Do you get upset about historical inaccuracies in movies or anime?
>>18462162the fuck is this?
>>18462162Kekimus maximusIs that from Nolan's "Odyssey"?It looks like fucking trash, holy fuck, the only goal of that movie is to mock Classic European Culture and goyslopify it, it genuinely looks like amerimutt capeshit
>>18462162I wish they would leave the classics alone. Goy cattle don't deserve easy access to be able to talk about these stories. Even if it's distilled for retards
>>18462162Not anymore. But recently I went to a castle museum that had a modern painting of a knight in the "armory" section, which was all over the place. 12th century nasal helmet, 16th century breastplate and tassets, mail hauberk/aventail, 15th century armor for the lower leg, the arms only protected by mail and a sword with a downswept guard. And this hodgepodge depiction really pissed me off - especially because they had genuine pieces exhibited there. It gets worse as said castle was closed for a long time due to renovations and modernisations (thx for that). But at least they restored a 13th century mural that was hidden behind 19th century wood veneers.
An anachronistic depiction of ancient myths could be interesting as long as it offered other merits besides authenticity. I'm not under the impression that this does.
DependsIt's one thing to deviate from what would be historically or culturally authentic out of a genuine sense of artistic vision and taking creative liberties intentionally, it's another to do so out of ignorance and/or not even bothering to do research, and just going with inaccurate elements because you couldn't be bothered to try to be accurate or you just going with what audiences expectI also think making a distinction between "accuracy" and "authenticity" is important. Very few pieces of media are truly "accurate", but you can be inaccurate and take creative liberties while still being authentic, by which I mean the narrative, visual etc choices you make can still feel grounded within the time period and region your setting is in and can tie into actual historical events or cultural beliefs and symbolism even if they are original elements you made up or tweakedTL;DR I think ideally, creatives should do their research and figure out what WOULD be accurate, use that as their starting point, and then put their own spin on it and selectively and carefully decide what elements to change or add while being mindful of having those new or altered details to still tie into the actual historical events, visual culture etc they're basing the work onI also think the stakes are lower or higher when you're dealing with regions or time periods that people have more or less general familiarity with. While there ARE obviously misconceptions the average person has around say Medieval Europe or WW2 or Classical Antiquity, the average person's understanding of those settings and what they looked like is at least somewhat evocative of reality, vs say with Prehispanic civilizations in Mesoamerica (pic) or the Andes on the other side of the spectrum, the average person knows jack fucking shit about the topic and has no context on what they were like, and audiences are going to have a much harder time intuitively working out what details are accurate or are fictional1/2
why did Homer leave out the part of the Odyssey where Anglo Odysseus fought Space Marines in a nordic pine forest? Was he stupid?
If the movie is good (like Braveheart, Gladiator or Kingdom of Heaven) I'm willing to overlook inaccuracies. But things I can't overlook are inserting blacks and Asians in European historical movies. I don't consider myself racist but shit like that is like putting a car in a medieval movie, it just doesn't make sense.
>>18462162What the fuck is this even supposed to be? The giants? The underworld?
>>18462162Depends, I don't know why anyone would get upset over the historical accuracy of the Odyssey though
I’m a train autiste and I get triggered by the wildly inaccurate stuff in films and TV. Little things are ok but seeing things like European trains in American settings is just plain lazy. They wouldn’t try and pass off some Eastern European village as Smalltown, USA but they’re too cheap and sloppy to do a bit of CGI or take some shots at a local rail museum.
>>18462273>But things I can't overlook are inserting blacks and Asians in European historical movies.I get mad at them shoving white people into American movies too.
>>18462246>While there ARE obviously misconceptions the average person has around say Medieval Europe or WW2 or Classical Antiquity, the average person's understanding of those settings and what they looked like is at least somewhat evocative of reality, vs say with Prehispanic civilizations in Mesoamerica (pic) or the Andes on the other side of the spectrum, the average person knows jack fucking shit about the topic and has no context on what they were like, and audiences are going to have a much harder time intuitively working out what details are accurate or are fictionalTrue. Wasn't it the case with the film Apocalypto that the dialogues were filmed in a Mayan language (which is still spoken today), but since none of the actors were native speakers, the babbling was so indistinct that no genuine native speaker could understand it anymore? Good for Gibson and crew to try but the execution could be better.
This movie not only looks like massive shit but all the actors look like retards too
it is not so much the historical inaccuracy here rather how plain ridiculous they look
>>18462273There's more evidence for blacks existing among the Myceneans and Minoans then there is about finno-angloids like Shart Damon being among the ancient Greeks
Why does it feel like there is some sort of mandate in the film industry that dictates that colors and historically accurate costumes are strictly prohibited from ever being depicted? Do filmmakers just think they're above looking at some osprey book for reference?
>>18462162A few months ago I saw a production of Oedipus on Broadway with Mark Strong in the title role. It had a setting in modern Greece with Oedipus as a politician. I didn't so much mind that but they made so many changes to the original play, such as removing the plague which is literally the inciting incident. Knowing the historical context in which the play was written, just after the plague of Athens, and the play's creeping sense of doom and tightening noose around Oedipus as each last hope that the prophecy has not borne out comes back negative, was reflecting the mood in Athens after the first year of the Peloponnesian war. Stripped of that what is the point of the play?
>>18462354the suitors
>>18462354
>>18462733people associate dark and gritty with realism, because color and optimism is associated with stuff for children.
Nolan is overrated, and this movie looks bad.>>18462748memes aside, no way>>18462354I really dont know. its been a long since i read Odysey (and even that was Gustav Schwab version) but nothing comes to mind
>>18462162It depends. If something is trying to present itself as accurate then I get a lot more anal about it. And regardless of whether or not something is presented as accurate, intention still matters. Someone who doesn't care about the period their work is depicting or, worse, someone who actively dislikes the period and is only depicting it in bad faith can only make garbage worthy of scorn. But if something isn't pretending it's accurate and the creators clearly think the period is cool, then I'm willing to overlook a lot of inaccuracies.
>>18462162inaccuracies like “they didn’t speak English in ancient Rome” or “those buttons didn’t exist in the 12th century” don’t bother me, stylish choices, like in 300 or A Knight’s Tale, are also ok. But if a movie is meant to be based on real history or an established story and ends up completely distorting it through bad casting, costumes and by inserting modern beliefs and sensibilities that don’t fit the period it totally breaks immersion.
