If you are looking for a history lesson, you might want to ignore these historically inaccurate movies. They act as kryptonite against history teachers, as they are full of fiction and other false information. While, yes, these kinds of movies are based on history — like wars, assassinations, and political figures — they tend to bend them for dramatic purposes.
Drama equals more box office sales, more attention from the press, and the spreading of false facts. This is the case with the most historically inaccurate movies, where drama paves the way, and history is left behind.
Historical movies, as the name gives out, are based somewhat on reality. History is a continuing thing with events that have shaped the whole world. But Hollywood doesn’t care. As long as there is a need for drama, history will change.
Romances, rivalries, and inflated battle scenes get inserted for that drama boost. But the most horrible crime that Hollywood movies based on history can make is to leave history in the back. History is sometimes as awesome as the most dramatic movies. The best example is Alexander the Great. He conquered a portion of the world in his younger years, yet the film based on him is nothing compared to the legacy he left behind.
If you are looking for historically accurate movies, this is not the list for you. In this list, we have decided to compile the movies that critics and historians have described as inaccurate. To save you some time, we have compiled a list of these period films in the list below. Like the drama in the movie? Upvote it. If you have any historical information to share, you can do so in the comments below.
This post may include affiliate links.
Bohemian Rhapsody
2018 | 2h 14m | Directed by Bryan Singer | IMDB: 7.9/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 60%
Starring Rami Malek, Lucy Boynton, and Gwilym Lee
Queen, the rock group that stole the Live Aid concert with their songs, was the focus of this movie. While more than half of the film is factually based, some parts are more fiction than reality. For example — Paul Prenter was not fired because of suggesting Mercury go solo. Instead, he got fired because of a party he threw at Mercury's house.
Don't care, still one of the best films ever. R.I.P Freddie. What a voice.
Pocahontas
1995 | 1h 21m | Directed by Mike Gabriel and Eric Goldberg | IMDB: 6.7 | Rotten Tomatoes: 54%
Starring Mel Gibson, Linda Hunt, and Christian Bale
Disney is not a stranger to shifting historical narratives in their animated movies. In this classic, Disney tries to portray the relationship between the Native American Pocahontas and the English colonist John Smith. While they seem to be the same age and kind-natured, Pocahontas (real name Matoaka) was ten years old, and Smith was an authoritative figure.
I did not like that movie. Sure, the music was good, but the entire theme was dumb. They turned Pocahontas, an actual cool person, into some dumb-struck lover. (Pls don't downvote just my opinion)
Cool Runnings
1993 | 1h 38m | Directed by Jon Turteltaub | IMDB: 7.0/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 76%
Starring John Candy, Leon, and Doug E. Doug
While this movie is based on the heartwarming journey of a Jamaican bobsleigh team in the 1988 Winter Olympics, some additional drama was still added. The biggest problem arises from the ending. In real life, instead of carrying their sled and receiving applause from the audience, they walked near it and only received some attention from the audience.
A Knight's Tale
2001 | 2h 12m | Directed by Brian Helgeland | IMDB: 6.9/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 59%
Starring Heath Ledger, Mark Addy, and Rufus Sewell
Some critics brutally attacked this movie for historical inaccuracy, but they are the minority. They usually have two reasons — the rock music and the praises that the winning knights get. Rock music might be the strangest reason, as the critics attack the inclusion of rock music in the soundtrack.
JFK
1991 | 3h 09m | Directed by Oliver Stone | IMDB: 8.0/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 84%
Starring Kevin Costner, Gary Oldman, and Jack Lemmon
The assassination of JFK allowed some people to create bizarre conspiracy theories that don't have the facts to stand on their feet. This movie jumps into the unproven theory that the CIA, FBI, the Mafia, and Secret Service worked together to assassinate their president. This theory is pushed through trials and tries to seem like a real solution to the case.
Something that's unknown can't be historically accurate. The movie was based on a book by University of Texas professor Jim Marrs, who was recognized as being the foremost researcher on JFK conspiracies. While I really don't care about JFK (the movie or the incident) I believe Marrs never jumped to any conclusions and in fact never made any conclusions. But people have taken his verified work and made their own.
