Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ben Hur
#1
Yep, historical inaccuracies in this version as well. In the trailer the soldier had long-sleeved tunics, ammo packs, etc. And at one point there was a flag that read Legio X Fretensis. Why is there such a tendency to place that legion there when it wasn't even mentioned in that timeframe?
James Ajiduah
Reply
#2
Because, Hollywood.
"I am not ashamed to confess that I am ignorant of what I do not know." ~Cicero

Real Name: Aaron Phelps
Reply
#3
(04-13-2016, 01:59 AM)Hasdrubal Wrote: Because, Hollywood.

Heh.?
James Ajiduah
Reply
#4
James he means the Hollywood Romans Wink

If you didn't know Hollywood has a time machine I saw it in many films (e.g. Back into the future I, II and III was it a IV too?) so they use it and travel into the period they want this time the world of Ben Hur and they are reproducing EXACTLY what they saw, so darn those archeologists, experimental reenactors and whatever, Hollywood has it ALWAYS right (1000% accuracy).

Enough joking the comment just means Hollywood NEVER got/get/will get it right, even when using different good advisors they manage to go round them and have its own view of "Hollywood Romans".

See the series of critics in AW magazine
-----------------
Gelu I.
www.terradacica.ro
www.porolissumsalaj.ro
Reply
#5
Its a self perpetuating cycle, the film makers think they know what the public would recognise and expect to see as a roman soldier, Viking, saxon medieval knight etc etc..... and their not wrong, because mostly the image that the public recognises comes from film and TV.... the bulk of which I've no dought is regular stock from film and TV costume suppliers...
whether or not the film makers know different I dont know... I suspect they dont care about such things at least from my own experience, but lets face it its just entertainment if it offends dont watch it....

And just how did that girl put on the medievalish dress in Centurion .-)
Ivor

"And the four bare walls stand on the seashore. a wreck a skeleton a monument of that instability and vicissitude to which all things human are subject. Not a dwelling within sight, and the farm labourer, and curious traveller, are the only persons that ever visit the scene where once so many thousands were congregated." T.Lewin 1867
Reply
#6
Ivor,

She had help from Guinevere. Angel
Alan J. Campbell

member of Legio III Cyrenaica and the Uncouth Barbarians

Author of:
The Demon's Door Bolt (2011)
Forging the Blade (2012)

"It's good to be king. Even when you're dead!"
             Old Yuezhi/Pazyrk proverb
Reply
#7
Ivor when the time travel team fro Hollywood got into that period they forgot a medieval type dress, the girl liked it(they always after new dresses) and well .....
-----------------
Gelu I.
www.terradacica.ro
www.porolissumsalaj.ro
Reply
#8
(04-14-2016, 06:03 AM)Gunthamund Hasding Wrote: Ivor when the time travel team fro Hollywood got into that period they forgot a medieval type dress, the girl liked  it(they always after new dresses)  and well .....

Not so much the Hollywood Medieval dress itself, but the fact that its Laced up the back, now the girl is an outcast and theres no one around who's going to help her put it on, so its probably not suprising the locals thought she had magical abilities... the dress alone is proof of that....  anyway i really need a real world answer that will convincingly explain it beyond all reasonable dought Big Grin
Ivor

"And the four bare walls stand on the seashore. a wreck a skeleton a monument of that instability and vicissitude to which all things human are subject. Not a dwelling within sight, and the farm labourer, and curious traveller, are the only persons that ever visit the scene where once so many thousands were congregated." T.Lewin 1867
Reply
#9
I’ve been in the film and television industry for 30 years. And I have bought this point up before on this forum, film companies or the wardrobe department of a major production hire there period costumes from an established costume hire companies. So if the film is about Hannibal and the hire company only has replicas of Imperial Roman armour, then that is what you get.
 
If you believe the film company should blow out the budget to make historical looking armour for the 2nd Punic War just to fulfil your expectations, then you are extremely misguided.
 
