Translating history onto screensis wrought with pitfalls. Ridley Scott, arguably the most seasoned, savvy director working today, should probably have anticipated the backlash for his depiction of the would-be supreme ruler of Europe blasting the nose off the Sphinx. It’s been common knowledge for centuries that the nose was never there during Napoleon Bonaparte’s excursion, not even at Napoleon’s birth, with illustrations proving the story as nothing but a myth originated by Francophobes or very bored Victorian Egyptologists.
Cue the firestorm of angry history buffs, upset at the lack of strict adherence to the facts. But here’s the thing, movies have to walk that line between truth and fantasy. Scots didn’t wear kilts in William Wallace’s time either. Does it really matter? We’re not here to nitpick costume designers, but rather the writers for badly (and often intentionally) mangling history. We should preserve our disdain for the movies that truly deserve it, you know, the ones that turn murderers into heroes, and propaganda into cherished fables.
Don’t think we’re here to ruin your favorite movies or characters, but while everyone is hassling Ridley Scott for a rather silly scene of little importance, let us put things in perspective. Before you get upset overJoaquin Phoenix’s Mr. Bonaparte, we should all take a second look at the following films.
The Best Propagandists Shillings Can Buy
Rousing speeches are the stuff of great legend, and fittingly, such is also the stuff of Oscar fantasies. Never mind their veracity — directors don’t either. Besides Napoleon, Hollywood’s favorite historical monarch isThe Virgin Queen. One of the more romantic tropes associated with Queen Elizabeth is her heroic address to troops as the imposing Spanish Armada anchored off the coast in 1588, primed to annihilate the Brits. TheElizabeth ITV series starring Helen Mirren came complete with stirring music, galloping on a battlefield as she won her troops' respect. Likewise, Cate Blanchett cemented her career thanks to the speech inElizabeth: The Golden Age. The moment was also immortalized inThe Virgin Queen(2005).
Historians now tend to agree that her most famous “heart and stomach” line was added in later by sycophants asa propaganda tactic, beefing up her pep talk. Academics still don’t know if the speech itself took place at all, but if it did, it was after the climactic battle that dispersed the Spanish Armada, not prior. That is to say, it was completely anti-climactic.
That’s not the bad part, or, well, the worst part. Heralded as one of the most inspiring moments of England’s long history, the speech marks one of the most disgraceful events in English history, not its peak of gallantry. The sailors and soldiers who fought off the Armada were left unpaid. Ultimately, more died after the war of disease and lack of food, called traitors when they demanded their back pay, and were denigrated by the elites that took all the glory, based on historian Lucy Worsley’s research.
The battle was declared a victory and the army was sent home less because of military practicality as much as simple financial circumstances; the treasury didn’t want to lose any more money on pesky things like back wages or bread. But, hey, at least the directors of those movies got the bright red wig part correct. Close enough, right?
Che Guevara for the PG-13 Demographic
While Napoleon was rendered one-dimensional to save runtime,director Steven Soderberghgutted his subject’s life story because he had to avoid moviegoers throwing their popcorn at the screen and walking out in disgust. Soderbergh’sChe, a sprawling two-parter from the late 2000s, is a stunning-looking yet astoundingly vapid examination into the life of the photogenic Argentine-rebel-turned-martyr Che Guevara.
The Motorcycle Diaries, focusing on his early years, also didn’t dwell on his undeniable racism, which modern defenders dismiss as harmless youthful ranting from a spoiled rich kid. When not posing for cameras, Guevara ran prison camps where prisoners, the unfortunate victims of the victorious communists, were tortured and executed without a fair trial, the Argentine earning the title of “Butcher of La Cabana.” The kids were spared, only forced to endure mock executions. What a guy.
Far from a brilliant thinker or tactician, he failed to export the revolution abroad, while destroying the economy domestically through blind incompetence after accidentally getting hired as the head of the national bank, his life sounding more and more like a parody than a tragedy. A radical thinker he was not, his policies when coming to power revealed him as a paranoid reactionary, banning jazz, barring dissent, and repressing any non-conformist that offended him, including artists, religious minorities, and gay people.
Related:10 Historical Inaccuracies in Ridley Scott’s Napoleon
Soderbergh had four hours. The fact he didn’t put in the details is clearly about sanitizing a figure, not clumsy editing. That’s exactly why you make a two-part biographic epic, to capture the full breadth of a complex figure. Che wasn’t a nice guy, though he is regularly celebrated, even by musicians outside of Cuba, to the great annoyance of everyone who suffered within.
The Woman King: History Disneyfied
One of the more perplexing historical epics is Gina Prince-Bythewood’s 2022 filmThe Woman King.The crew and supporters tried to wave the whole slavery controversy away as if enslaving people wasn’t really a big deal. Ironically, in a movie marketing itself for advocating representation, it was condemned for misrepresenting the motives and political ideologies of its heroes, an empire that got rich off the slave trade.
The issue in dispute not being the existence of female warriors, but the morality of those fighting in the name of their all-powerful king. The historical figure of the Dahomey king, Ghezo, played by John Boyega, is not deeply explored for a reason. His entire identity and power were fueled by slavery, which he took pride in. His female soldiers didn’t just defend the kingdom but actively sought out new prisoners to be used as human sacrifices.
Related:Most Historically Accurate Depictions of Warlords in Movies and TV
One of the villains of the story, a Brazilian-Portuguese slave trader named Santo Ferreira seems to be modeled on a real person named Francisco Félix de Sousa. Sousa, in reality, was the trusted counselor and diplomat for Ghezo and helped him take power, not plotting against him. As satisfying as his death is in the film, in real life, Sousa was respected for a century after his death. The movie is simply wish fulfillment.
Ghezo isn’t a hero, he is a villain. The legacy of the Dahomey, like every empire in history, comes complete with some highs, but also some dismal lows, as recorded by survivors of their incessant, sadistic sieges for human treasure. Lupita Nyong’o was honest enough to address the issue, hinting that she found playing a role glorifying the Dahomey empire and the female army of slavers very uncomfortable, turning down a role in the film.
Unfortunately, historical epics are too often defined by what they omit, not what they get correct. Of all genres, biopics might be the most treacherous as history (both large details and minutiae) means so much to people.
