Most Historically Accurate Films/Documentaries/Video

**Brennus** · 04-08-2010, 08:23

Vercingétorix: La légende du druide roi (2001) has legionaries wearing LS, tut tut.

**Lvcretivs** · 04-08-2010, 08:46

@Macrille: 'Ran' is actually Kurosawa's last epic jidai-geki - certainly you must have confused it with one of these Korean 'historical romances'

**Apázlinemjó** · 04-08-2010, 09:21

Saving Private Ryan - is quite accurate, but I was laughing at the Mustang "bombers" at the end of the movie.
The Pacific - is said to be good too, though I've not seen it yet, just read the critics about it.
Enemy at the gates - seemed ok too for me, anyone?
Alexander - isnt really accurate as they mix the battles and leave a lot of important events out of the movie.
All Quiet on the Western Front - I like this movie, but I don't really know if it is accurate or not, I don't really like to study the WWs, someone?

**Brennus** · 04-08-2010, 09:58

Originally Posted by Apázlinemjó

Saving Private Ryan - is quite accurate, but I was laughing at the Mustang "bombers" at the end of the movie

That is true, it can't be that difficult to find airworthy P-47s. My main objection to Saving Private Ryan is the fact it makes no mention of the contribution by British Commonwealth, Canadian or Polish forces, even the landing craft drivers (who were actually British) are replaced by Americans.

**Macilrille** · 04-08-2010, 10:32

SPR is in fact very inaccurate.
Lvcretivs that is true. Damn... there was one really- really bad Korean spin-off of the Chinese "historical" fighting films (which are bad enough in itself, edit THEMselves).

Nothing new... is both quite accurate and, AFAICR, faithful to the book by and large. I forgot that :-( Baaaad Palle.

**geala** · 04-08-2010, 13:08

From all movies about antiquity I like "Alexander" the most. It is not accurate, but it has at least some accuracy in it.

May I ask a question about "King Arthur"? Is it the movie about the Sarmatian riders who formed the Roman cavalry? If then I would like to know what was accurate and well searched in this movie? I watched it with less than possible interest after I get told that the Romans were still in Britain in the middle of the 5th c. AD and that the pope was the leader of the Roman empire...

"All Quiet on the Western Front" is fictitious but is quite accurate about the Trench War experience of individuals. The book after the movie is made ("Im Westen nichts Neues" by E.M. Remarque, 1928/29) is one of several well made novels about WWI. Because it was not so much patriotic it was forbidden and burned by the Nazis after 1933. Remarque had joined the war only for a short time, but he took much information from the reports of other soldiers.

**Mulceber** · 04-08-2010, 13:24

May I ask a question about "King Arthur"? Is it the movie about the Sarmatian riders who formed the Roman cavalry? If then I would like to know what was accurate and well searched in this movie? I watched it with less than possible interest after I get told that the Romans were still in Britain in the middle of the 5th c. AD and that the pope was the leader of the Roman empire

I also was distinctly turned off from the film when it mentioned the dates at the beginning. But apart from that, the fact that there were sarmatians serving in the Roman army, the fact that they worked in Bishop Pelagius, who in fact did get excommunicated for his beliefs about free will. Looking back, I suppose you're right that it should be moved to the inaccurate column, as most of the weaponry and armor is inaccurate to the peoples/time period, but I give KA props for making use of the Sarmatian connection and some of the historical events that really were occurring in late antiquity, especially since so few movies are produced about this era. -M

**athanaric** · 04-08-2010, 18:20

Originally Posted by geala

May I ask a question about "King Arthur"? Is it the movie about the Sarmatian riders who formed the Roman cavalry? If then I would like to know what was accurate and well searched in this movie? I watched it with less than possible interest after I get told that the Romans were still in Britain in the middle of the 5th c. AD and that the pope was the leader of the Roman empire...

Yes, and it got some scathing reviews, I hear. Probably because they confused the Saxons with the Chinese and had some "Warrior Chick" (Keira Knightley with a bow. Yeah right. I wonder how she managed to draw the thing) thrown in for fanservice.

"All Quiet on the Western Front" is fictitious but is quite accurate about the Trench War experience of individuals. The book after the movie is made ("Im Westen nichts Neues" by E.M. Remarque, 1928/29) is one of several well made novels about WWI. Because it was not so much patriotic it was forbidden and burned by the Nazis after 1933. Remarque had joined the war only for a short time, but he took much information from the reports of other soldiers.

I remember reading that one as a kid. The novel is quite good.

Originally Posted by Krusader

HBO Rome. You can say it depicts ancient Rome very accurately, but Ptolemaic Egypt? Its been given the CA treatment there too. Cleopatra's bodyguards were Galatians for one. Second the court would have had a more Hellenistic look too. Plus Bithynia is depicted as Arabic, when at this time was Hellenized.

Yeah something of a wasted chance with those Ptolemaioi. Though some audiences (read: executives) probably never heard about Galatians or even Diadochs, so they would have claimed it "unhistorical" if the show had actually shown it the way it was.

Roxanne was also caucasian.

By which you mean: was also Caucasian in Real Life? Because in the film, Rosario Dawson looked vaguely African (due to her mixed white/black ancestry). Well, at least she was pretty - and not as starved as most other Hollywood chicks.