12 Years A Slave

GOB wrote:

Maybe you could provide an example of a good, accurate historical cinema movie Tis?

Not quite shore what historical accuracy has got to do with it Gobster, it's a filum.

GOB wrote:

Maybe you could provide an example of a good, accurate historical cinema movie Tis?

How about "The Battle of Britain"

pepsipete wrote:

GOB wrote:

Maybe you could provide an example of a good, accurate historical cinema movie Tis?

How about "The Battle of Britain"

Did you see the recent documentary on TV about that Pete, regarding its historical accuracy?

Lord Tisdale wrote:

GOB wrote:

Maybe you could provide an example of a good, accurate historical cinema movie Tis?

Not quite shore what historical accuracy has got to do with it Gobster, it's a filum.

No, I was just curious if you had one.

GOB wrote:

pepsipete wrote:

GOB wrote:

Maybe you could provide an example of a good, accurate historical cinema movie Tis?

How about "The Battle of Britain"

Did you see the recent documentary on TV about that Pete, regarding its historical accuracy?

No, what was the verdict?

AstiSpumante wrote:

I found it very well produced/directed/acted and pretty emotional. As for it's historical accuracy, Does Hollywood do historical accuracy? overall though a good piece of cinema that i would recommend to others.

The thing is the film was all those things AND accurate.

Tisdale is just criticising for the sake of trying to appear critical, when he doesn't have the first clue what he is talking about.

The facts of the story are documented in the diary of Solomon Northup, who wrote the book and lectured on slavery after his release. The book actually titled, '12 years a slave'.

And there is nothing wrong with the screen play. The acting is terrific, and the story is vibrant.

Anyone would think it was Braveheart with the stupid points about jazzed up Hollywood screenplays and factual historical inaccuracies, or 'gratuitous' violence. As if slave plantations were in reality, lovely little places to live, or as if Tis prefers to watch really historically accurate films like Django Unchained.

Just admit you're a berk Tis. You don't have the capacity to carry through your act as this intellectual critic, who has nothing of any real substance to criticise it for.

ejh wrote:

AstiSpumante wrote:

I found it very well produced/directed/acted and pretty emotional. As for it's historical accuracy, Does Hollywood do historical accuracy? overall though a good piece of cinema that i would recommend to others.

The thing is the film was all those things AND accurate.

I do so love the HUA attitude of the pseudo intellectual, you show your own inadequacy by stating this to be a fact when it it is impossible to know if it is historically accurate, it may well follow the text of someone's diary from back in the day, that doesn't necessarily make it a fair and reasonable account of what actually happened.


It's a filum dopey, it may be rigidly based on one account, that don't make it true.


Therein Gobster lies the major problem with ascribing "historical accuracy" to anything including filum, unless you wuz there you can never be certain, how many times have you read a match report written by someone who may well have been sat next to you at a game yet are unable to recognise the game you have watched from said recantation? My dad was on the Achillies at the Battle of the River Plate yet was unable to confirm the accuracy of the filum of that name, other than to say that from his perspective it was pretty scary.

Perceived realism does not denote accuracy, Saving Private Brian would seem to be a step up in 'realism' from The Longest Day but I used to drink with an old boy who was in the first wave, him and his mates strolled off the LC and into town unopposed, which is the more accurate representation of events?

I like war filums me, I should like to think the general ethos espoused by film makers, ie. Allies good, Germans bad, was pretty much the case, but I doubt that it was, history as always being the preserve of the victors.

I'm shore ejh thinks Kirk Douglas and Tony Curtis really were Vikings which would make that particular piece of Hollywood pap "historically accurate", me, I'm not shore it matters, a filum is not a lecture with some jumped up knobber from the educational establishment asking questions about after, it's not art, it's not a method for adapting public opinion, it is in fact entertainment, 12 Hours a Slave is only entertainment for people who take themselves far too seriously and voyeurs of a sado masochistic bent, as always, of course, in my very humbly expressed opinion.

pepsipete wrote:

GOB wrote:

pepsipete wrote:

GOB wrote:

Maybe you could provide an example of a good, accurate historical cinema movie Tis?

How about "The Battle of Britain"

Did you see the recent documentary on TV about that Pete, regarding its historical accuracy?

No, what was the verdict?

More importantly, did Richard Burton get back alive?

Lord Tisdale wrote:

Saving Private Brian would seem to be a step up in 'realism' from The Longest Day but I used to drink with an old boy who was in the first wave, him and his mates strolled off the LC and into town unopposed, which is the more accurate representation of events?

Whether your old boy was landed on one of the Canadian/British beaches or is an Amercian who landed on Utah or Omaha the movie SPR concerned those that landed on the notorious Dog-Green sector of Omaha beach which, on the day, was a concentrated killing ground. Which would be the more exciting film "Hundreds die and many are wounded as brave troops face concentrated fire to liberate Europe" or "Man walks up beach and into town"?

