Excellent film!! On my all time favorites list.
KurtâŠI guess Iâm confused and a little worried for you. Do you think Hollywood is trying to teach history or entertain? If youâre looking for historical accuracy in movies or shows, youâre going to be horribly disappointed. Take hollywood with a grain of salt and be happy they spelled the name of the character right so you can research them yourself and learn the truth.
Anything that comes from the bowels of the Left Coast should be consumed with a healthy dose of skepticism. I have yet to find a movie that measures up to a good book.
In Braveheart, remember the 1st battle at Sterling? This was actually an AMBUSH at Sterling BRIDGE, on the Sterling RIVER - research it. They didnât even try to get THIS right! And the French princess? She wouldâve been a toddler @ the time, and the mother of the future Edward III. AGH!
Iâve read that Tennessee Williams didnât become a hard-core alcoholic until he began selling his plays to Hollywood. Compare Cat On A Hot Tin Roof to the film.
Yeah, we used to joke that according to Braveheart, Isabella of France had a gestation period years longer than even elephants. Her pregnancy is more miraculous than the Virgin Maryâs. ![]()
Exact same timeline problem with most versions of the Pocahontas story, by the way.
I think one of the sharpest criticisms Iâve heard of Braveheart (and itâs twin cousin âThe Patriotâ) is that it has such beautiful sets, scenes, and costumes, all set over fiction disguised as history. Itâs as though the fine details matter when the larger facts donât.
So many people, however, seem to equate movies as history sessions. We get sucked in by our âentertainmentâ including CNN, MSNBC, CBS, NBC, FOX, etc.etc.
Keep in mind, Hollywood writers are scraping the bottom of the barrel for original ideas or havenât you noticed with remakes of movies instead of original movie scripts?
So some writer is dry of ideas and comes across a historical moment like Custer and knows theyâll have to fudge some details to make it uplifting and entertaining. So they take certain liberties and rewrite history and make Custer live in the end like last survivor because audiences love a good struggle and uplifting story. Then some person comes through and complains on a forum that the historical details are wrong. No kidding? Well butter my butt and call me a biscuit! Hollywood isnât meant to be taken as historicalâŠitâs entertainment. I should knowâŠI know writers, actors, all sorts of people behind the scenes and no one is delusional enough to think movies should be true to history.
Now that is true. Most of the âNewsâ thatâs presented is really entertainment. Thatâs why we have non-stop panels of people yelling and screaming at each other. You know the caricature of the dry, boring anchor reading headlines that they always make fun of in the movies? Iâd pay for that news network, if it existed.
If itâs on TV, itâs GOT to be real, right? Thank GOD Iâm a 70-year-old-cynic and despise phonyness.
See if you can get BBC news.
Us old guys remember when the news was a 30 minute show in the evening. Now itâs 24/7. Theyâve got to have Somthing to take up all that time, so if nothings happening theyâll make up/exaggerate to fill the void. Youâll NEVER hear any ânews channelâ say âwell, thatâs all thatâs going on today so weâll cut for I Love Lucy and the Andy Griffith showâŠainât gonna happenđ
Iâm 70 - remember Huntley & Brinkley? John Chancellor? In Cleveland on Channel 5 we had Dorothy Fuldheim, the 1st female anchorwoman, who had actually interviewed Hitler AND Mussolini as a young reporter.
Kurt my son, I never seem to get a response. Therefore I wanted to chime in and ask if you had a change of heart and realized that Hollywood wasnât focused on reality and truth and instead was focused on entertainment. Itâs ok to admit you took a naive stanceâŠ.I just want to make sure you recogniz d your mistake before others followed your poor choices. Wish you the best!