"Movie "historical" truth has become general public truth." Topic

What war history event, item or person,that was presented in a movie, that has become general public truth?

There are of course many, but the one that is most obvious, that is planted in the public consciousness…that I'm most interested in.

That the British locked up civilians in a barn and set fire to it during the American War of Independence?

They are just alternate facts. It's a new thing. Nothing is untrue any more.

Hm. Actual truth, or truth as in 'alternate facts' truth? There's plenty of offenders in the latter category.

For modern audiences, I suspect the older the source material the more the movie version eclipses reality; so perhaps the nonsense of 'Braveheart' is the worst, current offender for fiction displacing historical reality. Regardless of that fact though, who outside the UK had previously heard of William Wallace? He'd be my nominee for Historical Person Most Elevated by a Motion Picture.

Then there's that farmboy from Tatooine, in that absurd pro-Republic propaganda piece… I mean, the kid was a terrorist, and he's portrayed as some hero with ancient, mystic, hand-waving abilities! Honestly, the ability of Hollywood to skew our perception of what is real…

Arteis02 they really did do that. I grew up on the property in Philadelphia. It was called the Wood's Barn Massacre 1777. A British patrol travelling along Ridge Road came under fire from local militia. The militia beat a retreat when the British counter attacked. They tried to hide in a barn. The British surrounded the barn and set fire to it killing the 7 or 8 men inside. Some of the militia's family members were hiding in the barn and were killed too. Not quite as brutal as what you were referring to but kinda close. Twenty years ago, I was part of a commitee that got a historical marker placed on the site.

That isn't really all that close to what happened in the movie. Innocent people being herded into a church and then being burned is WAY different from setting a building on fire during a fight with people inside the building who are shooting at you and killing some civilians in it by mistake.

But on topic, this is bound to be true. People learn something like 4x better from story accounts than from factual ones. So you could watch a 1 hour movie or 4 hour documentary to get equal retained information.

Even if they had ever been taught some of this stuff, even if a teacher had spent an entire hour long class teaching about William Wallce, the movie would wipe that out in the first 15 minutes.

Ice cream, Mandrake? Children's ice cream! You know when fluoridation began?

Anything and everything portrayed in Kingdom of Heaven. Although my pet worst offender is how they depicted the Bishop of Jerusalem as an egotistical, coward SOB, while the real deal sold all the Church jewels to ransom as many Christian prisoners as possible from Muslim captivity when the city was surrendered to Saladin, even if that impoverished him both at institutional and personal level.

Yep, we need a Star Wars movie from the Empire's point of view.

Awwww … I really like Kingdom of Heaven …

This sort of thing is not new.

My mother believed to her dying day that Amelia Earhart was on an espionage mission, because that's the way Rosalind Russell showed it in the movie. And it's not even hard to find liberals my age who got all they knew about Custer from Little Big Man.

I hated Braveheart but liked Kingdom of Heaven, even with its many historical flaws it is infinitely superior to Braveheart as a film.

To be honest, there is much supposedly real historical writing on Wallace that is very dubious. Legendary status has always affected the way an historical character is viewed and portrayed.

Braveheart is a big one.

I've talked to plenty of people on reddit who believe that Enemy at the Gates is apparently a documentary.

Almost forgot: King Arthur's flick, the one with the skinny chick as Guenevere… Kiera Knightley. That was bad in so many levels that I wouldn't know where to start. In a scale of 10 being the worst and 0 the best, this would get an 11!

Watching Waterloo the movie may have created several wrong impressions, but I sense that is not what the OP was talking about. And I don't recall much Prussian action…

SPR has convinced my son all Germans travelled in halftracks, and all tanks were Tigers (so not far from the prevailing feeling at the time really)

The idea that Hearst said concerning the war in Cuba (which led to the Spanish-American War), "you supply the pictures and I will furnish the war." This is most likely a fiction, but nevertheless continues to be reported as fact in universities across the world. The quote was actually made famous in Citizen Kane.

link

Some of the kids at the school that my wife teaches at believed the Lord of the Rings was historical and that Abraham Lincoln was an actual vampire killer.

Patton – in Patton.

Edit – any biopic movie. The movie will become accepted as fact over time.

I really enjoyed The Imitation Game but it plays as fast and loose with real life events as Braveheart or Gladiator.

I think virtually any popular film/tv series will define how people visualise the events and characters concerned.

Nearly every movie/show about the Medieval period.

Hey, , why not for Hollywood?

Well, my 11 year old pointed this out to his friend a couple days ago. Germans, attack in single file, straight ahead with absolutely no tactical savvy. In every battle, in every war.

My father, drafted by the US in 1944 told me that all the Germans knew was to goose-step and follow the man in front of them. His trainers assured him this was true of the enemy: why should he doubt? (Mind you, his own marksmanship training was three rounds, and a friend was killed in combat less than 90 days after receiving his draft notice. I bet German and Japanese trainers in 44-45 said some interesting things about the state of our training.