There are many other documented occurrences which involved both intense combat and high casualities and, basically, an unopposed "stroll in the park". Neither could be said to be fully representative of the entire Normandy landings.

Movies are movies. They're there to tell a story. Complain when it's a documentary if you think it's inaccurrate.

No, I have not seen 12 Years A Slave.

Lord Tisdale wrote:

pepsipete wrote:

GOB wrote:

pepsipete wrote:

GOB wrote:

Maybe you could provide an example of a good, accurate historical cinema movie Tis?

How about "The Battle of Britain"

Did you see the recent documentary on TV about that Pete, regarding its historical accuracy?

No, what was the verdict?

More importantly, did Richard Burton get back alive?

I think you're thinking of "The Longest Day" when he was shot down over occupied France. Burton wasn't in "Battle of Britain".

LOL - imagine Tis debating Robocop.


Well yes, I knew a chap who was shot to bits by a band of ne'er do wells in Honiton. He was rebuilt by an evil corporation and became, essentially, part man, part machine. He didn't solve the rabid crimewave in East Devon, he went off sick with stress! His name was Robert Copp and did I tell you the time I was shrunk inside a submarine and performed nano surgery on a man with a cyst............

Tis, stfu m8

bjorn_yesterday wrote:

I think you're thinking of "The Longest Day" when he was shot down over occupied France. Burton wasn't in "Battle of Britain".

I sit corrected, he must be about the only actor of that generation who wasn't in the BoB though.

hairy j wrote:

LOL - imagine Tis debating Robocop.

Well this will of course depend upon whether someone posts about it on the designated thread or, like the fook'tard ejh, on a forum designed to encourage banter.

Robocop is one of my all time favourite filums, the new'un will have to be a triumph of substance over style to stand comparison, stay rapt Hairy, I will let you know after I have watched it tomorrow.

Sensible let me watch Robocop on video when I was 11. Outrageous.

Lord Tisdale wrote:

......

I sit corrected, he must be about the only actor of that generation who wasn't in the BoB though.

Sean Connery? Audrey Hepburn?

Can't wait for the sequel-"12 years an Exeter City fan". Now that would encapsulate human suffering of the most appalling kind.Probably wouldn't get past the censors thinking about it.

A good historical film that I was captivated by was Apocalypto. It's a brilliant film and it's a shame Mel Gibson went raving mental and was involved in that rant against Jews - he started out as an accomplished director with this film and The Passion of The Christ.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0472043/

Recent 'history' - look no further than Lord of War.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0399295/
The opening title scene is perfect - it's probably on Youtube.

I really didn't enjoy Pearl Harbour.

Greenskin wrote:

Can't wait for the sequel-"12 years an Exeter City fan". Now that would encapsulate human suffering of the most appalling kind.Probably wouldn't get past the censors thinking about it.

Try 50 years as a City fan, at least I survived long enough to experience four whole years as Deb'n's No.1.

knecht wrote:

Sean Connery? Audrey Hepburn?

Ah, Pushy.

Long time since I watched it, but wasn't Robocop set in Detroit (of the corporate future). I always wondered where Micheal Moore got his inspiration from. I'm discounting the GM and Flint, Michigan issues here obviously.

Steve.

pepsipete wrote:

GOB wrote:

pepsipete wrote:

GOB wrote:

Maybe you could provide an example of a good, accurate historical cinema movie Tis?

How about "The Battle of Britain"

Did you see the recent documentary on TV about that Pete, regarding its historical accuracy?

No, what was the verdict?

Here it is Pete, it's well worth watching...

Yep, Detroit.

Robocop is savagely and unashamedly satirical. It was a satire of the US economy at the time where you have OCP running the police force and gangsters hiding out in disused factories. The audio commentary on the special edition blu-ray is fascinating. Robocop the character is an allegory for Christ - he basically dies, is resurrected and then dies again for the World's sins - his 'robot self' becomes human again when he takes his helmet off and becomes Murphy once more. It's got guns and explosions galore but it's quite a deep film. He even walks on water at one point too.

Robocop and Star Ship Troopers are awesome films.

Robocop 2 and 3 were really horrible films though. The remake is getting panned by the critics and people I know who've seen it were very much underwhelmed.

Dredd last year was probably the closest we've had to a true Robocop successor - the fact is, you can't make an 18 cert film these days like Robocop and make any real money.

Not seen the Robocop sequels. On a similar note, I haven't seen the most recent Judge Dredd, but they stopped me from getting into the Cape Town stadium because they were filming there. Saw lots of jazzed up dredd style vehicles, but was p'd off about not getting in the stadium.

Steve

Don't watch Robocop 2 or 3 - they're seriously awful.

Dredd's amazing. I loved the comics when I was a kid and they're too surreal to translate to film but the film was really close in tone - and the violence, glorious violence.