He’s the truth. And I will put it bluntly as there is no other way as I have my producer’s hat on. History and armour buffs probably represent about point 0005 percent of the audience market, so we don’t care about your demands for historical accuracy. Complain all you want, we aren’t listening, we don’t give a damn and we make jokes about you.
 
We make television shows about hospitals that are so inaccurate we don’t care because doctors and nurses don’t watch them...cause the last thing they want to do when they get home is to spend time watching people work in a hospital. And as the survey shows they only represent half a percent of the market, we are no interested in complying to their standards.
 
We make shows to make money and we make money by getting good ratings. So if getting good ratings means we bend, distort or manipulate the facts or medical procedures, then so be it.
 
Medical people (generally one) serve as advisors on the show to instruct actors how to look like they correctly giving an injection etc.etc. However, if they offer medical advice that will complicate manners or slow the tempo of the shoot down, we ignore them. In fact, the good ones who have been around for many years know when to shut up.
 
If I was making a WWII movie and I didn’t have the budget to hire the Bovington (real) Tiger 1, then I will get any tank available and with the use of wood make it look like a Tiger I. However, if I didn’t have the budget to do this, then I would get any tank and just paint a German cross on the side. Problem solved. Most of the audience (the real majority) don’t know the difference, so there is no real need to get the real thing.
 
I’m producing a documentary on the Lady Shore, the only convict ship that escaped in 1792. Well I can hire a replica close to the design of the Lady Shore but I would have to pay for the ship and crew to sail from England to Australia for the shooting. Cost about $3,000 a day to hire, so taking 30 to 45 days to get to Australia before shooting begins, it gets expensive. My next alternative is to hire the Endeavour, Captain Cook’s replica. Completely different design, but she is moored in Australia and this would dramatically reduce cost and financial wastage on the budget just to get somewhat of close to the proper historical look. And seriously, ruling out a few nautical buffs, the majority of the audience wouldn’t have a clue. So guess which ship gets the gig?
 
He’s a new strategy for those who want the Romans soldiers to look historical. To appease your expectations and stop your constant disappointment, why don’t you all donate HUGE amounts of money towards the production to achieve your wardrobe desires. I’m sure the costume designer, who has to work with a set budget, as you are paying for it, and I am talking from experience, will only be too happy to accommodate you.
 
So until then, cry all you want, nothing is going to change until you represent 60 percent of the market.
Reply
#10
well At least I know now why are you so inflexible in many things (you as a producer as well as a scientist), and of course we don't cry we laugh actually about the whole situation. As I come from industry (oil and gas) I imagine the cost is a constant pressure for a movie but we also know cases when costumes were produced for a movie so I suppose that getting it right would not have been so expensive, and BTW if you would not use vambraces is even cheaper, there are hundreds of them in an Roman period movie.

BTW accuracy about costumes is one but accuracy about events is different and I would say that it does not necessary cost lots of money, and you still manage to get it extremely wrong.

Ivor I suppose it was pre -laced then pulled over and then tightened
-----------------
Gelu I.
www.terradacica.ro
www.porolissumsalaj.ro
Reply
#11
Ivor wrote:
At least I know now why are you so inflexible in many things (you as a producer as well as a scientist), and of course we don't cry we laugh actually about the whole situation.
 
I’ve never been a scientist and if you know me you will find me quite flexible. However, I do stand by my convictions (rare these days) and if that makes people see me as being inflexible, that is their choice. But thanks for the personnel insult, not sure why you needed to, but if it made you feel good, then something positive has been achieved for you.
 
Ivor wrote:
BTW accuracy about costumes is one but accuracy about events is different and I would say that it does not necessary cost lots of money, and you still manage to get it extremely wrong.
 
I actually mentioned this in my original posting and then removed it to shorten the post. This is one area I do get up in arms about and have done on many a film set. But in those days I wasn’t the ones pulling the strings. And you are correct, it does not cost money, but alas, the abuse continues.
 
People might be surprised to know that a lot of the wardrobe used for some specific films has been purchased from second hand shops or charity shops. I know of a dozen Oz costume designers who work this way as a means to keep within budget.
 
