Historical innaccurate movies are good sometimes

Because in some cases, accurate movies would be crap.

But it’s funny to read how different they can be.

Just ask Oliver Stone and anyone who lost money on Alexander.

That would be me, and yes, I know exactly what you mean with that. Holy chirst that was one long-ass boring flick.

Y’know, i’ve always hated Alexander ever since I first saw the first half (couldn’t finish it, I could hang…), and I still to this day meet the very few people who did enjoy it. Fucking horrible movie, man.

Is it just me, or were Alexander and Hephaestion’s gay pussyfooting scenes altogether about thrice the length of the entire battle of Gaugamela? I mean, man, if you’re making a movie like this and that battle isn’t taking up two thirds of the whole flick and at least four quarters of the budget, YOU’RE FUCKING UP.

I was, unfortunately, horribly misinformed about the movie and got the dvd of Alexander. I watched about an hour, and then wandered off to do dishes. I mean geez, you’d think a frickin’ movie about Alexander the Great would be 300-grade nonstop action, but nooo. @_@

I didn’t even notice when Alexander came out and I live in Greece. I think even the Al-wasn’t-gay nutsos didn’t care.

More like Alexander the Slightly-Above-Average m i rite :slight_smile:

I lol’d at 2001.

And at 300.

(Which are not named about numbers for the same reason.)

Haha, the Patriot. We wouldn’t really know who to root for (you;d either like both of them or neither).

So many Gibson flicks and not a Religious, Roman, or WWII film. None of the Joan of Arc flicks made the list either. They really should’ve made a top 30 list instead.

Haha, that bit on 300 was great.

For the record, I rather liked Alexander. It probably sucked if you knew nothing about him. The comment from Philip about mothers was a nice touch.

I was wondering if The Passion of the Christ would be a nominee on that honor list.
No? Oh well.

I know seriously, who would want to learn something from a film.

(Realizing how needlessly critical that sounds, what I meant to say was something like, why can’t they make historically accurate movies good. Yeah.)


I am Spartacus!

And I’m Barry Lindon!

Originally Posted by Cavelcade
I am Spartacus!


LOL, that was a fun read. Of course, just as I don’t expect historical accuracy from movies (especially Hollywood ones) I also would not trust a snarky website for facts either. Encyclopedias still exist for that, you know. :wink:

Oh, and there HAVE been plenty of real-life historical characters whose lives would make for great movies, it’s just that they’re not as well known. Check out Eugene Vidocq, the man who founded the Surete (French Police) during Napoleonic times and effectively instituted Detective procedure before Sherlock Holmes was conceived. He was originally a criminal, and had spent his life dueling, swindling, escaping from jail, etc; Victor Hugo based both of his main characters in Les Miserables (the hero AND the villain) on him!

Also, many historical figures did things we just don’t appreciate today. Florence Nightingale instituted the nursing profession, right? Sounds boring, right? Except she went to the Crimean War to help treat the wounded, which meant she was surround by the dying, the maimed and the sick in a foreign land with constant war around her, and she did it out of nothing but goodwill, at a time when women were just second class citizens. I’m not afraid to admit I don’t have the cojones to do what she did. She saved hundreds of lives (plus all the ones that would be saved by her institutions). That, m’boys, is a HERO, and she never even fired a gun.

Wil, every Balzac fan worth his salt knows Vidocq. We just aren’t that many. Vautrin plays a smaller or greater role in many of his novels, especially in “Splendeurs et misères des courtisanes” (A harlot high and low). The Vidocq movie was kinda interesting, from what I remember it wasn’t too historical either.

Thanks for the link though, I didn’t know there was a biography of him in English. I’ll check it out.