill they'd earned on this away by releasing A Good Year six years later.
The Inaccuracies: Commodus, the hare-lipped Roman Emperor who lusted after his sister in the film, was in real life held in high esteem by the senate and ruled for a successful 13 years (rather than the ineffectual few months depicted in the film). Also, though the Emperor did, in fact, have an enthusiasm for gladiatorial combat (he did so incognito), he didn't get his ticket punched in the arena. He was killed in the bath by a wrestler named Narcissus to prevent him taking office as consul.
Why It Would Have Sucked Otherwise: No one wants to watch Russell Crowe take 13 years to murder an emperor, who is basically a decent guy, only to get beaten to the kill by a wrestler. We like our villains like we like our Books of Genesis: with implied incestuous relationships. Also, since any Roman unit that broke ranks when in combat against barbarians would have been mercilessly slaughtered, the movie would have ended within about 15 minutes.
#10.
Braveheart (1995)
The Flick: Mel Gibson's earliest example of "loose" historical reenactment, Braveheart marks a promising start to a career later spent boiling complex political issues down to "Mel Gibson kills Englishmen with an axe" (The Patriot) and curiously drawn-out torture scenes involving his heroes (The Passion of the Christ).
The Inaccuracies: Far from a scrappy commoner who clawed his way up from the mud to defend his homeland, William Wallace was actually a knight from a noble family, and his father Malcolm wasn't killed by the English, but fought on the English side in exchange for political favor. Also, instead of kilts, the Wallace and his army wore saffron shirts.
Why It Would Have Sucked Otherwise: We have to imagine that if Mel Gibson were forced to play a role any more layered than that of the just and righteous warrior-king-redeemer, his face would melt off from the challenge, revealing the circuitry within. And as entertaining as that would be, it's not as entertaining as the actual movie, or the years of mileage we've gotten out of screaming "They may take our things-but they'll never take our FREEEEEEDOM!" when we have our nail clippers taken away from us at airport security.
#9.
The Patriot (1998)
The Flick: An American whose home gets attacked by foreigners goes ape shit and kills everybody of the same race as those who attacked him, even people who weren't actually involved. Yay, prescience!
The Inaccuracies: Benjamin Martin, the vaguely-named Mel Gibson character in the film, is actually based on a real guy in the Revolutionary War, Francis "Swamp Fox" Marion. Aside from having a more memorable name, there were some notable differences between Mel and Marion. Marion, for example, never single-handedly killed an entire British infantry unit. He did, however, slaughter dozens of unarmed Cherokee Indians and repeatedly raped his female slaves. So, there's that.
Why It Would Have Sucked Otherwise: True, it would have given us an earlier tip-off that something is dreadfully wrong with Mel Gibson, but we're not sure anyone wants to watch a movie where the bad guys burn churches full of innocent prisoners and the good guy sexually assaults slaves and hunts Indians for sport. You kind of don't know who to root for anymore, other than maybe the French-and who wants that?
2001: A Space Odyssey is NOT a historical film. It is a science fiction/possible future film. You cannot blame it for being inaccurate.
Replyall the rest of these are historically inaccurate but 2001 is future tense inaccurate
Reply#4 Apocalypto
ReplyThey probably confused Mayans with Aztecs,
You see, it was the Aztecs that performed those rituals in which they would drag some poor sacrifice to the altar on top of the pyramid, place them on the altar and say, cut open his chest, rip out his beating heart and hold it up to the sun for THEIR god Quetzalcoatl - a feathered serpent. Now the Mayan god, Kukulkan, which the Mayans in the movie suposedly offered a sacrefice to is ALSO a feathered serpent. See where I'm going at here?
Oliver Stone's "Alexander" was actually one of the highest grossing movies internationally during 2004. It only really flopped domestically, and even then it still made its money back. Not to mention the fact that the DVD sales allowed Stone to release not just a Director's Cut but also his own preferred version of his film, the Final Cut. And having watched the Final Cut, it really should have been the version released theatrically instead of the version that Stone was forced to release after limited editing time.
ReplyI'll say one more thing about 2001, besides the fact that it was always supposed to be fiction, and hence makes a really s****y entry: Pretty much every single thing in it was author Arthur Clarke's way of saying (in the f*****g 60's), "Technology is going to get really fucked up at this rate. If we let it get out of hand, it's going to take control from us and do as it pleases." Which it does in some of our most common devices, sometimes subtly. So, you know, he wasn't really wrong.