Also when a film is having budget problems, the first department that has their budget reduced is wardrobe, followed by the art department.
 
Reply
#12
Sorry if you think it as personal was not my intention to insult you at all, really, my mother language is not English sometimes things that I say might look a little bit different that I intended,
not inflexible but stubborn and this is not an insult as well, I know I am stubborn as well and inflexible, might be a good thing but not always

so sorry about it again but really no insult intended
-----------------
Gelu I.
www.terradacica.ro
www.porolissumsalaj.ro
Reply
#13
Quote:I imagine the cost is a constant pressure for a movie but we also know cases when costumes were produced for a movie so I suppose that getting it right would not have been so expensive

Deadpool is one. The internet and Ryan Reynolds pushed hard for Fox to not only make the movie but do it right. BUT the exception there is that it was a huge market.

Quote:Also when a film is having budget problems, the first department that has their budget reduced is wardrobe, followed by the art department.

Atlas Shrugged Part 1 vs. Atlas Shrugged Part 2. Perfect example of this.

Quote:BTW if you would not use vambraces is even cheaper, there are hundreds of them in an Roman period movie.

Not gonna lie, I can't see how NOT using vambraces would increase the budget.
Reply
#14
(04-14-2016, 07:51 AM)Steven James Wrote: Ivor wrote:
Err no he didn't.....

but lets move on....

As far as costume is concerned, fully apprieciate though thats its necesary to fit within the constrants of the budget... not much point in going bust before you complete the work at least...

Steven Wrote:
I actually mentioned this in my original posting and then removed it to shorten the post. This is one area I do get up in arms about and have done on many a film set. But in those days I wasn’t the ones pulling the strings. And you are correct, it does not cost money, but alas, the abuse continues.

So I guess what you mean here is TV and Film are not really concerned about such things as history per se..... as long as the majority of the public cant tell the difference that is and its all about ratings and money..... but then I think thats fairly obvious and as I said creates a self perpetuating cycle...

Despite that is the often hoodwinking claims of historical accuracy in some form or another, lets face it most movie companys are not likely to tell you "we didnt have 2nd Punic costumes so we used Imperial Roman instead" so how is the public to know?.... but more likely that this is the most historically accurate thing since sliced bread and taken at face value.

Personally I dont mind so much as long as theres a decent script and there's not to many outrageous historical FUBARs in it... 

Eg "The Eagle" first 20 minutes I thought was quite good and then they introduced "The Last of the Mohicans" and I cannot imagine that the costume suppliers just happened to have this lot handy.... that was enough and its not a movie I would care to watch again.
On the other hand compare it with "We were Soldiers once and Young"... which I consider to be pretty accurate within my limited knowledge... and both thoughtfull , tragic and entertaining...

So its not Historical accuracy or history thats pesona non grata in the movie industry generally...

Many of the people here are passionate about History and often go to some extraordinary lengths in order to achieve some small historical thing, wouldn't it be great though if the Movie industry for the most part made the same kind of effort.....

Anyway will I watch the new Ben Hur... unlikely, for me its already been made once and that was enough... would rather watch some SciFi or unrecycled Fantasy.

Gunthamund Hasding wrote:
Ivor I suppose it was pre -laced then pulled over and then tightened..


I suspected as much but I needed someone with a decent knowledge of wearing womens dresses to tell me Big Grin
Ivor

"And the four bare walls stand on the seashore. a wreck a skeleton a monument of that instability and vicissitude to which all things human are subject. Not a dwelling within sight, and the farm labourer, and curious traveller, are the only persons that ever visit the scene where once so many thousands were congregated." T.Lewin 1867
Reply
#15
IMO the story was never good, anyway. It is amazing how unable the film industry is, to find good stories, and make the visual part more authentic. In fact, the historic reality looks so much cooler. But they seem not to know this.
Christian K.

No reconstruendum => No reconstruction.

Ut desint vires, tamen est laudanda voluntas.
Reply


Forum Jump: