Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Saving private ryan explanation
Saving private ryan history essay
Saving private ryan historical events
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Saving private ryan explanation
As it is commonly known, Hollywood tends to dramatize historical occurrences when it depicts events of the past. However, this does not mean that the movies they create are always historically inaccurate. Most of the time, the important details are kept and easy to relate to the events that actually took place.
One of the movies that stayed mostly true to its roots was “Hacksaw Ridge.” As it appears, details such as Desmond Doss bringing down injured soldiers through a rope off the ride as well as him kicking a grenade out of the way and being severely injured all were true, which is hard to swallow, but also a great form to show the brutality of war. Similarly, “Saving Private Ryan” also shows truth during its scenes, which include events such as having soldiers sinking in the ocean because
…show more content…
of the heaviness of the gear they carried.
In addition, “Alone in Berlin” gives off a chilling vibe when it reveals the events that brought the Hampel couple to send the postcards against Hitler. Personally, I highly appreciate knowing that there are several movies that portray the historical details as they are. Additionally, I understand that there are details added into the films in order to bring up the intensity of war, but sometimes these are taken a bit too far and drift from the initial point that was supposed to be shown due to the real story. For example, even though the movie “Red Tails” failed to show how Cuba Gooding Jr. and Terrence Howard were the ones the movie should’ve been about, but the directors made them play a secondary role in what should have been their story. Also, they failed to show how racism actually was quite prominent in this era. In reality, the Tuskegee Airmen were subjected to extremely cruel treatment, but the movie failed to capture the bigotry that darkened their time in history. “Pearl Harbor” made mistakes as well, for it focuses mostly in the artistic retelling instead
of the actual events that took place in Pearl Harbor. There were mistakes such as incorrectly timed events and inaccurate attacks throughout the movie, but that didn’t stop the movie from bringing people to the edge of their seats as they noticed the barbarity that was certainly a part of being involved in the war. All in all, movies aren’t merely created to show the true events. Instead, they are made to give the public an idea of what things were like during this time. However, some of these films do a pretty good job, and it’s impressive how much awareness they can bring to the public about events from the past.
Another accuracy in this movie was the concentration camps in this movie, they were portrayed very well. Just like history, immediately after arriving at a concentration camp, they were split up and divided by gender and age. As soon as they arrived people who the Nazis did not see fit to work were killed. Along with this people
...al events. Some events that happened in the film, didn't actually happen in history. Especially the whole romantic theme, though the scenes with romance helped develop the plot of the film, and to elaborate on the film's themes and message. Although the film seems to be mostly inaccurate, it still held some historical accuracy.
The movie Pearl Harbor was written based on the historic event that occurred in Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941. The movie has many inaccurate events that are misleading but overall the movie does a good job telling the historic event that occurred.
In today's day and age, it's rare to see famous historical events and societal disasters not be picked apart by film directors and then transformed into a box office hit. What these films do is put a visual perspective on these events, sometimes leaving viewers speculating if whatever was depicted is in fact entirely true. I have never felt that feeling more than after I finished watching Oliver Stone’s JFK.
Movies based on books are not always accurate relative to the plot of the book. In Fahrenheit 451 it can be said, there are some particular contrasts between the book and the movie. Despite the fact that the film emphasizes the subjects and premise of the book, there are numerous distinctions to differentiate. The motion picture Fahrenheit 451 is not accurate, taking into account the book's plot.
For example, the majority of the film was concerned with the key question of “Where did they come from?” In Jones’ book, we learn very early on that the people in question had in fact came from Africa, therefore nullifying any claims made towards them that they could be considered property. In the movie, we are kept in suspense of learning this truth all for the effect of building tension, to have this realization be the pivotal moment where it was clear who should win the case. With such heavy focus on this one element, the film neglected to expand on details of other factors playing a part in the court’s decision, such as the looming threat of civil war, international relations with Spain, and the push from President Van Buren who desired an outcome that would increase his odds of re-election. The film is also guilty in misrepresenting the way the case was handled in the Supreme Court. It is implied through the film that the words of John Quincy Adams alone swayed the judges into voting favorably against slavery, however as we learn in the book the case was really centered on the Atlantic Slave Trade instead of the issue of slavery within America. Spielberg’s inclusion of the fictional character Theodore Joadson also takes away from historical accuracy and diminishes the contributions of the abolitionist Lewis Tappan. Therefore it can be said that the advantage of reading the book over watching the film is that the book is less focused on tension building and more focused on providing details on the legal battle and the ramifications of the decision
It would be near insanity to say Letters from Iwo Jima constitutes an everyday war movie. Clint Eastwood not only created a film that sympathizes with the Japanese, but also acknowledges the fact that both the Japanese and Americans were wrong. The Japanese assumed Americans were cowardly fools and the Americans had been taught the Japanese were mindless imperial machines. These stereotypes are quickly cast aside as viewers of this movie acquaint themselves with Saigo and his friends. However, although this movie effectively accomplishes its goals, it still contains many inaccuracies. These errors eventually culminate to the point that the movie may seem sensationalized or even overly dramatized at points. More importantly, the cultural, geographical, and propagandized inaccuracies make it difficult to believe what Letters from Iwo Jima is trying to say; the Japanese fought even more bravely than the Americans despite what public opinion was.
