ARTICLE: Do Movies & TV Shows Have to Be Historically Accurate?
From PopEater.com...
Do Movies & TV Shows Have to Be Historically Accurate?
Great discussion / debate prompt at any grade level...
Do Movies & TV Shows Have to Be Historically Accurate?
by Jane Boursaw Posted Jul 17th 2010 08:00AM
Pop-Ed: How accurate do TV shows and movies have to be when it comes to telling real-life history? Is it OK to fudge the details to enhance the story? Or should the storyteller be a stickler for detail? While doing press for 'The Pacific' earlier this year, Tom Hanks told listeners of Dennis Miller's radio show that the HBO series wasn't really intended to be a "big picture" view of the war in the Pacific. Rather, it was all about the characters and their lives, how the war affected them and their loved ones. But since 'The Pacific' was based on real people, should the filmmakers have stayed true to their real-life stories?
Hanks noted that the series included a meeting between Eugene Sledge and Robert Leckie that never happened. That probably doesn't matter too much to the casual viewer, but you have to wonder if straying from the truth bothers the real families upon whom the series is based.
Filmmaker Peter Hankoff, who's helmed dozens of historical documentaries, including 'Secret Voice of Hitler' and 'Nazi Scrapbooks from Hell: The Auschwitz Albums,' told PopEater there's a good mix of real and fake history coming out of Hollywood, but that things are often condensed to maintain dramatic structure.
"There are so many bogus love stories shoe-horned into the plot to keep some structure alive while the audience is waiting for the a) big attack, b) assassination, or c) the whatever it is we hope will somehow give us satisfaction," he said, adding that the smaller stories like 'The Pacific' feel more real, "because it gives me time to think 'Hey, I could be that guy' or 'I wonder where they go to the bathroom.'" Yeah, the rest of us wonder stuff like that, too.
Read the full blog here.
Hanks noted that the series included a meeting between Eugene Sledge and Robert Leckie that never happened. That probably doesn't matter too much to the casual viewer, but you have to wonder if straying from the truth bothers the real families upon whom the series is based.
Filmmaker Peter Hankoff, who's helmed dozens of historical documentaries, including 'Secret Voice of Hitler' and 'Nazi Scrapbooks from Hell: The Auschwitz Albums,' told PopEater there's a good mix of real and fake history coming out of Hollywood, but that things are often condensed to maintain dramatic structure.
"There are so many bogus love stories shoe-horned into the plot to keep some structure alive while the audience is waiting for the a) big attack, b) assassination, or c) the whatever it is we hope will somehow give us satisfaction," he said, adding that the smaller stories like 'The Pacific' feel more real, "because it gives me time to think 'Hey, I could be that guy' or 'I wonder where they go to the bathroom.'" Yeah, the rest of us wonder stuff like that, too.
Read the full blog here.
Views: 4
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Jeremy Greene on
-
By definition tv and movies cannot be historically accurate. They should be seen the same as historical paintings - a representation of the past.
The better question is should they try to be historically accurate as possible.
Short answer: no. That is not their intention. They are intended to make money.
Teacher answer: yes! Movies are powerful in ways I can only fathom - students remember all sorts of things in them. So better imo to use clips - no more than 10 minutes to teach a concept or get a feel for the period from a "historically accurate" costume drama, for instance.
Documentaries are a different story. Even here I like historical reenactment to make them more interesting.
Best -
-
Permalink Reply by Ryan Goble on
-
Nice move - reframing the question is key!
-
© 2024 Created by Ryan Goble.
Powered by
