I've noticed that american films about history are totally wrong. For example, in the film King Athur. In real life, the saxons came from the north and travelled down south past Hadrians Wall. In the film, the saxons landed, travelled on a icy lake, then past Hadrains Wall. That would mean that they marshed up north to the furthest points of Scotland to find an icy lake then journey south.

Is there any other films like this?

afilms

braveheart? :idea:

never seen it but probably

That is because Americans are intelligent enough to understand the difference between a movie and a documentary. Usually. :wink:

Troy

Troy? :idea:

Speaking as an American who understands my culture, most Americans like films where things blow up and move fast. There also has to be lots of sparks, fires, computer generated imagery, and bright lights.

So what you say about films not being historically accurate is correct. If the original history doesn't contain enough excitement, film makers put it in to sell movie tickets.

I agree.
When American's go to the movies, they are paying for an experience. The price of a theatre ticket is very high, and people want to be entertained by the visual and audio special effects they can not get on their home televisions.

Speaking for myself, documentaries and more cerebral movies are something I rent to watch at home.

Also, sometimes the theatre itself can be very noisy, what with people coming in late, talking, getting up to buy snacks, sometimes even mobile phones and crying babies, so it can be hard to concentrate on something that requires intelligence to understand.

Inaccuracy isn't confined to American cinema, it's just easier to point the finger in their direction since they make more movies than we do.

Many Brit classics, think 'Zulu' and 'Lawrence of Arabia', romanticised and bent the truth a little for the sake of characterisation and drama.

There was a recent film, actually, that took things a little too far, 'Churchill: The Hollywood Years,' but i'm sure it was purely tongue in cheek

.... i hope

A few weeks ago I went to see The Da Vinci Code. It was directed by American actor Ron Howard and starred American actor Tom Hanks and French actress Audrey Tautou.

Based on the novel by Dan Brown, the film sparked a lot of controversy by the Catholic church. Their beef with it is that it suggests Jesus married and had kids. The Holy Grail is actually Jesus' living descendent(s).

I bought the abridged version of the CD audio book and listened to it---I'm too lazy to read a book that thick---before seeing the film. The film followed the book very closely, except some of the scenes were rearranged, but it didn't hurt the plot.

There were protesters out infront of the theaters the first week the film opened in my area, but none when I went. Things had calmed down since.

I guess someone forgot to remind the devoted that DaVinci is a work of fiction. :wink: The film or the book won't stop the true believers from going to church and filling the collection plate.

It wasnt' bad, but I don't think I'd care to see it again.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060518/REVIEWS/60419009/1023

I couldn't resist seeing "Code." If fundamentalists christians don't want me to see something, I'll go see it! :lol: