The Consensus 100 Greatest War Movies

Jan 2018
182
San Antonio
Everybody knows the picture “Zulu” lacks historical accuracy, so what? It’s a splendid movie and IMO worthy of being ranked the best war movie. A pedantic listing of inaccuracies isn’t making points with people who love movies.

Tell you what: if the inaccuracy bugs you pretend the picture is fiction.
 
May 2011
13,780
Navan, Ireland
Everybody knows the picture “Zulu” lacks historical accuracy, so what? It’s a splendid movie and IMO worthy of being ranked the best war movie. .
Well I said that in my first post I also made the point that it is a piece of entertainment not a documentary so really has no responsibility to be historically accurate at all.
I think very highly of the movie (number1? not sure but I guess you could say that for any choice).


A pedantic listing of inaccuracies isn’t making points with people who love movies.

Tell you what: if the inaccuracy bugs you pretend the picture is fiction .
So we can not discuss the histography of a movie? (a bit bizarre on a history discussion forum!)

We keep it just to cinematography? acting, plot lines etc? why would this be so?

Could we discuss that Private Hook the 'anti-hero' is a product of the 1960's and the social revolution occurring at the time and nothing like the actual private Hook? but that's bringing History into it ? similarly the anti-war sentiments expressed by several characters such as Surgeon Reynolds reflect attitudes of the Mid 20th century rather than the actions of the historical Reynolds.

Sorry if you don't like discussing history why come to a History discussion forum?
 
Likes: Zip
May 2011
447
New Iberia, La.
In my opinion, war movie fans (not regular fans) can and should take historical accuracy into account. "Zulu" is a great movie, but I feel its inaccuracies prevent it from being the best war movie. To me, the best war movie would be outstanding in all categories - acting, plot, cinematography, and accuracy. I do not take the position that historical inaccuracy is a breaking point, but neither do I take the position that if a war movie is entertaining it doesn't matter if it's accurate. It sure mattered to Hook's family. This character development certainly made the movie more entertaining, but cannot be condoned.
 
May 2011
13,780
Navan, Ireland
I don't think a war movie has to be accurate since essentially it just entertainment but I do like it to be and you really have to question why its 'changing' history. Films like the interpretation of history say a great deal about their times.
 
May 2011
447
New Iberia, La.
In a perfect world, if you are making a movie about the Battle of Rorke's Drift and there has not been a movie on the subject before, you must assume that if the movie is successful, it might create the public's image of the battle. In that case, you owe it to the masses to balance entertainment with accuracy. It would have been very simple to change the name of the Hook character. After all, the character in the movie is a stereotype. Witt is not as easy as he goes down in the public's mind as "the missionary". I really do not have any major problem with the other inaccuracies. For instance, the ending is inaccurate, but not egregiously so, as with "We Were Soldiers". You walk out of the theater knowing the basics. My problem is with the character assassination.
 

Similar History Discussions