• 목록
• 답변
• 글쓰기
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Although h­ailed as an interesting portrayal of the moral dilemmas facing Allied POWs held captive by the Japanese in World War II, "The Bridge on the River Kwai" (1957) was seen as a slap within the face to at least one esteemed, actual-life British officer. Director and actor Mel Gibson's portrayal of Scotland's hero William Wallace mesmerized audiences and gained the film five Oscars. Something about this formula must carry some resonance with American audiences. Interestingly, "The Far Horizons" (1955) does something very similar to "Pocahontas." It tries to create this tension between a native American woman and a white explorer, both of whom are properly-identified in U.S. Not only that, but the movie depicts Custer turning to alcohol in 1865, when in reality he swore off the stuff after an embarrassing incident in 1862. Modern viewers take subject with the film's stereotypical, one-dimensional depiction of Native Americans as nicely, notably Chief Crazy Horse, the Lakota Sioux battle chief. The movie depicts villainous enterprise males lying concerning the presence of gold in the Black Hills to oust the tribes dwelling there; in fact, there was gold on this region. Although it could also be true, as Smith later said, that Pocahontas intervened to save his life, she was only 10 or gold eleven years old when she made the gesture - the movie depicts them each as adults.

Here's the place the story takes a turn that will maintain the 1421 idea's standing as debatable for years to return. Were this film not directed toward kids (who are less prone to know the true story), it could maybe be dismissed as harmless historic fiction. But as it portrays actual historic figures, critics complain that "Pocahontas" simply misleads youngsters and interferes with the occasions they'll later study. Those who knew the actual story objected that it tainted Toosey's honorable popularity. The story reaches its climax when Pocahontas throws herself on Smith to save lots of his life.S. This happened in 1995, when Disney released its personal version of the Pocahontas story. When "Braveheart" got here out in 1995, it was an prompt success. Errors of omission notably incense critics, comparable to how Stone neglected the fact that Garrison's key testimony was brought on by drugging and hypnosis. But controversy actually ignited in 1991 when Oliver Stone released­ the movie "JFK," which posits that one fringe theory surrounding the homicide is fact and follows New Orleans district lawyer Jim Garrison as he investigates it.

That is even supposing Maximus (the main character portrayed by Russell Crowe) is fictional. The film centers around the character of British commander Col. The film centers on the famous expedition of Meriwether Lewis and William Clark, who had been despatched by President Thomas Jefferson to discover the Louisiana Territory for the United States. In the movie, Sacagawea and Clark fall in love while traversing hostile territory and battling the jealous villain Toussaint Charbonneau. If you're in any respect accustomed to the story, you recognize that along the way, they encountered a very helpful girl from the Shoshone tribe named Sacagawea. People are of­ten stunned to find out how little historians learn about probably the most celebrated playwright of the English language, William Shakespeare. She proved extremely helpful to the occasion however never - so far as historians know - made a transfer on William Clark. Historians discover this conjecture about Wallace and Isabella a bit hard to swallow provided that, at the time the film is ready, Isabella was a child. Against all odds, gold Wallace commands a gorgeous victory in opposition to the English within the Battle of Stirling Bridge. Nicholson arrives in a Japanese POW camp, where the Japanese are forcing the men to build a bridge that will probably be instrumental of their army ways.

Much to the shock of his fellow officers and to the delight of the Japanese commander, Nicholson seeks to improve his males's morale by forcing them to construct a stable, well-constructed bridge. Not until the dramatic finish does the obsessive Nicholson acknowledge the folly of helping the enemy in struggle and destroy the bridge. His admirers declare he did the best he might to maintain his men safe whereas not giving support to the enemy. Filmmakers continuously admit their lapses in historical correctness but declare to have captured the spirit of the truth. Other occasions, filmmakers wish to make a point about a trendy subject or ignite wartime patriotism by invoking analogous events of the previous, even when meaning bending details. The filmmakers completely fabricated the idea that love blossomed between them, and historians dismiss this idea out of hand. We've gathered 10 films that many historians discover insufferable and others just find laughable.