One may ask why would directors and filmmakers leave out the facts of war and focus on the drama? After reading The Faces of Battle by John Keegan and reviewing war movies such as Saving Private Ryan, and Pearl Harbor, one can clearly see what makes the Hollywood version of war different from real life war. When you watch a movie about war you are given a plot to the movie, like in saving Ryan the plot of the movie was to find a soldier named James Frances Ryan which takes place in Germany during World War II.
Unlike the WWII era, the Vietnam War brought realism into literature and film. There were no heroic movies of men fighting in Vietnam. Men could no longer shoot fifty enemy combatants on top of a tank without being hurt. Instead, popular culture brought a realistic view of war, death, pain, and destruction. Author Tim O’Brien, like many war veterans, struggled with his Vietnam experience and expressed them through writing. Tim O’Brien exposed the truth behind war stories because he shows the difference between WWII romanticism and Vietnam realism.
Films are necessary in our time period because the human eye can articulate the message intended through sight allowing visual imagination to occur. In the book, world 2 by Max Brooks, he creates a character by the name Roy Elliot who was a former movie director. Roy Elliot manages to make a movie titled “Victory at Avalon: The Battle of the Five Colleges” and some how it goes viral. Similarly, Frank Capra’s film, “Why we Fight” expresses a sense of understanding the meaning of wars. Films do not inevitably portray truth because they display what the film director views as important and beneficial for people to know.
Hollywood war movies are commonly based around heroic and courageous actions. These are major characteristics in the movies Saving Private Ryan and Black Hawk Down. Although the film Black Hawk Down is based on an actual event, it is all about common soldiers conquering fear and hardship to save wounded allies, despite seeing the deaths of friends along the way. The story becomes personalized and revolves around a few individual soldiers who give examples of heroism. In the movie, one soldier returns to base injured and later chooses to return to the front line to help rescue his allies that are more gravely wounded than him. There are also multiple instan...
...ctual roles, or adding in exciting events that revise the storyline. These changes are beneficial to producers because they engage a large audience and generate massive profits. In contrast, they do not always have a positive effect on viewers. Although they are entertaining which is an important aspect of theatre culture, they also are often misguiding. Many spectators take movies at face value, without considering that they may not exactly qualify as primary source material. Even when an historical event is fabricated to teach or enhance a moral message, it still doesn’t compensate for bending the truth. Moviegoer’s may have a positive experience and gain some skewed historical perspective, perhaps better than what they knew before the movie, but they loose out on the truth and therefore, a genuine understanding of the historical event, and its significance.
The historical accuracy was brought into detail to keep the film fact based and precise by even having the characters personal lives accurate as well. Such as having the characters Joe and Shirley Wershba, being married and keeping it a secret because they were coworkers which was forbidden to marry or even date your coworkers in that time. Also it wasn’t allowed by the CBS company that they are working in. The director also showed accuracy in the characters lives by showing what really happened in the character Don Hollenbeck life, who was an associate and commentator with Edward R. Murrow in real life.
The movie was historically accurate mainly in the larger events; the director said 80% of this movie is factual. The Nero Decree by Hitler was factual, as well as the Monuments Men finding the artwork in the mine at Altaussee because of a dentist. While the causes of the deaths were not the same, it is true that only two Monuments Men died in combat (Donald Jeffries and Jean-Claude Clermont in the movie, Ronald Balfour and Captain Walter Huchthausen in history).
Further, the movie has failed to highlight the entire scenario of the Iraq invasion as it did not depict the ending of the war and the cease fire between Iraq and Kuwait which led to the closure of the war.