[Il Duce]

I'm just getting over the fact that many movies and stories throw liberal ideals and views in ancient stories like Spartacus, Cleopatra, Alexander the Great, etc. In a way it paints a picture on a civilization which simplifies them to a 'Goodie and Baddy' dichotomy.

Ie, the Greek States have always been shown as the beacons of light and defenders of democracy. Little take notice of its use of slavery, barbarism of the spartans (Though glorified by 300) and much more. Even Alexander's conquests have been looked upon in a positive light.

Persia have always been shown as the bad guys which represent the 'tyrannical hordes of asia'. Yet they had a grand civilization.

As for Rome, they are often the force of tyranny, corruption, conquest, perversion and ruthlessness. I lose count how often movies show people rebel for FREEEDDOOOMMMMMMM. Hannibal and Carthage have often been portrayed as the good guys as well. On the other hand, few mention this:

[youtube]ExWfh6sGyso[/youtube]

Hell even non-ancient but medieval/imperial Britain were always portrayed as the evil side in most films.

Those poor scots...

[youtube]WLrrBs8JBQo[/youtube]

Poor Frenchies...

[youtube]xcM8ilpHsfQ[/youtube]

Oh and Murica!

[youtube]VnGpwNmF430[/youtube]

When will they stop this shit? :/

[Kon]

Yeah fuck, everyone knows the British didn't roll around the world fucking up everyone's shit

[Igor Antunov]

Ancient is ok, it happened long ago, the historical texts are incomplete and subject to personal interpretation-so fantasy thrown in although unfortunate is still understandable.

But what shits me is depictions of events that occured just some decades ago. Eg the british film enemy at the gates was a perversion of the battle of stalingrad.

[Gletkin]

Pfffft...whining about the portrayal of dead historical issues.

In a way it paints a picture on a civilization which simplifies them to a 'Goodie and Baddy' dichotomy.

Gladiator, Rome, and Centurion didn't.
Those were all essentially "good Romans" vs. "bad Romans".

As for Rome, they are often the force of tyranny, corruption, conquest, perversion and ruthlessness.

The Eagle
King Arthur

Hell even non-ancient but medieval/imperial Britain were always portrayed as the evil side in most films.

Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves.
Four years before Braveheart, blue war-painted Celts are portrayed as savage mercenaries working for evil Normans against good Anglo-Saxons.

Also one word: Napoleon.
When it comes to the Napoleonic Wars, most historical dramas set in this topic seen throughout the Anglophonic world take the British POV. Even in America despite us having been Napoleon's ally.

So quit your bitching already and focus on what really matters: Hollywood's neglect of the Carlist cause in Spain!!

[Red_Army]

My problem is not with the British being depicted as evil (they obviously are/were), but that they aren't depicted effeminate enough.

Rob Roy did this well with evil/girly Tim Roth, but we need more.

[Potemkin]

My problem is not with the British being depicted as evil (they obviously are/were), but that they aren't depicted effeminate enough.

Rob Roy did this well with evil/girly Tim Roth, but we need more.

Quoted for truth. The English ruling class managed (and still manage) to be both evil and effete at the same time. Not enough people realise how awesome that was, and still is.

[The Clockwork Rat]

Kingdom of Heaven was stubbornly even-handed towards Europeans and Arabs, with more and less sympathetic characters in all corners.

[Oxymoron]

It also sucked balls.

[SolarCross]

Kingdom of Heaven was stubbornly even-handed towards Europeans and Arabs, with more and less sympathetic characters in all corners.

It wasn't that even handed, I recall a scene where the super intelligent white folk from europe teach the stupid brown people how to get water in the desert by digging for it How ridiculously patronising. At that time in history the arabs had mechanical water pumps while europeans would hygienically dump their shit out of the window into the street.

[The Clockwork Rat]

I was talking about sentiment. There were some decent people and some arseholes on both sides.

[Il Duce]

This isn't whining, this is more complaining about putting a liberal spin in all of it, like as if there was a political message in all of it.

[Red_Army]

So you're accusing Mel Gibson of putting a liberal spin on his movies?

[layman]

Rob Roy did this well with evil/girly Tim Roth, but we need more.

Tome Roth was fantastic in that film. Much, much better than Braveheart.

[Rancid]

Persia have always been shown as the bad guys which represent the 'tyrannical hordes of asia'. Yet they had a grand civilization.

I disagree with this one. Persia is often shown in a positive light as well. Hell I just saw a documentary on Persia last night. Basically talking how Cyrus the great and Darius did a revolutionary thing, in that they didn't enslave those they conquered.

Any time I see anything about Persia it's in a positive light, except for the movie 300.

[Doomhammer]

Also one word: Napoleon.
When it comes to the Napoleonic Wars, most historical dramas set in this topic seen throughout the Anglophonic world take the British POV. Even in America despite us having been Napoleon's ally.

I urge you to watch Sergey Bondarchuk's Waterloo (1970). I think he was cast in a fairly positive light.

[fuser]

^ Seconded.

But I would say he was shown in a neutral way rather than positive or negative, they didn't portrayed any sides as good or evil. But the movie is just awesome if nothing else then just for that damn cavalry charge.

[Beren]

Eg the british film enemy at the gates was a perversion of the battle of stalingrad.

Any Western interpretation of non-Western history, literature or art must be a kind of perversion.

Is there any Russian movie about the American Civil War? It would be a must watch.

[Igor Antunov]

The 1993 German film 'Stalingrad' is amazing. Is that not a western film? How is the battle of stalingrad non-western history? How is the scottish resistance against english enroachment non-western history? Western or non-western, it doesn't matter. Accurate and innacurate films come from all places, no matter their subject matter.

[Beren]

The West German film 'Stalingrad' is amazing. Is that not a western film?

It's a German film about their own German history, not a Western film about Russian history.

How is the battle of stalingrad non-western history?

It's Russian and German history basically, with which the British don't have much to do actually, due to which their interpretation sucks.

How is the scottish resistance against english enroachment non-western history?

What?

Western or non-western, it doesn't matter. Good and bad films come from all places, no matter their subject matter.

It actually matters who interprets what, because it determines the way he does it. If an American or a British interprets Russian history, then it will look like a kind of perversion almost inevitably, and vice versa.

[fuser]

It's Russian and German history basically, with which the British don't have much to do actually, due to which their interpretation sucks.

It actually matters who interprets what, because it determines the way he does it. If an American or a British interprets Russian history, then it will look like a kind of perversion almost inevitably, and vice versa.

You haven't watched many historical movies, have you?

"All quiet on western front" : an american movie on Franco German conflict during ww1.

"Cross of Iron" : British movie on Soviet German war during ww2.

Waterloo: Russian movie on Franco British war during Napolenic war.

etc etc.

And they all are classics.