Anonymous: Roland Emmerich Peddles Crackpot History

[dudalb]

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1521197/

Wow.His "History" is just as accurate as his "Science" in Day after Tommorow and 2012.

The discussion forum at the IMDB site is something else. A prime example of Conspiracy kook thinking. It's like they gave up on 9/11 truth and adapting the "Shakespeare did not write Shakespeare" nonsense.

 

[Verde]

The discussion forum at the IMDB site is something else. A prime example of Conspiracy kook thinking. It's like they gave up on 9/11 truth and adapting the "Shakespeare did not write Shakespeare" nonsense.

You say that like it's a bad thing.
Can we please scatter little things around the hills and have the kooks follow them, wherever they may?

V.

ps: I really enjoyed 'Independence Day'. Utter nonsense, of course, but I found it hilarious. His later works, not so much.

 

[Cleon]

Wow. All the plot, storytelling, and acting of an Emmerich film, but without the fun bits? Where do I sign up?

 

[dudalb]

Wow. All the plot, storytelling, and acting of an Emmerich film, but without the fun bits? Where do I sign up?

Yeah,all the stupidity and wild inaccuracy of his disaster epics, but without the cool SFX effects to make it worth sitting through.
A Shakesperean quote is appropritate here:
"Much sound and fury, signifying nothing".

Chtulhu knows that Emmerich's previous expedition in history "The Patriot" was inaccurate enough (don't get me started on Mel Gibson and his Incredibly Semi Automatic Muzzle Loading Rifle) but "Anoymous" is gonna beat it on that basis.

Just read that a major plot line has Good Queen Bess having a illegitmate child by the Earl of Oxford....

 

[Pacal]

Yeah,all the stupidity and wild inaccuracy of his disaster epics, but without the cool SFX effects to make it worth sitting through.
A Shakesperean quote is appropritate here:
"Much sound and fury, signifying nothing".

Chtulhu knows that Emmerich's previous expedition in history "The Patriot" was inaccurate enough (don't get me started on Mel Gibson and his Incredibly Semi Automatic Muzzle Loading Rifle) but "Anoymous" is gonna beat it on that basis.

Just read that a major plot line has Good Queen Bess having a illegitmate child by the Earl of Oxford....

Oh my God!! Emmerich uses the totally insane Prince Tudor plot crap. I do hope he doesn't have the compounded incest crap.

As for The Patriot. Its portrayl of the British in the American South during the Revolutionary war was standard evil enemy cliche stuff that owed a lot to World War II films and attitudes about the Nazis but have little relevanhce to the Revolutionary war period. The burning of people in a church is a nice touch. It of course bears a stricking similarity to a Nazi atrocity in France in 1944, (The massacre at Ordeaur sur glace, in which hundreds of men woomen and children were burned alive in a church.) This atrocity was never commited by the British in the American South during the Revolutionary war. Oh and the only atrocity similar to this was a massacre of Deleware Indians by American Frontiermen in a church in 1782.

During the Revolutionary war American Patriots engage in repression of the pro-British, called Tories, by widespread violence and intimidation, which escalated once the British invaded the South in the later part of the Revolutionary war. In fact the Patriots were in the habit of routinely executing Tory prisoners as a matter of course. The British had a hard time preventing and often failed in efforts to prevent their Tory allies from retaliating. In the end the British decided that for each captured Tory executed they would hang one Patriot prisoner. The result was that the routine Patriot execution of Tory prisoners largely stopped.

It is of interest that many British Officers complained in their memoirs that they were too restrained, gentlemenly in their conduct of the war in the South and that the Patriots were little better than brutal, thugs who cheated and commited with approval myriad atrocities. Thus these Officers contended if they had waged war i a similar fasion, with little restraint they would have won. Thus they fought with one hand tied behind their back.

The Patriot of course is miles away from that perspective. It is in my opinion basically propaganda.

 

[Marduk]

Remove shakespeare from grave
surround corpse in twists of copper wire and place magnets in coffin
hook up generator
replace corpse in grave
wait for spin to start
free electricity

 

[Tomtomkent]

It is odd that "We know very little about Shakespear" tends too easily to become "Shakey can be whomever I choose." But this takes the biscuit for not even bothering to read what history actually happened at the time. Yes, there were attempted coups, assasinations and playwrites being caught up in the whole mess. But apparently "Christopher Marlowe" wouldn't sell as many tickets. Strangely if you wanted to tell ripping yarns about who may or may not have told a few of Shakeys tales, there are better stories that could be told: The question is not so much "what was his true identity," but more "who was this guy?" Even if you fall for the idea that there were better theories. Or rather theories that make better tales. Oh, and who wouldn't love to see a knock about comedy about Shakey taking other peoples plays, rewriting them with his own flair to make them successes, while effectively ripping off the others?