Replyjoaquin phonix infact does not have a hairlip that is infact a birth mark nothing more
ReplyNever mind that several of these movies are works of fiction, or based on fiction. But Braveheart? Yeah, they didn't even begin to touch on the inaccuracies in that movie. The directors of 300 claimed that they weren't going for historical accuracy, but that they were trying to make it accurate as to the graphic novel.
ReplyHoly s**t, Judaism is not a race, it's a religion. Must the Cracked writers always claim something is racist or racism to stir up emotion?
ReplyBeing Jewish is a racial identity, just like being White is a racial identity. Jews are physically Jews; Judaism is the religion they aren't obligated to follow.
Yeah, I can think of *nothing else* that happened in 2001... hmm, it seemed like there was something important... Anyway, I kid, the point still stands, space-traveling to jupiter we were not.
ReplyHAHA nice.
I don't know, IBM made the computer that won Jeopardy.
Replyhey f**k you, the ravens are awesome
ReplyAlso, a comment about the Maya and the Aztecs. Both participated in human sacrifice and autosacrifice (bloodletting). This is evidence in material remains (tools, individuals, blood traces found on sculpture shown to be used for sacrifice in texts, chac mools, etc) and murals.
ReplyThe Aztecs are more renown for human sacrifice than the Maya, although they don't really deserve it. Other South American societies really have more material remains related to human sacrifice than the Aztecs. The Aztec were just around when the Spanish came, and the Spanish exaggerated and used sacrifice as a way to justify their conquest. The Spanish reported tens of thousands of people being sacrificed at the Templo Mayor in just ONE DAY, yet only 100 something individuals have ever been found there. More bodies are found under the Tower of London.
Human sacrifice is found in every region of the world: Africa, Europe, Asia. The Americas are not unique. Yes there was sacrifice. It is overemphasized though and there is much more to their societies than that.
It's the Maya*, not Mayan. Common mistake really. Mayan refers specifically to their language, while Maya refers to nearly everything else people usually mean (like the people and culture).
ReplyWhen did they hint salieri poisoned mozart? I didn't get that at all.
ReplyI saw the play and not the movie, but I thought that Salieri just ruined him financially until his poor living conditions caused his death. I guess I wasn't paying enough attention...
You should check your facts about William Wallace. While he did come from a minor noble house, he was the second son, and likely would have received little of his family's money in favor of his older brother. In addition, he wasn't knighted until after some of his more well known victories. If anything, the larger historical accuracy is in the portrayal of the battles themselves.
ReplyFirstly, Wallace was far from just another guy who gave great speeches. He was probably the most imposing physical figure on any of those battlefields. It is estimated we was at least 6'6, and carried a huge claymore specifically because it scared the s**t out of people. Even more historically inaccurate, are the battles themselves. Wallace and crew almost never fought straight up, and often employed guerilla tactics.
The whole battle with the stakes spearing the cavalry was fought on a bridge. Wallace and his men trapped the English cavalry on the bridge and slaughtered them, mostly with arrows, while the English scrambled to get their army turned around(it was common and mannered practice in the day to allow the opposing army to cross and get settled before commencing in the fight).
As a Wallace, I thank you :)
Also re: Cold Mountain; the girl who tries to seduce Jude Law is definitely sporting implants. Which are awesome, but historically inaccurate.
ReplyIn Cold Mountain they forgot to mention that Renee Zellewiggers lived in the plains states where they were the basis for the semi-nomadic plains Indians. By the Civil War white hunters were mercilessly slaughtering untold numbers of Renee Zellewiggers for their hides which could be sold back east for a decent sum. The massive and majestic herds of Renee Zellewiggers were quickly reduced to small groups of the beasts and were nearly wiped out of existence by over hunting. Today you can see Renee Zellewiggers, large hairy beasts that resemble domestic bulls, in most zoos and Bridget Jones' Diary.
ReplyOut of these 11 I've only seen Space Odyssey
ReplyDid the writer actually *watch* Amadeus before writing this? The entire movie is told in Flashback form, that flashback coming from the deranged mind of the now-senile and delusional Salieri. It was never meant to be historically accurate. It was painting a picture of how Salieri remembered events, and his own psychoses making him believe that he actually killed Mozart.
ReplyI guess 9/11 wasn't a significant enough event to be mentioned in the list of happenings in 2001.
ReplyDon't have children.