To Two Queen with Margot Robbie from Napoleon Ridley Scott: The most boring mistakes of historical movies

It is traditional to divide cinema into documentaries and art. It is understood that the person describes the facts and the latter about fiction. However, this does not work with genres such as historical and biographical dramas in which the audience expects the restoration of the events, life and morals of that period. The same fate understands the film adaptation of books in Old and Bible, whose reliability is still being discussed.

Even such films, which have become classic as the “17 Spring Moment ılanmış dismantled, did not escape criticism. “Pearl Harbor”, “Caligula”, “Troy”, “300 Spartalı”, “King says!” et al.

It is true to say that the audience does not notice many mistakes. For example, in the aviator, the hero Leonardo DiCaprio asks him to bring cookies with chocolate pieces that will appear in only the 30s. The most prominent blunder in the film “Brave Heart with chalk Gibson was that the Scots did not paint battle with blue paint on their faces – but such blunder did not break their hearts to the audience. Such errors are a matter of carelessness, not attention. However, directors are also people like other team members responsible for the originality of the period.

In which new historical films, we tell you that directors make annoying mistakes that cost careers.

The abiligation is “gladiator”. Ridley Scott (2000; 2024)

Ridley Scott’s talent gave us a “stranger” and “running along the knife, but historical paintings often caused astonishment. For the sake of entertainment, the director usually neglects the facts.

In 2000 “gladiators ,, there were many, especially the crow source, especially those who did not prevent him from receiving five“ Oscars .. At the beginning of the film, Maximus is called general, but there was no such title in ancient Rome – it only appeared in France in the 16th century. It would be right to turn him into a Legate, the Legion commander. Yes, and the legionaries were shot with arrows, not the cross waves (then no).

He signed the statues and busts of the rulers in ancient Rome – they had already rejected us. In the meantime, the Colosseum of that period was called Flavias’s amphitheater – MS VIII took its modern name in the century

MS II. The events emerge in the 18th century, so the sadness in horses is open anachronism (only in the 4th century AD). According to many sources, the commodity wore a beard, but in the film, the actor shaved smoothly. And the commodity did not drown Mark Aurelius – the plague died. The commodity promises his nephew to tell him the story of his ancestors, the ruler of a different dynasty, to tell the story of Claudius.

“Gladiator 2” starts with a mistake. General Acacia, the coastal city of the Numidians – over the nationality living in North Africa. Until then, the Roman Empire has long for a long time with the Mediterranean Lake, conquered all the coastal peoples and novelized. They did not need to conquer the castle of Numidia (Modern Algeria). The Greeks and Persians, but Trojan horses joined the Salamine War.

In ancient Rome, gladiators were valuable slaves, especially if the audience loved them, so the scene where he was killed by 10 gladiators – terrible waste a few minutes before the beginning of the war.

There could not be Roman Times newspapers (Johann Gutenberg invented pressure in the mid -15th century). Important ads were carved into stone signs (ACTA Diurna) or the heralders were used. There was no demand in the old artillery ammunition. The amphitheater of the collectionium was filled with water, but the sharks could not be there. The gladiators fought the rhinoceros, but they could not.

“Napoleon” is. Ridley Scott (2023)

With Joaquin Phoenix, “Napoleon” Ridley Scott’s career could be Opus magnum, but failure at the box office was waiting for failure. Critics and spectators noted in the wars in Austerlitz, Borodino and Waterloo, but many historical mistakes. Many of them appreciated to focus on their relationship with Napoleon’s wife Josephina (Vanessa Kirby).

Initially the most prominent error: Napoleon was not present in the execution of Maria Antoinette – ordered the troops at the other end of France. In addition, he never gay in a cavalry attack. But most importantly, the surprise caused weapons in Cheops’s pyramids – this is a pure fiction.

Critics also disturbed Bonaparte’s campaign to Italy, which made it a national hero, and its first defeat in Spain. Probably in a four -hour version that Ridley Scott promised to take part in Apple TV+.

Napoleon was not specified that he left Korsikan Elite – he appeared from the bottom in the film. Very little is said about the reforms used in modern justice.

“Jeanne Dubarri” is. Maven Le Bestko (2023)

The film about Louis XV’s favorite fascinates the story of love and does not contain terrible anachronism, but shows greatly the French court’s life and traditions. We have been shown to Jeanne Dubarri with a violation of social norms, which fascinates everyone around it. For example, when he returned to Monarch – in reality, he was removed from the palace for so long.

In costumes, hair styles are missing. In the makeup of the actors, there is too much bright net line that is unacceptable for the Rococo period. Although nobles bleach the skin, there should always be a blush on it.

He was scattered and a monotoned – the rules of court for the Burgons who have to wear a wig or a complex hairstyle. Although his favorite was actually wearing a free hairstyle, he looked completely different.

He wanted to show the director Dubarri a fascinating violation of the rules. However, under any circumstances, he could not walk around the favorite table.

During the meeting, hero Johnny Depp is 58 years old and Jeanne Dubarry is 25 years old. According to portraits, both of them looked dazzling, the actors could not be said about unfinished images. Since the emphasis was placed in the relationship of the courtyard and clothes, mistakes were played against the director.

“Two queens” is. Josie Rurk (2018)

The film is based on the historian John Gai, who summarized Maria Stuart and Elizabeth I in a novelized form, “Maria, Queen of Scotland”.

In fact, I have never been a meeting of Maria Stuart and Elizabeth, but this was the scene that became the peak of the film, which corresponds to the feminist agenda, as well as other things. For the same reason, many chapters are shown in the spirit of our time and is not possible in any way in the 16th century. For example, when the Queen of Scotland tells her favorite David Riccio, her favorite.

Although the dark -skinned people in the UK emerged at the time, they did not occupy the highly high tasks, especially ambassadors, except for a slave or servants.

Hero Margot Robbie has shown that Robbie hated men and suffered from infertility, but they did not say that it was syphilis in the film, because therefore wearing a wig and white face.

“King of England” is. David Misho (2019)

The main claim of the film’s critics was that the director never decided: William Shakespeare’s “Henry V”, full of mistakes in terms of history, makes a historical film or film adaptation.

The action took place at the beginning of the 15th century when the young king of England returned to the throne. In the film, varicose veins refused to say goodbye to the dying father, in fact IV. He agreed with Henry, but in the last years of his life there were disagreements about politics. Shakespeare made them enemies reflected in the film.

There was a confusion on the throne. Henry V’s brother Thomas Lancaster died and therefore the hero was the king. In fact, Henry V directed the country for nine years when his brother died.

In addition, it was shown that the war with France began because of the fact that the young ruler was broken, which was deported and weak: In fact, Henry V was sure of the legitimacy of the allegations on the French throne and went to his whole life. Moreover, he has achieved more than other predecessors who spoke as a purposeful person.

Dresssers also saved the emergence of the hero of Timothy Shalam, who received a serious injury in one of the wars – falls into his face and leaves an impressive scare for life. On the screen, there is no more than a scratch. It is not clear why Henry won in the Azenkur war that lasted almost an hour. The issue is not that the king fights them in the battlefield and thus raises his soul, but in the tactics. After the siege, the British army was several times lower than the French due to hunger and diseases. Henry avoided a direct collision as long as possible. Robert Patisson, who played Dawuphin, should never fight in the war – Charles d’Abre stood at the head of the feudal army.