Argo
2012 | 2h 00m | Directed by Ben Affleck | IMDB: 7.7/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 96%
Starring Ben Affleck, Bryan Cranston, and John Goodman
CIA and Hollywood mix perfectly together, but sometimes, the land of entertainment takes its artistic liberties. In the movie, the CIA takes a more central role while the Canadians sit in the backseat. In real life, the Canadian Caper operation was headed by the Canadians, with the help of the CIA and especially agent Tony Mendez.
Braveheart
1995 | 2h 58m | Directed by Mel Gibson | IMDB: 8.3/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 76%
Starring Mel Gibson, Sophie Marceau, and Patrick McGoohan
This movie goes all in on the fiction, basically reducing historical facts to nothing more than references. The writer of the script admitted that the movie was based not on historical facts, per se, but on an epic poem of the 15th century. Even then, artistic liberties got taken, and facts were mixed in with fiction beyond the point of recognition.
I took a History of the British Isles class in college and did my final paper on Braveheart's historical inaccuracies. My teacher, who was Scottish, was quite amused at the part where I pointed out that Mel Gibson had perfect, white teeth, which... probably wouldn't have been the case for the real William Wallace in the late 1200s. The point of my paper was that the movie was inaccurate af, but was still entertaining in its own right. That's actually how I view most "historical" movies... probably not 100% accurate, but can be enjoyed as long as one takes them at face value, and as long as one does not believe that they are the end-all-be-all truth. That's actually the same way I approach stories on the internet/AITA on Reddit... probably not true, but can be entertaining to read anyway XD
Apocalypto
2006 | 2h 19m | Directed by Mel Gibson | IMDB: 7.8/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 65%
Starring Gerardo Taracena, Raoul Max Trujillo, and Dalia Hernández
The movie failed to depict the Mayan culture, the focus of the story. It goes all in on the human sacrifices, an aspect that is commonly associated with the Aztec civilization and was rarely practiced by the Mayans. The events in the movie also play into the idea that the Mayans were savages and the Europeans were civilized people.
lol Mayans have a long bloody history of human sacrifice. They even had a sport where the losers were sacrificed. The movie took place in 1502, when the Mayan civilization was waning. Whoever wrote the above blurb is talking about a culture that hadn't existed for some time in 1502. People don't realize that Mayan civilization started around 1500 BCE. So by 1502 the Mayans had already had 3000 years of civilization. The comment is ridiculous, it's like someone crying about how any current movie made today doesn't accurately represent the Roman Empire in 1000 BCE. If you want to know more about Mayan sacrifice, and trust me, you do: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice_in_Maya_culture
Gladiator
2000 | 2h 35m | Directed by Ridley Scott | IMDB: 8.5/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 80%
Starring Russell Crowe, Joaquin Phoenix, and Connie Nielsen
The Roman Empire, while epic, was portrayed with fictional details in this movie. The first one is that Marcus Aurelius never gave a random commander the whole empire, as he entrusted the holdings to his son, Commodus. The other is how Commodus passed away, because in recorded history, he was strangled by his trainer.
300
2006 | 1h 57m | Directed by Zack Snyder | IMDB: 7.6/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 61%
Starring Gerard Butler, Lena Headey, and David Wenham
Sparta — they take the focal point in this movie by using 300 Spartans as a defending force against Xerxes' army. In reality, more like 5 to 6 thousand Greeks (all of them) stood against the Persians in the Battle of Thermopylae. Also, the defeat was a clear-cut defeat for the Greeks, as it now allowed Persians to attack their cities.
It was a defeat, but one that held up the Persians long enough to allow the Greek combines fleet to destroy the Persian one in the Aegean Sea, causing them to run low on supplies, which is what ended up starving out the campaign. And it was about 1500 not spartans w ith 300 spartans, and they had a stone wall they were defending in a narrow half mile long pass.
