I don't think I've ever seen a cataphract reenactor until now

[bobbin]

I didn't know the Scots knew of phalanx tactics. Or that the battle of Stirling Bridge did not, in fact, feature a bridge.

Scottish pike formations were quite famous during wars of independence era so in that respect the clip was accurate but yes no bridge at the Battle of Stirling Bridge is a bit idiotic.

[A Very Super Market]

A bit? That's like making a movie about Rommel with no tanks. And set in South America. In 1987.

[antisocialmunky]

Well to be fair, they ran out of money for both a bridge battle and a castle battle and inaccurate face paint.

[mountaingoat]

they mooned them till they could take no more?

[Macilrille]

The "Kata" on the pic looks more like some of the Germanisc Iron Age offshots we know best from the Wendel graves in Sweden.

And the Russel Crowe Robin Hood film did not feel they had money to get some proper re-enactors over (us) to do the fighting scenes and big battles. They apparently believe the travel expenses plus standard wage for 50 Danes and 100+ Brits working in UK would make the film go bust.

[Ludens]

Scottish pike formations were quite famous during wars of independence era so in that respect the clip was accurate but yes no bridge at the Battle of Stirling Bridge is a bit idiotic.

True, but the film made it appear like Wallace reinvented the pike. The makers claim that Braveheart is a Celtic fantasy. I agree, as long as one places the emphasis on fantasy.

[antisocialmunky]

True, but the film made it appear like Wallace reinvented the pike. The makers claim that Braveheart is a Celtic fantasy. I agree, as long as one places the emphasis on fantasy.

I liked the chariot battle shield wall spear thing from Gladiator more.

[Macilrille]

I have yet to see any cinematic depiction of anything concerning military history and/or war- fighting- melee- you-name-it, come close to the actual thing.

Edited to add what I forgot cause my ferret sounded very ill and had to be checked, except Stalingrad. That is not too bad.

[Ludens]

I have yet to see any cinematic depiction of anything concerning military history and/or war- fighting- melee- you-name-it, come close to the actual thing.

Edited to add what I forgot cause my ferret sounded very ill and had to be checked, except Stalingrad. That is not too bad.

Have you seen "Tora! Tora! Tora!"? I understand it is pretty accurate. It certainly seems more like a documentary than a film.

BTW, which "Stalingrad"-film are you referring to?

[antisocialmunky]

Its the German one I believe. That one that starts out really happy and then gets super ridiculously depressing.

[vartan]

I have yet to see any cinematic depiction of anything concerning military history and/or war- fighting- melee- you-name-it, come close to the actual thing.

And what my friend would be the "actual thing"? hmm?

[Olaf The Great]

I suppose downfall counts as a retelling of the fall of Berlin, and that truely was an amazing film.

[Macilrille]

And what my friend would be the "actual thing"? hmm?

The various forms of war, and even history, they depict- as you know if you are a regular I am both a historian and re-enactor.
The Russel Crowe Robin Hood wanted to make an effort and use the best re-enactors, but at the last moment decided they could not afford it, as if that is going to make its earnings go red, LOL.

I think we should not actually start to bash specific films, bashing has a tendency to turn personal and I am sorry to have started the trend.

[Ludens]

I think we should not actually start to bash specific films, bashing has a tendency to turn personal and I am sorry to have started the trend.

Good idea. Venting about bad historical accuracy in films has led nowhere in the past.

I am surprised to learn Das Boot is not as accurate as I thought it was. The director went through a lot of trouble to build a realistic German submarine and the cast was not allowed outside during the summer so they would get the pale facial colour of real submarine crews. However, I suppose his motivation was to recreate the atmosphere inside an U-boat, rather than an actual U-boat warfare.

[bobbin]

True, but the film made it appear like Wallace reinvented the pike. The makers claim that Braveheart is a Celtic fantasy. I agree, as long as one places the emphasis on fantasy.

Oh yes i completely agree its about as accurate as The Patriot, that other godawful mel gibson "historical" film.

[Skullheadhq]

Real history is not shown on TV, go read a book.

[athanaric]

But it could be, that's the point. It would be so easy to just consult some decent historians and actually try to do what they say. Instead we get served the same crap again and again and again.

I'm still hoping to see a realistic movie about something in the EB timeframe, especially something with cataphracts and a proper rendition of "Eastern" peoples...

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

(likewise I'm still waiting for a decent Lord of the Rings film, but that won't come for some time)

[Dutchhoplite]

Oh yes i completely agree its about as accurate as The Patriot, that other godawful mel gibson "historical" film.

Or "Apocalypto" what a horrible piece of garbage that was.

Mel Gibson should be forbidden to do anything else with history

[ARCHIPPOS]

well admittedly there are some war movies which are waaaaay better than most...
I'ld recommend ...
-"Paths Of Glory" (Stanley Kubrick so you know it's great!!!)
-"The Battle Of Algiers" amazing, mindblowing movie on politics and revolutionary violence...
-"Das Boot" (not the English dubbed version though)
-"The Thin Red Line"
-i also liked "Jarhead" a lot...

those films capture the essence and moral implications of modern warfare with minimal or almost-none Hollywood cheesiness...

[Duguntz]

guys guys guys, let's stop the movie bashing! If you wanna learn something stop to complain that the movies are ahistorical or any shit like that god damn, movie are for entertainment, if you want education, watch a documentary, discovery channel or get up from your computer and read a damn book.

Mel Gipson did a great job with every of his movies and it's not because he didn't worked day and night with an historian that YOU have the right to discreditate his movie!

all your bashing is as significant as bashing on the movie 300 for ''ahistorical'' reason

I've a good one for you : there are some movie wich are only for entertainment!

[A Very Super Market]

Das Boot is not as realistic as you think. The writer of the book denounced the movie as a bunch of lies. Although unwarranted, this is the truth. You see the experienced crew whimpering meekly under depth charge attack, enough rivets popping to implode the sub 8 times over, and the reporter being subjected to court-martial material actions.

Neither was "The Thin Red Line". I think we can assume that all movies hold some degree of ahistoricality, and let it be. Das Boot is enjoyable regardless of these rather minor faults, and I'm sure there are people who enjoyed Braveheart for reasons other than accuracy. Only the ones who take entertainment for reality are the fools.