 

[Walter Ego]

Oh my God!! Emmerich uses the totally insane Prince Tudor plot crap. I do hope he doesn't have the compounded incest crap.

As for The Patriot. Its portrayl of the British in the American South during the Revolutionary war was standard evil enemy cliche stuff that owed a lot to World War II films and attitudes about the Nazis but have little relevanhce to the Revolutionary war period. The burning of people in a church is a nice touch. It of course bears a stricking similarity to a Nazi atrocity in France in 1944, (The massacre at Ordeaur sur glace, in which hundreds of men woomen and children were burned alive in a church.) This atrocity was never commited by the British in the American South during the Revolutionary war. Oh and the only atrocity similar to this was a massacre of Deleware Indians by American Frontiermen in a church in 1782.

During the Revolutionary war American Patriots engage in repression of the pro-British, called Tories, by widespread violence and intimidation, which escalated once the British invaded the South in the later part of the Revolutionary war. In fact the Patriots were in the habit of routinely executing Tory prisoners as a matter of course. The British had a hard time preventing and often failed in efforts to prevent their Tory allies from retaliating. In the end the British decided that for each captured Tory executed they would hang one Patriot prisoner. The result was that the routine Patriot execution of Tory prisoners largely stopped.

It is of interest that many British Officers complained in their memoirs that they were too restrained, gentlemenly in their conduct of the war in the South and that the Patriots were little better than brutal, thugs who cheated and commited with approval myriad atrocities. Thus these Officers contended if they had waged war i a similar fasion, with little restraint they would have won. Thus they fought with one hand tied behind their back.

The Patriot of course is miles away from that perspective. It is in my opinion basically propaganda.

While agreeing that The Partriot was a crock in terms of historical accuracy, what exactly are you saying here? American patriots in that war viewed the British as foreign force invading their country, a situation that doesn't always bring out the "gentleman" in residents of the invaded country. I get the feeling you'd feel better if the U.S. lost that war and was today a Commonwealth country like Canada.

 

[Tomtomkent]

While agreeing that The Partriot was a crock in terms of historical accuracy, what exactly are you saying here? American patriots in that war viewed the British as foreign force invading their country, a situation that doesn't always bring out the "gentleman" in residents of the invaded country. I get the feeling you'd feel better if the U.S. lost that war and was today a Commonwealth country like Canada.

What the Patriot missed was that the revolutionary war was not about invaders in the Americans turf. It was a civil war with the colonists ceding from the Empire. Both sides thought it was their country.

 

[Walter Ego]

What the Patriot missed was that the revolutionary war was not about invaders in the Americans turf. It was a civil war with the colonists ceding from the Empire. Both sides thought it was their country.

Well, King George may have tought it was a civil war but we had a different opinion on this side of the pond. The "colonists" did not consider themselves to be Englishmen. You Brits haven't figured that out yet? Most of the "colonists" were not even born in England.

(Sorry to be jingoist here but my mother's maiden name was Braddy... Irish, ya know... and my family has a "thing" about British imperialism.)

 

[Tomtomkent]

Well, King George may have tought it was a civil war but we had a different opinion on this side of the pond. The "colonists" did not consider themselves to be Englishmen. You Brits haven't figured that out yet? Most of the "colonists" were not even born in England.

(Sorry to be jingoist here but my mother's maiden name was Braddy... Irish, ya know... and my family has a "thing" about British imperialism.)

Except of course the ones who did. Like Benjamin Franklin who identified himself as such for the years he spent trying to prevent the war in London. At the risk of sounding patronising, but you are taking an overly simplistic reduction of fairly complex issues. For a start stating that the colonials pre-war would have considered themselves English instead of British. (And, if you hadn't noticed not all Irish families have the same thing about Imperialism, if they DID then history since William of Orange would have been a little more straightforward).

By simple semantics the colonies were breaking free of British rule, not being invaded. The most commonly cited cause was taxation, by the British representitives ALREADY THERE.