Dances With Wolves
1990 | 3h 01m | Directed by Kevin Costner | IMDB: 8.0/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 87%
Starring Kevin Costner, Mary McDonnell, and Graham Greene
Sometimes, movies inflate numbers on the antagonist side for that much-needed drama in the story. In this movie, the Sioux are seen as a small, heroic group of Indians, while the Pawnees are the evil and stereotypical villains. In reality, the roles were shifted, and the Sioux were the more powerful of the two, number-wise.
Elizabeth
1998 | 2h 04m | Directed by Shekhar Kapur | IMDB: 7.4/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 83%
Starring Cate Blanchett, Liz Giles, and Rod Culbertson
Focusing on the early days of Queen Elizabeth, a.k.a the Virgin Queen, this movie jumps back and forth with the events she partook in. But the biggest problem might be with the portrayal of the queen herself. In the movie, she had terrible judgment, a weak character, when in reality, she was a strong-minded queen.
Alexander
2004 | 2h 55m | Directed by Oliver Stone | IMDB: 5.6/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 16%
Starring Colin Farrell, Anthony Hopkins, and Rosario Dawson
There is nothing impossible for those who try, except when Hollywood tries to depict a historical Alexander the Great. This movie fails at multiple things, with the most visible one involving the Persians. In the movie, they look like a backwater nation, when in reality, it was advanced and cultured, and troops wore clothes.
Bonnie And Clyde
1967 | 1h 51m | Directed by Arthur Penn | IMDB: 7.7/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 90%
Starring Warren Beatty, Faye Dunaway, and Michael J. Pollard
Bonnie and Clyde, real-life criminals, are portrayed as this romantic couple, and this movie is to blame for it. The couple's life gets glorified, and other characters, based on real people, are shown to be more evil. For example, Frank Hamer, a decorated Texas Ranger, is shown to have been a criminal, but that is far from reality.
No, this movie isn't to blame for it. The media at the time is to blame for it, that's how they portrayed Bonnie and Clyde. That's what this movie is about. Kinda laughing at the idea that Hamer couldn't be a criminal because he was a decorated Texas Ranger. The two are nowhere near mutually exclusive.
Troy
2004 | 2h 43m | Directed by Wolfgang Petersen | IMDB: 7.3/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 53%
Starring Brad Pitt, Eric Bana, and Orlando Bloom
Homer might have added a touch of drama to this epic battle of the ancient world, but Hollywood dumped a truckload of it. In Homer’s story, The Trojan War took ten years of continuous conflict, while in the movie, it seems only a few years had passed. Also, Agamemnon, the villain that met his demise at the end, survived in the original story.
Pearl Harbor
2001 | 3h 03m | Directed by Michael Bay | IMDB: 6.2/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 24%
Starring Ben Affleck, Kate Beckinsale, and Josh Hartnett
When you know that a Japanese movie did a better job of capturing Pearl Harbor, then your film is inaccurate. Michael Bay paid more attention to the action and explosions and ignored historical facts. Even war veterans and surviving victims admitted that the movie was historically incorrect.
Patch Adams
1998 | 1h 55m | Directed by Tom Shadyac | IMDB: 6.8/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 21%
Starring Robin Williams, Daniel London, and Monica Potter
Incorrect and damaging, the story portrayed in this movie played too much into the comedy aspect, leaving out the truth behind. Even Hunter Doherty "Patch" Adams came out and said that the movie was factually incorrect. However, he did praise Robin Williams's portrayal and only hated the story that was presented in this movie.
The Sound Of Music
1965 | 2h 52m | Directed by Robert Wise | IMDB: 8.1/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 84%
Starring Julie Andrews, Christopher Plummer, and Eleanor Parker
Focusing on the story of the von Trapp family, this movie, like the stage musical before it, takes some artistic license. First of all, the family itself, while they did oppose Anschluss, didn’t live in a mansion. Georg von Trapp, in the movie, is said to be a captain, but in real life, he held the noble rank of "Ritter.”
