DB7

LONDON (Reuters) - Hollywood film studios are guilty of a "grotesque distortion of history" which is destroying Britain's national identity, a newspaper on Sunday quoted British historians as saying.

The chief executive of English Heritage, the government body responsible for the historic environment, told the Independent on Sunday film-makers' "sloppy" and "formulaic" approach to history had left a generation of children confused.

"One of my principal concerns is that the majority of children now leave school with the sketchiest of chronology about English history," Simon Thurley said, adding that they turned to films for knowledge.

Antony Beevor, Britain's best-selling author of popular history, told the newspaper the Americanization of British history was a particular problem.

"You can't turn every hero in the world into an American," he said.

The historians singled out "Saving Private Ryan," based on the Normandy World War II landings, "U-571" about submariners, and "Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves" as prime offenders.

In "Saving Private Ryan" all mention of British or Allied troops was omitted, while the British submariners at the heart of the real action were replaced by Americans in the film "U-571."

"Robin Hood" was accused of distorting of Britain's medieval past. Beevor described the trend as "shameless and totally irresponsible -- a grotesque distortion of history."

Classical historian Bettany Hughes said it was not just British history that had been misrepresented.

"Hollywood has committed some terrible crimes against history," she said, describing the Hollywood epic "Troy" as a "travesty of mismatched cultural references."

"Dead heroes in Greco-Roman dress were cremated with coins on their eyes -- before money had been invented," she said.

David Brent

For years the Yanks have drilled into everybodys heads through the movies that they alone won the war.

I was touring some years ago through Europe & met a group of American students travelling by train.I was amazed how little they knew of WW2 & how it affected Europe.They didnt realise the war had been going on for 2 years before America paticipated.They seemed to think that as soon as the Americans entered the war it was all over.They continually referred to "how we won the war." I'm sure American movies with this John Wayne attitude are to blame for this lack of education.

The worst part is that i hear that the Americans are now making a film about the "Battle of Britain"in which Tom Cruise cleans up the Luftwaffe. I kid you not!

Dave.

Gibbie

David,

As I've said before, distinguish between Hollywood and America. Hollywood producers are a nation to themselves. Not only was "Robin Hood: Prince of Theives" bad history, it was ridiculous.

True, Hollywood is quite guilty of revisionism, especially "U-571". Why the revisionism, I do not know? Be aware also that the current millieu of multi-culturalism has specifically anti-Anglo (both British and American) presuppositions and playing to that Hollywood producers are banking on revisionism (need I mention Gibson's "Patriot", which really played into his cultural biases and while I'm at it - "Braveheart" was mostly errant history, too). But, remember that Willie Shakespeare's histories also had political colouring to them. You will notice that most big Illumionati-type bad guys these days have English accents. Hollywood has its own form of social propaganda. I could go on... They mostly project a reality that is not really there. Perhaps that is why movies like "The Matrix" are so popular and more true to cultural norm - Nintendo games.

Before we fall into some kind of culture war, note who is perpetuating this bad history. Whatever the papers say, there is certainly no lockstep mentality here. BTW, many in our national education system have a political agenda to denigrate the past and keep students ignorant about the past, unless it is to remind them that their ancestors were all bad guys. This is a combination of taught ignorance with a Hollywood focus on American-only contexts (sometimes they play it both ways for the cash), which is bizarre, because they tend to project one dimensional, and usually false, objectified characterizations of conservative and traditional Americans. It is a strange cocktail. And, on the other end, you see the resulting mixture, which is not all that it appears. This is the current politicization of entertainment. But, remember, this is just entertainment, even with its artistic achievements. A further problem is that people, usually kids, see this and tend to accept these bad characterizations and histories. Per the article, if historical ignorance is a problem with youth today in Britain, it is more the fault of the educators, community and students themselves, than the movie makers (who simply trash out bad history)

If it helps at all, many of these movies end up in the sales bin (I think that was a view well stated by DB7). Anyway, most people in the world probably own more copies of original British versions than the revisions.

"Saving Private Ryan" is really more a personal pursuit of the movie's producer/director than objective history. Interesting to note, the movie's protagonist is not truly the hero, but the coward. This film is a sort of personal confession toward more nobler men.

If Cruise plays in a revised version of the Battle of Britain, I will certainly miss that one, too. If this is true, perhaps the producers have seen a success in the new DVD of the original film and think that if they "Top Gun" it, they'll have a positive cash flow? They worry about quarterly earnings.

Perhaps an indie movie producer can create a really well done British historic film that is not self-phyrric (which has been the case with most of the E.M. Forster-type stories for the past few decades). It is possible.

Closing thought, I think Hollywood producers, even with all their Oil Sheik cash, have simply run out of ideas. And, remember that while our nation is more diverse today (both good and bad), its roots in culture (both Puritan and Royalist), language and law are from Britain. Revisionism cannot alter that historical fact, not even the movie makers.

Gibbie

David Brent

Great response Gibbie,

Just changing the subject just a little may i ask you what you feel the general American public reaction has been to Micheal Moore's film "Farenheit 9/11"?

I have not seen it myself yet but hear that it leaves a strong & scary message about America's place in the world.

With so much rewriting of history by Hollywood, mostly in favour of America & with super heroes & fantasy being strong storylines in todays films are the American public ready for a warts & all portrayal of their country? Most importantly - are they prepared to believe it?

How has it been accepted in your part of the U.S.
Gibbie? I believe it has brought up strong passions both for & against in different states.

I would be most interested in your educated view of the matter.Movies still hold a lot of power.
Are Americans worried how the world's view of them may change through this movie?

Cheers mate!

Dave.

Gibbie

Thank you, Dave.

Per Moore, "liberals" love it and "conservatives" hate it. I must say that I have not seen the documentary and that I do not respect Moore, who is a phyrric individual that has shown he is more interested in emotive raging (destroyer) than the common good (reformer). His presuppositions are his hatreds. I have heard that there is a lot of inaccuracy in some of his assertions, but frankly, I don't know enough to fairly appraise them.

I think most are ignoring the documentary, but then again, it tends to be according to the interest of the individual. Rate Australian, Uk and US box office results against the whole population and that will give you a better estimate of interest.

Documentary films and a free press are important to a free society, but when they become manipulative rants, discussion becomes absurd.

Dovetailing back to the thread, Hollywood types love this documentary, because most of them hate Bush, who just has to take the abuse (if he responded, he would be projected as petty and it would seem to justify Moore's rants). The strange twist on Hollywood's Americanisms is that much of the terrorism that effects us is a reaction to the pushing of Hollywood's trashyside on other cultures, Muslim in particular.

To add to the complexity of the documentary's subject matter, it must be noted that Hollywood and corporate leaders see themselves, in general, as above cultural accountability.

I wonder if Moore will make a documentary about that?

Gibbie

David Brent

Thanks Gibbie for your most interesting observations.

For what it's worth,Moore's "Farenheit 9/11" is doing good business in Australia & for the most part the critic's have endorsed it.

Dave.

Gibbie

You're welcome, Dave.

You are correct. I just read where it has just grossed over $100 M. So, there is much popular support for it.

Another issue to research over and argue is accuracy.

While human rights is a very important topic, the obsession, in recent decades, over personal rights and commercialized belly gazing has had an affect on our general notion of getting things accurate.

BTW - hope all is well in Aus - beautiful country!

Gibbie