Reference guides for Film and TV

[Robert Vermaat]

I can't find the post

http://www.geocities.com/vortigernstudi ... raham1.htm

[Graham Sumner]

Hi Jim

Amazing to think that the costumes in 'Fall of the Roman Empire' or even 'Alexander', perhaps the most accurate reproductions of all did not even get nominated while the worst 'Ben-Hur', 'Quo Vadis' and 'Gladiator' did and won the Oscar. Research and attention to historical detail did not help in those cases but at least those in 'Cleopatra' got a nod.

Outside the Roman era we may think they look accurate but I bet re-enactors and costume historians from those periods would have something to say. Generally something from the contemporary fashions always creeps in.

Graham.

[Tarbicus]

Outside the Roman era we may think they look accurate but I bet re-enactors and costume historians from those periods would have something to say. Generally something from the contemporary fashions always creeps in.

To be honest, Graham, I suspect they did think they were being accurate, based on what was known at the time. Here's a snippet on the subject:

A special accuracy was required by historical movies. Each detail had to be right, be it with the Romans, Vikings, the knights etc. In these historical fields the costume designers found their challenge. The absolute sovereign was Edith Head, who was suggested for the "Oscar" for 35 films and was awarded an oscar eight times.

http://www.cyranos.ch/costum-e.htm

And this on teaching costume design:

1) What kind of skills training and/or education would I need to become a costume designer?
Tara: I needed a Ph.D. and most costume designers in University theatre need at least an MFA, that is a Master of Fine Arts in Theatre Design. Generally, to do this sort of work in an educational setting you need to be prepared to be a college professor, that is do historical research,

http://www.costumes.org/advice/1pages/j ... iption.htm

Check out that website's links to ancient armour:
http://www.costumes.org/history/100page ... nt%20Armor

Vorti, thanks.

[Tarbicus]

More on the subject:

http://www.costumersguide.com/design.shtml

http://www.salon.com/ent/movies/feature ... index.html

These definitely bear out that the costume designer "fiddles" with the accuracy.

[Robert Vermaat]

My pleasure.

To be honest, Graham, I suspect they did think they were being accurate, based on what was known at the time.

I once read some blog by one of the xtras during the shooting of 'King Arthur'. And the guy was boasting and boasting about how accurate it all was...
Much later I heard that people who raised objections aginst the 'liberal' approach, were sent packing!

Of course, when the producers found out at the eleventh hour that they were for sure going to become a laughing stock when they would retain the references to ‘Russian knights’ instead of ‘Sarmatians’, they called in the aid of John Matthews and Linda Malcor. Since they were no historians and had very little time to begin with, not much could be changed after all.

:twisted:

[Graham Sumner]

Hi Jim

In one of those sites I think this quote by the designer Powell sums thing up nicely.

I'm not interested in an exact replica of the period. I look at the period, how it should be, how it could be, and then I do my own version."

Thanks for the links though. Interesting to see many of the books I already have even mine was in there, no wonder they get things wrong!

Robert wrote:

Of course, when the producers found out at the eleventh hour that they were for sure going to become a laughing stock when they would retain the references to ‘Russian knights’ instead of ‘Sarmatians’, they called in the aid of John Matthews and Linda Malcor. Since they were no historians and had very little time to begin with, not much could be changed after all.

Matthews did apparently get the Viking Runes off Excaliber in time!

Graham.

[Graham Sumner]

Thanks Jim
You have just cost me another book 'Hollywood and History'!
Graham.

[Titus Publius Saturninus]

I had an opportunity to work with the " Last Samurai" crew when they came down here to Taupo to shoot the film. They didn't give a toss about correctly portraying the correct Satsuma Rebellion swords which were actually just taken arsenal blades wrapped inversely, used plain black iron kodogu (metal fittings) and so such entitled" Rebellion swords"

Within the remarks that were made it was all about how the GP views such things VS cost to make a movie. Swords used were mainly ready to go cheapola stock items.

Cheers,

Rick

[Matus turpis ferinus]

Outside the Roman era we may think they look accurate but I bet re-enactors and costume historians from those periods would have something to say. Generally something from the contemporary fashions always creeps in.

Graham.

Oh how right you are Graham! I'm also a WW2 reenactor (steady now!) and the things that most gets us most are vehicles and weapons.

Since 'Saving Private Ryan' things have improved vastly but the 60s, 70s and 80s :roll: The 50s ones are quite good, generally, as they used original kit! hock:

[Graham Sumner]

Hi
It is amazing how some contemporary anachronisms can creep in perhaps unbeknown to the film makers, largely unnoticed by the audience and perhaps would not occur if the same film had been made a few years later.

Watching 'The Land of the Pharaohs' recently I spotted a few things in the opening sequence the arrival of Pharaoh's army. It was clear that the film had used modern Egyptian soldiers as extras. Normally this works quite well but given the films date, in the mid fifties, it was immediately obvious that the soldiers were marching like British soldiers!

The arrival of the camel corps would perhaps be seen as quite spectacular and not out of place however the evidence suggests the camel was unknown in ancient Egypt and was possibly only introduced into North Africa during the Roman period! For instance there are no images of Camels in ancient Egyptian art or camel gods.

Matt wrote:

Oh how right you are Graham! I'm also a WW2 reenactor (steady now!) and the things that most gets us most are vehicles and weapons.

I can appreciate the difficulties that film makers have of collecting together the right vehicles let alone the right marks suitable for a time period. It was very interesting to read how the aircraft was collected for the film 'the Battle of Britain' and how even a few years later such an experience would have been impossible.

Nowadays most big epics will rely on CGI so there should at least be no excuse to recreate the right equipment but as you rightly point out many films made in the late forties and fifties had access to real vehicles and ships which can not be bettered by even the best computer effects.

I enjoy watching WW2 re-enactment too, will you be at Beltring?

Graham.

[Sub-Roman Britannia Enthu]

'People expect things' is a 'half' truth.

Sadly, I think it depends on the subject matter.

Not to drift too far from base, but I absolutely wanted to throw up when I saw that the costuming idjits at WETA had most of the human warriors of Middle-Earth with Late Medieval accouterments, armour and weaponry. Every piece of plate armour or hand-and-a-half sword I saw made me want to beat someone over the head with a copy of The Tolkien Letters where the late Professor stated that 'the styles on the Bayeux Tapestry fit well enough'. They turned the few Quendi warriors and their equipment into some weird Romano-Samurai fusion on the one hand, and other accouterments of Elvish origin (specifically Glamdring and Sting) into late Medieval European weapons.

Mostly I think its because Hollywood thinks the audience is composed of slack-jawed morons that have to be spoon fed pablum. As a result, anything is open to 'interpretation'. People hear the word knight or even fantasy and they think of jousting, courtly love and other drek.

[Robert Vermaat]

Every piece of plate armour or hand-and-a-half sword I saw made me want to beat someone over the head with a copy of The Tolkien Letters where the late Professor stated that 'the styles on the Bayeux Tapestry fit well enough'.

Well said!

Another Sub-Roman Britannia Enthu. :wink: