Historical Inaccuracy Corner
- Thread starter SckizoBoy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
In that new Robin Hood film, when the french were invading, they were using landing crafts that most definetely not been invented in the 12th century, or for another few centuries after that. also, While king Richard was killed by a crossbow bolt, it didn't go through his neck, but his shoulder, which then got infected, and he died several days later.
Yes. I think. It was a Russian movie. And it was violent. Can't recall the name...BlackStar42 said:
OT: Most movies where there are Russians. They either speak English, or 'Russian'. What, can't they hire actual Russian actors? The most recent movie I remember with proper Russian is (guh) Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull... and that's only because Steven Spielberg's rule of, if they are from a country, get actors from there.
I got annoyed at Pride & Prejudice & Zombies when Darcy's extremely English housekeeper greets Elizabeth in a kimono and bound feet. All kinds of wrong. Yes, it's a parody but really now! /pet peeve
The rest of the book isn't all that good either. Funny in parts but not that good. Cover is AWESOME though so I do want to get rid of it... >_>
The 13th Warrior film is another. People that live in the same tiny village speaking 3 separate languages - plus one fellah who spoke Swedish with a Finnish accent IIRC - is not all that believable. Amused and annoyed me at the same time.
The rest of the book isn't all that good either. Funny in parts but not that good. Cover is AWESOME though so I do want to get rid of it... >_>
The 13th Warrior film is another. People that live in the same tiny village speaking 3 separate languages - plus one fellah who spoke Swedish with a Finnish accent IIRC - is not all that believable. Amused and annoyed me at the same time.
While I agree with you that we get a little more credit then we deserve. You also have to realize that before we got involved with the war. We were constantly supplying ships and everything to Britain, and other countries. So we didn't just get get in the war years after it began. We were somewhat there from the start.Sizzle Montyjing said:
OT: Its been said a lot already but, 300 and Gladiator. Though I like the movies.
Oh, and in Black Hawk Down, ignoring the rest of the inaccuracies, one small one that bugged me was that in the helicopter, one person was reading a book in paperback. The movie takes place in 1993. This particular book wasn't in paperback at that time.
300 and Gladiator are pretty popular choices, and would have been my choice if not already picked apart.
Some above mentioned Braveheart. Wallace would have not been running around in a tunic. Since he was in the transitional period of armor, he would have been using a coat of plates and partially articulated legs and arms. Also when charging the British, he didn't change his weapon every few feet (sometimes to nothing at all).
Some above mentioned Braveheart. Wallace would have not been running around in a tunic. Since he was in the transitional period of armor, he would have been using a coat of plates and partially articulated legs and arms. Also when charging the British, he didn't change his weapon every few feet (sometimes to nothing at all).
Yes they did, pretty much everyone up until the gunpowder age had bowmen. While their archers were not always Romans, they still used mercenary bows and cavalry quite often.Th3Ch33s3Cak3 said:
Nor could King Richard actually speak English, having only spent around 4 months of his life in England by the time he died.Agow95 said:
He did die assaulting a fortress, but it was after leaping off a boat on the shoreline wearing no armour whatsoever, not sitting on a horse in full mail.
Oh, and there's no shoreline underneath the cliffs of Dover unless I'm very much mistaken...
I'm not American, but after taking an American History course I can safely say that the film "Thirteen Days" is historically inaccurate. The film is about The Cuban Missile Crisis and according to the film, Kennedy took all his advice from a fictional character, The Russian's side of the debate doesn't exist, and it never explains how or why the Missiles were in Cuba in the first place (again, making this movie showing only the American side). You can probably see where I am going with this, but seriously, these mistakes were big enough that our class had a two day discussion about it.
Americans were prohibited from joining the RAF by the Neutrality Acts. Those who did so anyway had to pass themselves off as Canadian. The official law required they be stripped of their citizenship for doing, so none of the 9,000 or so American pilots flying in the RAF were technically American citizens while serving, but no one seemed inclined to enforce the law once the Axis declared war on the US.Jake Lewis Clayton said:
except that the spartans did not participate in the war after thermopylae, 300 was all their tiny little slave-state of pedo-flavored angry gay men could afford without losing control of their own country. much less send a contingent of ten thousand soldiers.Lt_Bromhead said:Just wondering what you mean by the Zulu track in the background...?
OT: 300. The whole damned thing, pretty much.
Then again, one could argue against this - as the story of 300 was the battle as told by Dilios, and as first hand accounts by Spartans go, that was likely pretty much how they would have told the tale. Especially if appealing for help...
here's one: that watchmen movie! almost NONE of that happened in the 80s, and i checked, nixon was only elected twice!
*rolls away in laughter-propelled sportscar*
You should do some historical research then. They had archers...the Phalanx wasn't their only military method contrary to popular belief. http://www.bbc.co.uk/schools/primaryhistory/romans/the_roman_army/Th3Ch33s3Cak3 said:
First off, this movie wasn't supposed to be historically accurate, it's fictional and not based at all, in any way, on the historical retelling of how Hitler died. Second, there are no detailed accounts of exactly how Hitler died. Some will say that the allies raided Hitlers bunker and killed him there, my great uncle was in that party and swore to his dying day that Hitler wasn't found in the bunker. One of his SS officers later said that they fled the bunker after Hitler told them how thankful he was for their loyalty and shot himself in the head. They, supposedly, wrapped his body in a grey nazi army blanket, removed his body from the bunker before the allies came, and burned the body after they paid their respects and fled for their lives.ChupathingyX said:
As far as my historical inaccuracy, the list is too long, but any movie with sword play I tend to pick apart. Specifically, musketeer movies or any movie in which a rapier is being used. I have studied this weapon extensively as well as the styles of many masters of fence. Walt Disney's "The Three Musketeers", horibble..."The Musketeer"...really? Crouching tiger, Hidden Dragon meets french rapier styles? They're entertaining movies, but sicken me with the combat that is hollywooded up.
That guy was a wank. Of course Alfred Nobel invented dynamite. He invented it to aid in mining and was completely horrified when humans started using it to kill each other. This is the main reason why Alfred established the Nobel Peace Prize.Heimir said:Don't remember when but someone told me I was a moron when I said Alfred Nobel invented dynamite.
http://inventors.about.com/od/dstartinventions/a/Alfred_Nobel.htm
He then told me to go f**k myself and that I was a communist.
Americans, you need to put those guys in the looney bin asap
Not all Americans are wank myself included.
Really? talking about historical inaccuracies and you bring up Red Alert?? Anyone who has ever played a Red Alert game knows they are not even attempting to be accurate. That is like saying Half Life was not accurate because Gordan Freeman wasn't really a scientist.gigastar said: