History on Screen by Fisher, James

Downton Abbey - an unhistorical historical drama

2023-11-10 12:46:37 UTC

This article is heavily critical about 'Downton Abbey', arguing that it is historically inaccurate and omits the two big themes of religion and the British Empire. The article further criticises the depiction of the attitudes of the people of the time, arguing that they are too accepting of unmarried pregnancy, women's freedoms, and homosexuality. They also criticise the closeness between servants and their employers, arguing that this wouldn't have been the case in the 1910s and 1920s.

‘Darkest Hour,’ or the Great Man Theory of History (and Acting)

2023-11-11 16:54:33 UTC

This review is written by American film critic Anthony Scott, in which he analyses the roles of actors and also the historical accuracy of the 2017 film 'Darkest Hour'. Scott calls the film a 'Historical Drama' which attempts to depict an ideal English character, but ends up with something reactionary rather than nostalgic. He also states that the film promotes 'hero-worshipping' and offers something of a ''Great Man Fetish', showing nothing but a meaningless fantasy of 'imperial gumption and national unity'. Moreover, Scott also criticises the film for its lack of historical accuracy and attempts at promoting 'sham populism', as best seen from the scene where Churchill rides the London underground prior to his 'never surrender' speech and encounters the everyday British people.

What 'Dunkirk' gets wrong

2023-11-11 18:32:33 UTC

This article is written by a journalist that consults with a WW2 historian. It is critical of the accuracy of the film, in terms of how it depicts the air battles and the amount of emphasis placed on the small boats used to rescue the soldiers. However, despite the historian being largely critical of the film, he notes there are some accuracies in the film, and particularly praises the accuracy of the portrayal of the soldiers.

Satirising Hitler and the Nazi's - Jojo Rabbit

2023-11-12 15:06:25 UTC

Here Jojo Rabbit is praised for it's depiction of Adolf Hitler and his Nazi regime, while being clearly absurd and full of creative license it does not mean it is historically inaccurate. Hitler is imagined through the eyes of a ten year old boy, he is not this evil, sadistic fascist dictator but rather a goofy, harmless imaginary friend. Therefore, when dealing with a period so brutally inhumane using comedy in many ways is the best way to portray it in the modern world. As the journalist stresses prejudice is irrational so trying to approach it in a reasonable way won't necessarily work. However. if you use satire the ridiculousness of Nazism is exposed and a quite powerful and poignant message can be expressed to today's audiences.

‘The White Queen’ courts confusion

2023-11-12 19:20:04 UTC

This review discusses the White Queen series, and its historical inaccuracy in the portrayal of the complicated events in the Wars of the Roses. The author critiques the lack of exploration of the events of the period and instead seems to focus on the 'swampy lands of generic medievalness' instead. This fictionalising of events means that the show has relied upon stereotypes and condenses complicated political machinations in order to entertain the audience. However, the author does praise the empowerment of women and the focus of how they navigated politics in medieval society.

1917 - How does it deal with the realities of war?

2023-11-12 22:31:13 UTC

In this review, Jeremy Banning highlights the over-reliance on cliches and the lack of historical accuracy specific to this timeframe of early April 1917. Whilst the film does tick the boxes of the various tactics the Germans deployed when retreating for example the scorched earth policy as well as rearguard fire, the more intricate details are missed out. For example, there is lack of accuracy around the positioning of soldiers, as in the film there were soldiers some 9 miles beyond the former German line whereas others were behind the line, unaware of whether this line was manned. In reality the Germans withdrew in such a co-ordinated manner that by early April 1917, any enemy would have been miles away, and there would therefore be no confusion between the troops and their positions. Banning also draws upon how Sam Mendes draws too much on his grandfather's wartime stories and critiques this reliance on family lore, advocating for a wider consideration for a more coherent storyline. History in this film therefore is used with partial accuracy, to ultimately create a dramatic and entertaining "story of friendship and duty".

