Film: Late Call

[Martin Benjamin]

Apologies for keeping this thread off the topic of "Last Call", but in terms of mainstream films and distortion of history, Braveheart must be a serious contender. I mention this purely for the delight of being able to mention John O'Farrell's witticism, when he wrote that the film couldn’t have been more historically inaccurate, even if a plasticine dog had been added to the cast and the film retitled "William Wallace and Gromit".

[MJMcCready]

You have to determine what counts as fiction and fact to say such things. The lines between both are rather blurred and its been that way for a long time. Charles Dickens was exceptionally gifted at drawing those two closer together. If he were alive today and into documentary making, he'd have a field day. If mainstream media appears someone nauseating, why don't you watch documentaries instead. I recently watched this first for the first time in a good few years and found it very engaging.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wzrsQJCpP-w&t=944s

[JustinHorton]

Apologies for keeping this thread off the topic of "Last Call", but in terms of mainstream films and distortion of history, Braveheart must be a serious contender.

How would it stack up against Birth Of A Nation, say

[John McKenna]

"Birth of a Nation"?

For a start that's a misnomer at best.

It is about the rebirth of a nation that had already been born, in 1776, in pain and rivers of blood after a long period of equally painful and bloody gestation.

[Matt Mackenzie]

Apologies for keeping this thread off the topic of "Last Call", but in terms of mainstream films and distortion of history, Braveheart must be a serious contender.

How would it stack up against Birth Of A Nation, say

Not much to choose between them, I would have thought.

I quite like Braveheart as a film tbh, just don't treat it as the unvarnished historical truth (as at least some SNP supporters seem to do)

[JustinHorton]

Apologies for keeping this thread off the topic of "Last Call", but in terms of mainstream films and distortion of history, Braveheart must be a serious contender.

How would it stack up against Birth Of A Nation, say

Not much to choose between them

I'd venture that a film about how the Ku Klux Klan saved America from black people might be a bit more damaging to the historical record than a fantasy about William Wallace

[Matt Bridgeman]

There’s a good quote in the recent Netflix movie, Mank;

‘You cannot capture a man’s entire life in two hours. All you can hope is you leave the impression of one.’

It’s really quite a decent movie by one of Hollywood’s best directors, David Fincher. It’s sort of a loose, stylish, throw back black and white biographical film of the screenwriter Herman Mankiewicz, played in Oscar winning form by Gary Oldman. The (controversial) premise being that Mank is as much responsible for how Citizen Kane turned out as Orson Welles. And Citizen Kane of course was it’s own impressionistic take on the businessman, William Randolph Hearst. These sort of reimaginings of historical figures tend to be much more entertaining than shooting for some kind of forensic accuracy, which probably would be a turn off for large sections of the audience.

[Matt Mackenzie]

How would it stack up against Birth Of A Nation, say

Not much to choose between them

I'd venture that a film about how the Ku Klux Klan saved America from black people might be a bit more damaging to the historical record than a fantasy about William Wallace

Oh yeah, the underlying message of Nation is rather more pernicious - no dispute there.

Was just commenting on their (non) relationship to actual reality.

[JustinHorton]

Sure but one reason I mention this is that if we're discussing historical inaccuracy in fiction, we're going to ask not only "does it matter" but why and how.

[John Sellen]

We seem to be straying considerably from the subject of chess

[Nick Grey]

Braveheart better than Highlander. Christopher Lambert was fantastic in the chess film Knight Moves. IMO Knight Moves was the most realistic film of how insane chess players can be.

[Matt Bridgeman]

At the end of the day this film is effectively a bomb that will be long forgotten about. If historical events and characters from the world of chess are to be portrayed in film they need that imaginative star dust that The Queens Gambit had in spades. Film makers don’t need to be straight-jacketed with having to follow every tiny accurate detail. Films like The Wolf of Wall Street and The Big Short technically had some real people and real events wound into their narratives, but also created something actually fresh and properly entertaining, and not something that is boring, cliche and seen it all before.

[John Sellen]

" that imaginative star dust that The Queens Gambit had in spades"
Agree totally with you Matt
I thought it was brilliant on so many levels and has been the best thing that has happened for ages in bringing chess to the notice of the general public

[JustinHorton]

Braveheart better than Highlander. Christopher Lambert was fantastic in the chess film Knight Moves. IMO Knight Moves was the most realistic film of how insane chess players can be.

Our man's opinion in 2009 was "definitely rubbish".

Night Moves is recommended in the comments, I'd like to see that.