The Other Boleyn Girl
2008 | 1h 55m | Directed by Justin Chadwick | IMDB: 6.7/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 43%
Starring Natalie Portman, Scarlett Johansson, and Eric Bana
Historians agree that this movie is full of little historical inaccuracies. The story focuses on two sisters, Mary and Anne, real-life figures who played supporting roles in the creation of the English Reformation. However, their portrayal is not exactly right. Mary, for example, was not as shy as she was portrayed in the movie.
The movie is based on a book that is literally historical FICTION. I don't think anyone was trying for historical accuracy.
The Imitation Game
2014 | 1h 54m | Directed by Morten Tyldum | IMDB: 8.0/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 90%
Starring Benedict Cumberbatch, Keira Knightley, and Matthew Goode
Alan Turing was one of the most influential people in British history, so it's a shame that the movie based on his life and work was about 50% factual. This movie portrays Turing as an extreme introvert, but this is far from the truth. Also, the story focuses on Turing cracking the enigma machine but shifts the facts in the worst way possible.
Shakespeare In Love
1998 | 2h 03m | Directed by John Madden | IMDB: 7.1/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 92%
Starring Gwyneth Paltrow, Joseph Fiennes, and Geoffrey Rush
William Shakespeare wrote some legendary drama works and then became a character in a drama about him. This movie has taken more than enough liberties. Besides getting their dates of events wrong (Virginia colony creation) and an inaccurate depiction of Queen Elizabeth, the movie lied when it showed how hard Romeo and Juliet's writing process was for Shakespeare.
The Bridge On The River Kwai
1957 | 2h 14m | Directed by David Lean | IMDB: 8.1/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 96%
Starring William Holden, Alec Guinness, and Jack Hawkins
Based on the construction of the Burma Railway, the movie is a fictional take on an event that cost thousands of civilian and allied soldiers' lives. However, the movie doesn’t showcase just how horrible the conditions truly were. Also, the film shows how willingly the British partook in the construction when the reality was far from this lie.
Newsies
1992 | 2h 01m | Directed by Kenny Ortega | IMDB: 6.9/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 39%
Starring Christian Bale, Bill Pullman, and Robert Duvall
If you are going to create a musical about the 1899 Newsboys New York strike, at least give more screen time to the leaders of it. The center of attention was the fictional character Jack "Cowboy" Kelly, and Kid Blink, the real-life leader, was a minor character in the story. Also, the strike lasted much longer in real life.
Jack was based on kid blink. Anyways its a great movie and you need to at least appreciate how gay it is. It also has great choreography and fun songs, respect it
The Last Samurai
2003 | 2h 34m | Directed by Edward Zwick | IMDB: 7.8/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 66%
Starring Tom Cruise, Ken Watanabe, and Billy Connolly
Critics and historians jumped to attack this movie from both sides — as a historical epic and just as a film. Critics criticized it for being racist, as Tom Cruise's character acts as a saving grace for the other Japanese people in the movie. Historians focused more on the Meiji modernization and the role samurai played in it.
A Beautiful Mind
2001 | 2h 15m | Directed by Ron Howard | IMDB: 8.2/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 74%
Starring Russell Crowe, Ed Harris, and Jennifer Connelly
While the movie is great, winning the Best Picture Oscar, the mathematician John Forbes Nash Jr. was portrayed inaccurately. John Nash was diagnosed with schizophrenia, but his symptoms weren’t as severe as shown in the movie. Also, the movie skipped over his other accomplishments, instead focusing on game theory and Nash Equilibrium.
U-571
2000 | 1h 56m | Directed by Jonathan Mostow | IMDB: 6.6/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 68%
Starring Matthew McConaughey, Bill Paxton, and Harvey Keitel
While the movie is based on the real U-571 submarine, the events portrayed are fictional. The movie credits the Americans for capturing a working Enigma Machine when the British had already done so several times before. Even the British Prime Minister took a stab at the movie for its poor portrayal of the events.