 

[Walter Ego]

Except of course the ones who did. Like Benjamin Franklin who identified himself as such for the years he spent trying to prevent the war in London. At the risk of sounding patronising, but you are taking an overly simplistic reduction of fairly complex issues. For a start stating that the colonials pre-war would have considered themselves English instead of British. (And, if you hadn't noticed not all Irish families have the same thing about Imperialism, if they DID then history since William of Orange would have been a little more straightforward).

By simple semantics the colonies were breaking free of British rule, not being invaded. The most commonly cited cause was taxation, by the British representitives ALREADY THERE.

Actually, you do sound patronising. However...

I don't care to get into long discussion about this right now. It's a beautiful day here in Savannah and I'm going to the Historic District and to drink some cappuccino and listen to my Le Carré audio book.

For the record, I'm not a right-wing republican or an Anglophobe. I like Brits... even the anti-American ones like Le Carré

 

[timhau]

Yeah,all the stupidity and wild inaccuracy of his disaster epics, but without the cool SFX effects to make it worth sitting through.
A Shakesperean quote is appropritate here:
"Much sound and fury, signifying nothing".

That's just the problem: there won't even be much sound and fury this time.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Actually, you do sound patronising. However...

I don't care to get into long discussion about this right now. It's a beautiful day here in Savannah and I'm going to the Historic District and to drink some cappuccino and listen to my Le Carré audio book.

For the record, I'm not a right-wing republican or an Anglophobe. I like Brits... even the anti-American ones like Le Carré

It wasn't meant to sound patronising at all, and if it did I appologise. I certainly wouldn't want anybody to think that having a differing opinion was a bad thing. But as far as I can tell it's not just the red coats (or former red coats depending which side they found themselves on) who treated the war as a civil war rather than an invasion. What we would now term the American forces were under no illusions, they were after all revolting, it was a war of revolution, not of defence against an invading force. Too often the subtleties of what was actually important to the majority of civillians and citizens are reduced away to the broader strokes of policy. Red Coats being evil invaders, Revolutionaries as defending heros, and Bennedict Arnold as a simple traitor are easier sells than the some of the shades of grey.

As for Le Carre: Hope it's the recent full cast adaptions radio4 have been running. And frankly, if it's An Honourable Schoolboy Smiley should have listened to the CIA and sent Spec-Ops to the freighter.

 

[Tomtomkent]

I don't want to drift the thread any further so if anybody wants to correct me on the Patriot issue, I have started another thread.

 

[not daSkeptic]

ZOMG! A fictional story that isn't accurate to real life?! No way!!!

 

[Cactus Wren]

Just read that a major plot line has Good Queen Bess having a illegitmate child by the Earl of Oxford....

Oh, it's better. According to one blogger, the movie has Elizabeth I having an illegitimate child by HER ILLEGITIMATE CHILD the 17th Earl of Oxford.

<brain croggles>

 

[Brainache]

Oh, it's better. According to one blogger, the movie has Elizabeth I having an illegitimate child by HER ILLEGITIMATE CHILD the 17th Earl of Oxford.

<brain croggles>

Obviously this means they will have to change the name of that US state from Virginia to Incest Slutland.

Mr Emmerich just never thinks these things through, does he?

 

[Lucian]

Oh, it's better. According to one blogger, the movie has Elizabeth I having an illegitimate child by HER ILLEGITIMATE CHILD the 17th Earl of Oxford.

<brain croggles>

Yes, that's Prince Tudor Theory 2 (Return of the Killer Prince Tudor Theory).

 

[Pacal]

While agreeing that The Partriot was a crock in terms of historical accuracy, what exactly are you saying here? American patriots in that war viewed the British as foreign force invading their country, a situation that doesn't always bring out the "gentleman" in residents of the invaded country. I get the feeling you'd feel better if the U.S. lost that war and was today a Commonwealth country like Canada.

I agree that that is how the American Patriots viewed it. I should point out that the American Tories, who were also mostly born in America did NOT so view it, and believed that the Patriots were engaged in unjustifiable rebellion. The American Tories were a substantial amount of the population and over 20,000 joined the British. This does not include a substantial number escaped slaves who joined the Brtish forces also. Oh and in one of the least credible episodes of American history various American leaders at the end of the war tried to get the British to return their "property" i.e., escaped slaves. The Brtish refused and instead evacuated them.

The American revolutionary War was not just a revolution and a war of independence it was also in much of America a civil war.