News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on How Tom Hanks Became America's Historian in Chief. Parent comment

Re:How Tom Hanks Became America's Historian in Chief by pan69 on Wednesday March 10, 2010 @05:38AM (#1180606)
Uh? Where did you get that from? The Band of Brothers series is based on true stories from the men who fought in 101st. You even see the interviews with the guys now (10 years ago). Maybe some parts of it are romanticized but definitely based on true stories.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How Tom Hanks Became America's Historian in Chief by Tichy on Wednesday March 10, 2010 @07:08AM (#1180707)
Didn't know that. Even so it seems very unlikely that they simply filmed the 1:1 memories.

OK then: but Saving Private Ryan definitely was just fiction? That was mentioned in the article along with BoB.

The reality is that in the long run these movies will be what people think of as history (as in it will be the only history they know). I think that is slightly disturbing.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How Tom Hanks Became America's Historian in Chief by brc on Wednesday March 10, 2010 @07:39AM (#1180752)
History is always viewed through the lens of the person retelling it. Very few historical accounts are immune from the flourish of an author or historian eager to leave their view on the way things happened.

Strictly speaking, it doesn't matter if Saving Private Ryan was fiction, it depicts the reality of war quite well. The accuracy of dress, vehicles, weapons and command structures is enough to make it a useful film, even if the story is complete fiction.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How Tom Hanks Became America's Historian in Chief by balding_n_tired on Wednesday March 10, 2010 @03:38PM (#1181905)
Accuracy, perhaps, but Hollywood accuracy--it looks just the way things would have looked in 1944 if orthodontia had by then reached its perfection and the Wehrmacht and Rangers recruited based on looks.

Steven Spielberg has a terrific eye for detail, but I would argue the historic sense and insight of a grade-school kid playing GI in the back yard.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How Tom Hanks Became America's Historian in Chief by Tichy on Wednesday March 10, 2010 @07:56AM (#1180784)
Useful, yes - but few people will watch it that way. Nobody goes to see that movie just to see a realistically looking uniform.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How Tom Hanks Became America's Historian in Chief by brc on Thursday March 11, 2010 @01:35AM (#1183203)
True, but they will subconciously absorb the level of detail, such that when watching another, poor recreation of WW2 that they will see it as such.

I'm looking at this through the prism of any improvement in historical sense is better than nothing for the average joe, as long it isn't off by orders of magnitude.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How Tom Hanks Became America's Historian in Chief by Tichy on Thursday March 11, 2010 @06:52AM (#1183559)
It's hardly the accuracy of costumes that matters about history. What matters is motivations of people and reasons for stuff happening. Hollywood movies are especially bad at portraying that accurately.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:How Tom Hanks Became America's Historian in Chief by brc on Wednesday March 10, 2010 @07:39AM (#1180751)
History is always viewed through the lens of the person retelling it. Very few historical accounts are immune from the flourish of an author or historian eager to leave their view on the way things happened.

Strictly speaking, it doesn't matter if Saving Private Ryan was fiction, it depicts the reality of war quite well. The accuracy of dress, vehicles, weapons and command structures is enough to make it a useful film, even if the story is complete fiction.

[ Parent | on HN ]