Well, my take on this is that idiots are going to believe idiotic things--which would include much of the content in what passes for history classes in public schools these days. However, movies and television shows with historical themes at least may create an interest that will lead kids with greater intelligence or curiosity to go looking for more information. At least that was generally my reaction as a youngster. It is really a great shame that there are so few historical movies or series these days, which helps explain why there is so little interest in history among young people. You have to have something exciting, even if weak on accuracy, to spark the interest.

I've had adults tell me that the US was at war with all of Vietnam, that France surrendered without fighting in both world wars and that the US was allied to Britain against Napoleon so I don't think the schools are that much worse today.

Yep, we need a Star Wars movie from the Empire's point of view.

Ever seen the I.M.P.S Relentless fan films?
Portraying the heroic forces of The Empire in the thankless war against Galactic Terrorism.
impstherelentless.com
The videos are all on YouTube.

Thanks for sharing that Rabbit 3.

Hadn't seen those before.

They are superb, and in some ways, better than the official movies.

Nice share, I'll have to look for those :)

As far as kids and history, I'll add that video games seem to have picked up a lot of the slack that Hollywood left behind.
Between games like Assassin's Creed, Mount and Blade, Battlefield, Hearts of Iron, War Thunder, Europa Universalis and Civilization, I see a lot of young people get at least a bit interested.

Some will not care, some will want to know a little bit to give them more context and some will get into it hardcore.

'Gallipoli' is another one which has a lot to answer for. How many people know that far more Brits served in the campaign than Aussies, for example? Most people will assure you that is was an entirely ANZAC enterprise, purely on the strength of having watched the film.

Shoot, how many people know that the French were there :)

Or the Indians…

You mean to tell me that one of the Great Escapers didn't actually grab a despatch riders motorbike and almost jump the border fence into Switzerland? Oh no!

It really is too bad that the great unwashed masses get a lot of their history from movies. They don't understand that movies have two constraints right out the door:

First, they have to make money, which means they have to entertain.

Second, there are many debates in history. History books can address the different sources, debates, and nuances; movies don't have that luxury. Even movies with the best of intentions cannot cover everything and have to make a decision on which version/issue to portray.

When in doubt about anything in a historical movie, refer to my first point above.

raylev3

Excellent points, and not just limited to war films: all films allegedly 'based on actual events' seem to feel the need to 'sex-up' the story. I recently read that 'Sully' – the film about the chap who managed to land that plane in the Hudson River – drew complaints because they turned the crash investigators into the 'baddies', rather than just people who were doing their job.

I shall say one word then hide:

'Zulu'.

On the flipside, sometimes what seems made-up turns out to be true or at least based in truth :)

I recently rewatched Kingdom of Heaven and got to talking with a friend about the whole "Raise the common soldiers to knights" scene which seemed super Hollywood.

Well, imagine our surprise when we looked it up and it actually did take place, even though it was only 60 guys, not the entire force.

Weasel has a good point that runs along with the fact that history doesn't have to be plausible. If it happened, it doesn't have to be likely, foreseeable, or even imaginable to contemporaries.

One of the big things with reporting facts (as opposed to truth) is that there are so many of them and there are so many that have an impact on outcomes. So context is important, which makes it hard to summarize.

Leading up to the Fashoda Incident, one of the French commanders didn't make it. Bad logistics, terrain, disease, and plain old getting lost a bit all combined to create the no-show. "If some dumb Lieutenant had learned to read a map, things would have been different." Can that statement be true without being verifiable (or even factual)?

To build on what Etotheipi says, which facts you choose to put in the film also significantly influences the message you get out of it.

Take the scene of the GI shooting German POW's in Band of Brothers as a good example.

Do you leave a scene like that out?
Do you include it?
Why? (in both cases).

How does the story look with it and without?

White-washing of the brutality of war or condemnation of the US military?
Both? Neither? A bit?

Do you leave a scene like that out?
Do you include it?
Why? (in both cases).

Absolutely: I'll never forgive Jackson for editing out Bombadil and putting in Dwarf Tossing jokes.

I mean, U-571 was bad enough (blah blah blah enigma machines blah blah blah) but – never mind actual travesties of history that insults an entire nation – what that Peter Jackson bloke did was criminal…

John T

Braveheart is surely my favorite hate on this topic (I'm surprised at how many mentioned it specifically, I thought I was almost alone).

Shakespeare has a lot to answer for, corrupting everyone since.

Mark Twain is egregious. But I like his book on Joan of Arc.

One Million Years B.C. Everyone should know that giant spiders didn't overlap with T-Rex, for starters. And that pterodactyls did not pick up sexy cavewomen and drop them in nests.

And while we're talking about "Jurassic" special effects, carried over into contemporary history: there hasn't been a historically accurate movie of Sinbad yet.

A recent one is how Vikings ended this season. Ivar sis not kill his brother as he did in the show. His brother was killed by rival Jarls to the east. Ivar was the oldest of Ragnar's kids not the youngest as stated. So many warped occurances in the show that most of the public deems as truth.
Still watch it. Other shows are just as bad. roman armor or shields are wrong.
Persians viewed as supernatural. Hate the 300 movies. Totally obscene.
So many example and not enough room.