From: Glasgow, Scotland
Then there are movies - well intentioned - that exaggerate for dramatic effect and, in so doing, lose credibility among those of us who know the real stories (but maybe not the general populace). Hacksaw Ridge and We were Soldiers Once come to mind.
Therein lies the rub.
Movies are not being made for the AE audience. They are being produced for the general public without an in-depth understanding of events.
I'd also disagree that any historically themed film has to be a slavish reproduction of fact - the purpose of a film is to tell a story.
That differs from a documentary that seeks to communicate facts. I feel that AE forumites would do well to know the difference.
Nobody blasts Shakespeare as he got the politics of England during the War of the Roses wrong, do they?
Yeah, Titanic, if that were a historical war film, then it would have been a new kind of bad.
Although, what would I know. I haven't actually seen the film.
Its obviously not a war film (and if it were that would indeed be a new kind of bad ) , but it is a film about an historical event - Canoerebel said 'history is history' and did not limit this to military history. You say you haven't seen it - lucky you, you should keep it that way - aside from old whatsherface getting her norks out, the film has no redeeming quality whatsoever from an historical perspective.... well I suppose on reflection they got the name of the ship right and gave her four stacks so that was nice......
Amusingly enough, James Cameron made a significant effort after diving the wreck (and gaining an appreciation for the human aspect of the story) to get the story as close to the truth as possible, and even to this day continues to make minor corrections on inaccuracies (see recent documentary he made about the break-up).
Given that everything that happens during (SPOILERS!) the sinking section of the movie has basis in either fact or testimony, Titanicis probably one of the most factually accurate movies based on a historical event.