How Accurate Gladiator's Epic Opening Battle Is Compared To Real Life

2023-11-12 23:09:53 UTC

This article written by Jen Tombs details many historical accuracies as well as inaccuracies present within the opening scene of Ridley Scott's 'Gladiator' (2000). Tombs praises the effort made by the producers to try and be as historically accurate as possible whilst not deviating away from the main goal of creating a compelling narrative. Armour and weapons shown during the film are seemingly standard issue for Roman soldiers during that time despite there being unrealistic usage of siege machines. The article references historians who claim the costume design to be 'relatively true to history' with only a few gripes such as there being too much leather etc. Additionally, the article claims that the way the film depicts the complexity of Roman camps is commendable. These camps would have been grand and acted as mini towns with the article referencing an archaeological dig in Vindolanda supporting this notion. Furthermore, the death of Marcus Aurelius is also somewhat accurate as he did die in 180 AD when the battle was set and he likely died within the confines of his camp. However, he was not killed by his son Commodus in real life so the film certainly does prioritise the continuation of the fictional narrative over historical accuracy in many cases. While the article does recognise that this level of accuracy is not necessarily maintained throughout the rest of the film, these opening scenes in particular do deserve praise. It is not the goal of historical fiction to provide a documentary retelling of historical events so in the rare case where there is a significant attempt at historical accuracy, it deserves recognition.

The Death of Stalin - Sacrilege to Satirize?

2023-11-12 23:22:52 UTC

This review is largely an account of praise for the disarming of horrific historical individuals, breaking them down beyond their crimes and highlighting the macabre humour that was inherent within the Soviet political system. A system whereby friends could murder each other for political gain without a second thought, and a man could be undyingly loyal to the person who murdered his wife. The writer also notes the question of whether it can become 'sacrilege to satirize' a given historical figure, given the magnitude of their crimes committed. This is an example of how Kenny argues Ianucci makes the film intentionally uncomfortable, as in the first scene there is a depiction of how the power of the state and individuals of the state mortally threatened anyone in society at any given moment. This moves the film beyond simply political machinations which can feel unrelatable to the viewer if it were the sole focus. The decision to allow the actors to speak with their own accents further disarms the genocidal characters in question, encouraging free-flowing dialogue centred on themes of pettiness and squabbling, which would escalate into an murder and illegal executions, highlighting most poignantly the banality of evil.

Munich: The Edge of War

2023-11-13 00:11:18 UTC

This review discusses the film, Munich: The Edge of War, an adaptation of the book by popular historical fiction writer, Robert Harris. The film's overarching theme (from a history perspective) is the highly positive brush with which Chamberlain and his policy of appeasement is painted in.

Fact & Fiction: Titanic (1997)

2023-11-13 01:55:02 UTC

This review of Titanic describes how, despite its descriptions as one of the most historically accurate movies about the titanic, many actual figures in the movie were misrepresented. I find it raised an interesting question on the ethics of portraying real people (particularly those who were heroic) as immoral. Though this was done in Titanic to reinforce a message, of the negligence and pride of those in charge of the ship, this re-writing of history gets rid of nuance and paints a false picture. Is it worth it for a coherent message- even assuming this is necessary to convey that message?

Medieval movie review: Ironclad

2023-11-13 06:49:05 UTC

This review looks at the numerous historical inaccuracies of the 2011 action film Ironclad. Whilst it accepts that many of these changes are understandable results of the film making process, it is more critical others. It argues that the filmmaker's decision to pit Knights Templar against Vikings was driven by an 'anachronistic and comparative pulp imagery'.

Hitler's Circle of Evil

2023-11-13 08:30:34 UTC

This TV series, released on Netflix in 2018, tracks the lives and interactions between the top Nazis surrounding Hitler. As stated in the review, it combines reenactment with real archival footage alongside some 'talking head' context offered by a few historians. However, it suffers somewhat from historical inaccuracy (such as misdating the year of the assassination plot of Hitler as 1942 rather than 1944) and overdramatization in the reenactments. Despite this, the review states that it would recommend the show although it should be watched as a piece of historical fiction rather than a professional documentary.