Using as your historical source not the ghastly Internet (TO REPEAT: DO NOT USE INTERNET HISTORICAL SOURCES), but one or more of the books cited below, or perhaps others (after clearing them with your instructor, of course), you will evaluate the degree of accuracy with which your chosen film depicts its “historical” material. (Your use of the Internet MUST NOT extend beyond the search for books and films, and you must not display any interest whatsoever in the opinions of film critics or other writers on cinematic subjects. It’s your opinion that counts!) Remember that this is not to be a “film review” in any conventional sense. Do not use a novel as a source in evaluating film – even if your chosen film was based on that novel.
Questions to consider include the following: Does the film follow the basic facts? If not, to what degree does it depart from them? If characters bear the names of real people, do these characters resemble their historical counterparts, in appearance (if known), personality and/or action? If the main characters are fictional, does the film seem accurate once we accept these characters’ existence and any interaction they may have with historical individuals? Does the film seem to accurately convey the “atmosphere” of the era in which it is set – and if so, how? – or at least manage to avoid seeming too “modern” in such matters as dialogue and the characters’ attitudes or actions? Is the historical narrative simplified so as to “streamline” the narrative, or simply to add drama? (You should be specific in explaining why something depicted in the film seems accurate or inaccurate, and never assume that your reader is familiar with the film under discussion.)
Most movies are of course intended primarily to entertain. But you should consider the possible reasons behind specific instances of inaccuracy or fiction – without being too dogmatic in your speculations or assertions! Do the film makers seem to fear that the audience might dislike the main character (or think him trivial, dull, or otherwise undesirable) if history is followed? Is historical reality simply too grim or disgusting to be acceptable entertainment? Does a film (such as a World War II film actually made during the war) have a “message” or propaganda purpose requiring history to be rewritten? Do the facts or historical background seem to have been “softened” to make things more cheerful or “uplifting”? What of the film’s depiction of violence, if any? (You should keep in mind the fact that for decades following the birth of “talkies” Hollywood was discouraged or prohibited from overly explicit depictions of violence as well as sex, and from showing crime or serious moral transgressions going unpunished. Novelist and World War II combat veteran James Jones, employed as a screenwriter for The Longest Day, was outraged when industry censors urged that the film’s depiction of costly Allied landings against heavily fortified, Nazi-defended beaches strive to avoid too many scenes of mass death and thus a “bloodbath” effect.)
Consider the film’s “viewpoint.” Who is the hero/heroine/protagonist/narrator? Does there seem a particular reason for choosing this apparent viewpoint, or selecting the characters which the film follows? Are certain important things (or people) left out of the film, and if so, why might this have happened? Might there be possible justification for certain inaccuracies or “reshaping” of the story -- from a dramatic or other angle? Can you argue that the “real story” (assuming we aren’t getting it in the existing movie) would actually make a better film? A worse film? Can a drama’s historical distortions, in some cases, help reveal a greater historical truth?
Please remember that in using a books or books as your historical “check” on the film, your intent is not to simply compare nonfiction book and dramatic (even if fact-based) film. The purpose of each is very different!
Don’t write this as though you were simply “filling in the numbers” by answering specific questions. Produce a smooth analytical essay, fitting things together into a coherent whole. Remember to explain why you are advocating a certain position or point of view on a subject – none of this pure “feelings, oh-oh-oh feelings” nonsense. However, since filmmakers do wish to provoke emotions in their viewers, you should, when relevant, point out how the film makers use dramatic incidents, music, lighting, and “movie magic” in order to achieve this end, being precise in your explanations.
As a general rule, use the PRESENT tense to describe film action and dialogue, reserving the PAST tense for historical reality.
This material may consist of step-by-step explanations on how to solve a problem or examples of proper writing, including the use of citations, references, bibliographies, and formatting. This material is made available for the sole purpose of studying and learning - misuse is strictly forbidden.Stephen Brumwell, in his book, White Devil: A True Story of War, Savagery and Vengeance in Colonial America, has attempted to provide a historical account of the destruction of the Abenaki village of Saint Francois in October, 1759. This historical account definitely makes a contribution to the literature on the Seven Year’s Wars. But, it seems the objective of the author is also to rescue the main character, major Roberts Rogers, regarded by some scholars as responsible for the brutal execution of the native community. For Brumwell, he is a man of action, and he gives an insight into Rogers personal bravery and heroism. This comes across in the movie, Northwest Passage (1940) as well. Although, the raid on Abenaki community is regarded as a painful episode in the history of the struggle against the French, but, the main hero of the book as well as the movie is Rogers. He was ordered by Sir General Jeffrey Amherst to lead an avenging expedition against the Indians associated with the French....