Sign in to follow this  

Implausible yet entertaining historical epics -

3 posts in this topic

what's your take?


When films started attempting to get a bit more historically accurate in the 1960's or 1970's, with denigrations of people like Custer in "Little Big Man" et cetera, there was a lot of criticism of older films like "They Died With Their Boots On" with Flynn as Custer.


This is not to say that some earlier silent and talkie directors did not look for verisimilitude in their subject matter, but there was a preponderance of fluff masquerading as fact in many classic Hollywood films of the golden years.


Yet....those old films, directed by masters such as Raoul Walsh or Curtiz were rip-roaring action flicks that entertained and have stood the test of time.


But again, they did take major liberties with historical veracity. So...which do you prefer or can you find both appealing in their own way?


The best of both worlds might have been to have Errol Flynn starring in something like "Battle of Algiers" but I'm afraid that is something only to be wished for....


I do think Flynn was good as both Custer [even though it was a romanticized portrayal] and as Gentleman Jim Corbett [the famous pugilist and ladies man] and did achieve some accuracy in both film portraits, just by Flynn's bravado and charisma, which both characters supposedly had also in spades.


Your take on historical films...should they be all fact, or is an almost all fact version acceptable, with artistic license?



Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites


Movies can be entertaining without distorting fact. Case in point.. A NIGHT TO REMEMBER about the TITANIC disaster. Until DANCES WITH WOLVES came along, Native Americans were negatively depicted. THEY DIED WITH THEIR BOOTS ON did not accurately describe the Seventh Calvary, much less the Indian tribes. In short,poetic licence is ok in some cases but accuracy should be the key point when making the films,

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it's easier to take artistic license on an historical event than a person's life. However, when I think on those old biographical movies of the 30's & 40's where the stories were mostly white washed, I think of them more as semi-fiction rather than truth and take it for what it's worth--good entertainment.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:


Having problems?

Contact Us