Hollywood's ability to rewrite history.

originally posted by: BlackArrow
Ever since people have given up book reading for opinion articles, non neutral news, television and movies. Hollywood has successfully rewritten several events of history.

I am hoping to open this to a general book chat of historic rewrites because the real ending wasn't good enough for Hollywood.

There's a saying around Hollywood that some people attribute to Alfred Hitchcock that basically suggests that Hollywood happy endings are a complete myth arrived at according to where you choose to end the screenplay. That is, things in real life might be seen as a victory at some point, but a few years down the road the victory sours, people get old and die, and sometimes all the positive things they accomplished are actually seen as horrible.

A good example of this is cowboy movies. In some of the older ones where a plucky cowboy manages to wipe out an entire tribe of Indians, it's a huge victory. These days, genocide and slaughtering native peoples with advanced technology is generally seen as not a good thing. Or what about "The Imitation Game" about the gay math genius Alan Turing? The way he's portrayed is the way modern audiences prefer to see gay people, which is generally more passive and soft. Turing in real life was apparently a big, drunken gay bully. That would not go over well with the community.

So maybe it's not so much that Hollywood changes history for some nefarious purpose, but it's because the audiences at the time expect to see "good" triumph over "evil," but don't understand and don't care that good and evil can completely change places over time, just like all of our own personal attitudes about seemingly innocuous things might someday reveal us all to be monsters. I think this might happen with the way we treat animals, particularly once we start producing huge amounts of lab-grown meat. Just have to wait and see.

originally posted by: paraphi
U571. Braveheart (the film) is now taken as fact by many Scots, which is (ahem) a laugh. The Patriot is another joke film which pandered to the lowest common denominator of historical accurcy.

Need I go on?

I always assumed Mel Gibson just really hates the English.

a reply to: BlackArrow

Agora is not a Hollywood movie. It's Spanish.

I liked the movie because I don't think that I'd ever heard of Hypatia before.

It's like this: Historians don't always know the details, it's this might have happened or else this other thing happened. When writing a script, the writer must actually choose one or the other. Movies would suck if every few minutes the screen would go black with a notice "WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED NEXT. PLEASE STAND BY."

As far as I'm concerned, the movie did a very good job of depicting what the social conditions in Alexandria may very well have been at the time when the Emperor in Rome decided that Christianity was thence to be the official religion rather than one of the legal religions. Suddenly, the Christian Cult has all the status. Pagans*(see edit below) converting for the status and influence gain. Suddenly the local Bishop is elevated to a very high position. Naturally, the mad competition to hold that position would ensue.

What I've read in other places is that Hypatia was highly regarded by all factions at the time. One side of the Bishop fight probably thought "Well if she isn't supporting me, then she certainly won't live to support that other guy."

* edit:
The word pagan is often used as a pejorative, demeaning civilized religions that don't happen to be Abrahamic Monotheistic. What I mean is the Alexandrians switched from Serapis Cult to Jesus Cult, because social standing can only be enhanced by being of the same cult as the Emperor.

a reply to: BlackArrow

What miracles?

If you are actually asking that then it is you that needs to read the Bible.

Your average heathen on the street is aware of the miracles Jesus performed.

But I get it, you don't believe the Bible is God's word. You are not alone, the way of the world proves that much.

a reply to: BlackArrow


Hollywood replicates unintended historical inaccuracies from the source material. For instance: Factual errors in the film The Longest Day (1962) stem from Cornelius Ryan's book of the same name. On the other hand, a film like are popcorn chewing, your drink of choice, historically inaccurate but fun watches. Providing one doesn't go in with unreasonable expectations before watching related movies, there is no disappointment.

a reply to: BlackArrow

Here is a pretty good list of inaccurate movies, of "true" historical events.


21 Surprisingly Inaccurate Movies That Are Based On True Stories

originally posted by: ScepticScot
I always assumed Mel Gibson just really hates the English.

Not of fan of the Jews either...

originally posted by: AugustusMasonicus

originally posted by: ScepticScot
I always assumed Mel Gibson just really hates the English.

Not of fan of the Jews either...

I believe his next historical blockbuster is 3 1/2 hours of him punching Benjamin Disraeli repeatedly in the face.

This is a good one.
Spielberg's take on 'the battle of Los Angeles.
en.wikipedia.org...

a reply to: ScepticScot

I really wanna see the new Top Gun movie.

And Tom Cruise is just about crazy as they come.

There all nuts in that place, and that place is nuts. LoL

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: ScepticScot

I really wanna see the new Top Gun movie.

And Tom Cruise is just about crazy as they come.

There all nuts in that place, and that place is nuts. LoL

Different flavour of crazy but still def crazy.

originally posted by: ScepticScot
I believe his next historical blockbuster is 3 1/2 hours of him punching Benjamin Disraeli repeatedly in the face.

He'll get a bunch of stuff massively wrong, like making him the King or something.

a reply to: ScepticScot

You go to the circus you expect to see clowns.

Its Hollywood, 57 flavours of different crazy, and then some i suppose.

This may be a tiny sidepoint or nitpick, but I have noticed in pretty much every movie or story hollyweird puts out about history, the 'historical women' are always pretty and full of feminism. Marie Curie was actually really.. well, let's say that she wouldn't have won many beauty pageants.

However, she's always depicted as some kind of hot romantic interest.. it's like they HAVE to do this to every historical woman, they just can't help it.