Rob Roy

**thescot** · 5th February 07, 10:39 AM

Originally Posted by Panache

. . .I always thought that King Leonidas and the battle of Thermopylae was pretty interesting and stirring. I know very few people who have an inkling of what I'm talking about if I mentioned it as an example of how a few people can make a huge difference against overwhelming odds.

. . .

Now that's just crazy talk! Hush yourself.

Three Hundred Spartans with Richard Egan, I believe. Saw the movie when I was a bout 9 or so and went out to find something in the library about it.

Very good point, Panache. I agree, a movie will at least give me a place to start with the students.

**McClef** · 5th February 07, 10:40 AM

There has been at least one movie about Leonidas and his "300 Spartans" already.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055719/

The title alone is misleading as to the numbers as there were 700 Thespians and 7000 other Greeks involved!

**Panache** · 5th February 07, 10:43 AM

Originally Posted by McClef

There has been at least movie about Leonidas and his "300 Spartans" already.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0055719/

Bye gents!

Cheers

Says Panache who is heading off to his Netflix account.

**macwilkin** · 5th February 07, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by auld argonian

Said it before, say it again:

Those who do not study history are condemned to learning it from Hollywood.

Originally Posted by Fearnest

You mean the USS Nimitz didn't REALLY time-warp back to the Battle of Midway??? GASP!

(Removing tongue from cheek.)

Having taught at college too, I'll agree - Hollywood can make life more difficult for us to get the "accurate" information out. But it can also be a great tool in introducing learners to new subjects/areas, and motivate them to dig in and do the research to find out the truth!

Originally Posted by Panache

One can hope that a movie inspires people to go out and learn more about history. When I've mentioned Dunkirk to people I tend to get blank looks.
Henry V and St. Crispin's Day? Ditto. Anything that's gets people to go out and "READ A BOOK" is a good thing. I think I'd rather have people have some idea (even if a bit distorted) than no clue.

I have a quote on my syllabus that says:

History repeats itself because no one was listening the first time.
-- Anonymous

Which is not only true for history, but also for my class!

Seriously, though, I do agree that movies do provide a "springboard" for some in to the realm of more "serious" history -- the problem comes with those who are not curious about the "real" story and take the movie for face value.

Now, don't get me wrong -- I enjoy a good ol' movie anyday -- but sometimes I do get frustrated. I do remember reading an interesting article about the volcano thriller Dante's Peak a while ago by a noted volcanologist who said that while the movie had some problems (lava flows are found in Pacific volcanos, not the Mt. St. Helens type), overall, it presented a fairly decent picture of what a volcanologist does. I try to take the middle ground as much as possible, even when I am cleaning up the mess!

T.

**Fearnest** · 5th February 07, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by cajunscot

I have a quote on my syllabus that says:

History repeats itself because no one was listening the first time.
-- Anonymous

Which is not only true for history, but also for my class!

Sounds like me and several variations of undergraduate math...

**ccga3359** · 5th February 07, 02:09 PM

Originally Posted by Riverkilt

Hmmm, I also fenced in college.

I'm so into fencing that I got my PhD (Post-hole Digger).

Sorry Ron, I had to quote somebody!

**SnakeEyes** · 5th February 07, 02:25 PM

Wow, quite a lot of activity on this thread since I went to bed. I'm inclined to agree with those of you who said there's no point in picking apart a movie. Sometimes you just have to remember it's a movie, and sit back and enjoy it. But sometimes, I can't help but nitpick. For instance, we watched Braveheart for the millionth time the other night...

"You know, the battle of Stirling was actually fought on and around a bridge..."

"Yeah, you told us last time."

**MacWage** · 5th February 07, 02:26 PM

I am in an odd situation on the history/hollywood battle.
You see, I am trained in history.
My family is REALLY into movies. My uncle is the "Director of Photography William Wages" and 2 cousins and brother went to film school. My father is a HUGE film buff.
So, I am in the middle and both sides of the debate.

I appreciate and applaud a good historical work.
However, I am able to understand SOME changes when the history is complex and convoluted. It accounts more as simplification, rather than random changes.
That said, what REALLY gets my "gut" is STUPID changes that either add unnecessary changes or complexities or either misrepresent a person or fact or are simply IRRITATING (history buffs know EXACTLY what I am talking about)
I also separate the story, the "look and feel," surrounding history/politics, and the like.

Rob Roy is VERY GOOD for looks, design, costume, and period history.
As for the precise events of Robert MacGregor (Campbell)'s life, I simply don't know enough about the truth. The movie is reflective of many of the popular legends of Rob Roy.

Braveheart is an excellent epic (which I love from a cinematic standpoint), BUT misrepresents the costumes, history (battles, cities, culture, and more), persons (like Robert Bruce), and more. THESE drives me NUTS!!!!
(I feel like Two-Face, torn between 2 sides on this movie.)
My rewritten ending:
(picking up at death of Wallace)
Scene-> Bruce tells of father
Scene-> Bruce-> "You have bled with Wallace, bleed with me"
Visuals: montage of battles and ambuses
"Robert the Bruce took up Wallace's sword and lead the army. For 7 more long hard years, the Scots fought for their freedom. In the year 1314, the armies of Edward II and The Bruce met on the fields of Bannockburn, just miles from the Bridge of Stirling. Here, in the spirit of Wallace, the Scots won their freedom. (continue as written in the end of Braveheart)

To me THAT would BOTH be more accurate AND more powerful. PLUS, it gives the Bruce his due (rather than charging an unsuspecting army, in a TOTAL slam of the ACTUAL battle)
Of course, what else would you suspect when Randal Wallace (writer of Braveheart) says "I never let the facts get in the way of a good story" (now sometimes rephrased as "way of the truth").

Back to topic-> Me Like Rob Roy!!!!!

**thescot** · 5th February 07, 02:32 PM

Amen, McWage. Tell it!

The real historical error in Braveheart had to do with his "affair" with the wife of Edward II! I think she was just a little girl at the time of the events depicted in the movie. My students, no doubt, believe that the next heir to the English throne was, in fact, the shild of Wallace.

As for me, give me Casablanca anyday.

**SnakeEyes** · 5th February 07, 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by thescot

...The real historical error in Braveheart had to do with his "affair" with the wife of Edward II! I think she was just a little girl at the time of the events depicted in the movie. My students, no doubt, believe that the next heir to the English throne was, in fact, the shild of Wallace...

Apparently she didn't even marry Edward II until something like 9 years after Wallace was dead!