07-31-2011, 10:42 PM
I think Joe asks an interesting question and I am at a loss to name a title, even with regards to many films set in the modern era.
Saving Private Ryan was certainly successful, but I would not hold that film up as a paragon of historical accuracy or honesty. (Band Of Brothers was certainly better in both departments).
However... I do not agree with Joe's implication, that entertainment trumps accuracy and therefore anything goes.
This is the approach taken by Riddley Scott, as elucidated by him on the commentary tracks included on the Director's Cut DVD of his film Gladiator.
Although it would certainly be entertaining if the Romans used Tiger tanks while Spartacus and the Slave Army were armed with RPG's, I doubt even the most jaded of viewers would accept such historical fabrication. (Unless, of course, it were a Zack Snyder film like Sucker Punch, where the battle scenes were very much like a group of ten year olds playing with their toy soldiers. "I've got a dragon" "I've got a Sherman tank." "I've got some samurai." "I've got some German solders. Let's play!"
That works for Sucker Punch, but not for Spartacus.
Just because a film has not achieved that exalted status of being both accurate and entertaining does not mean Hollywood should not continue to strive to make such a film, nor that we should not continue to demand that they do so. Of course, this is Show Business, and the bottom line does matter, so the deck is decidedly stacked against us.
Darryl Zanuck once said, "There is nothing duller on the screen than being accurate but not dramatic." Never the less he went to great lengths to make his opus, The Longest Day, as faithful to the history as possible. (With, admittedly, mixed results in this regard.)
This new Spartacus may turn out no better than the series currently running on the Starz network, but we can certainly hope that it will. As always, time will tell.
:wink:
Narukami
Saving Private Ryan was certainly successful, but I would not hold that film up as a paragon of historical accuracy or honesty. (Band Of Brothers was certainly better in both departments).
However... I do not agree with Joe's implication, that entertainment trumps accuracy and therefore anything goes.
This is the approach taken by Riddley Scott, as elucidated by him on the commentary tracks included on the Director's Cut DVD of his film Gladiator.
Although it would certainly be entertaining if the Romans used Tiger tanks while Spartacus and the Slave Army were armed with RPG's, I doubt even the most jaded of viewers would accept such historical fabrication. (Unless, of course, it were a Zack Snyder film like Sucker Punch, where the battle scenes were very much like a group of ten year olds playing with their toy soldiers. "I've got a dragon" "I've got a Sherman tank." "I've got some samurai." "I've got some German solders. Let's play!"
That works for Sucker Punch, but not for Spartacus.
Just because a film has not achieved that exalted status of being both accurate and entertaining does not mean Hollywood should not continue to strive to make such a film, nor that we should not continue to demand that they do so. Of course, this is Show Business, and the bottom line does matter, so the deck is decidedly stacked against us.
Darryl Zanuck once said, "There is nothing duller on the screen than being accurate but not dramatic." Never the less he went to great lengths to make his opus, The Longest Day, as faithful to the history as possible. (With, admittedly, mixed results in this regard.)
This new Spartacus may turn out no better than the series currently running on the Starz network, but we can certainly hope that it will. As always, time will tell.
:wink:
Narukami
David Reinke
Burbank CA
Burbank CA