Amistad
1997 | 2h 35m | Directed by Steven Spielberg | IMDB: 7.3/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 78%
Starring Djimon Hounsou, Matthew McConaughey, and Anthony Hopkins
Even Steven Spielberg can go off track when it comes to historical moments. Displaying the revolt of the La Amistad slave ship, the movie underplayed the role it had in the abolitionist movement in the United States. Also, the racial relationship between people got downplayed and even softened.
Marie Antoinette
2006 | 2h 03m | Directed by Sofia Coppola | IMDB: 6.5/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 57%
Starring Kirsten Dunst, Jason Schwartzman, and Rip Torn
The French and American critics praised the movie in some areas but also criticized the historical context of the shown period. Firstly, the movie viewed the regime of the monarchy in a lighter tone. Secondly, historians and critics noted that the political context behind the queen was not fully explored.
In the behind the scenes and making of the movie it's explained this movie was purposely made to be unlike every other Marie Antoinette documentary/biography movie. It's a fresh perspective of how the directors imagined what Marie's life was like in her eyes as a young teenager. The costuming was inspired by French desserts, instead of the darker, muted colours portrayed in portraits.
Hamilton
2020 | 2h 40m | Directed by Thomas Kail | IMDB: 8.3/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 98%
Starring Lin-Manuel Miranda, Phillipa Soo, and Leslie Odom Jr.
Alexander Hamilton — the father of the United States economy — is incorrectly and inaccurately portrayed in this movie. While the musical shows Hamilton to be an abolitionist, in real life, he agreed with the 3/5 compromise in the US Constitution. Besides that, there are also a small number of incorrect facts that touch upon the relationships between characters.
He was an abolitionist and very involved in the Abolitionist Society (Which was co-founded by Burr before Hamilton took it over), he supported, like many abolitionists at the tiem of the 3/5 compromise, with giving congress the right ban on new slaves after 1807 (which they did) as a compromise. In fact in 1799 Hamilton, as a General in charge of a 100,000 milita army for President Adams begged adams for permission to take his army and move it away from the Canada border and use it to force all the slaves to be free. He was denied this, by Adams, who was a abolitionist but felt it would collapse the country. What is historically inaccurate is how they portray Burr, a advocate for black rights, Native rights, Women's right to property and voting, etc
Amadeus
1984 | 2h 40m | Directed by Milos Forman | IMDB: 8.4/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 89%
Starring F. Murray Abraham, Tom Hulce, and Elizabeth Berridge
Mozart and Antonio Salieri were two music giants of their time and quite the rivals behind the curtains. However, it wasn’t as prominent as shown in this movie. They respected each other but had a mutual rivalry with each other. Also, Salieri didn’t cause the downfall of Mozart or poison his drink.
King Arthur
2004 | 2h 06m | Directed by Antoine Fuqua | IMDB: 6.3/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 31%
Starring Clive Owen, Stephen Dillane, and Keira Knightley
Already based on a legend, this movie decides to place the conflict with the Romans not in the middle ages but in AD 467. But another problem comes from this — Romans had left England in 410. Besides the timeline mishap, the movie can incorrectly portray events and the characters that Arthur is involved with.
The Far Horizons
1955 | 1h 48m | Directed by Rudolph Maté | IMDB: 6.1/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 38%
Starring Fred MacMurray, Charlton Heston, and Donna Reed
When Times says your movie is one of the ten most misleading movies ever, you know you goofed up. The action is set after the United States had purchased the Louisiana Territory and sent Lewis and Clarke to explore it. The inaccuracy comes from the relationship between Sacagawea, played by a Caucasian actress, and William Clark.
They Died With Their Boots On
1941 | 2h 20m | Directed by Raoul Walsh | IMDB: 7.2/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 82%
Starring Errol Flynn, Olivia de Havilland, and Arthur Kennedy
Focusing on the journey of George Armstrong Custer, the movie forgot to account for the real historical events that happened. If talking about Custer himself, in real life, he was the one that proclaimed that gold was in black hills, thus starting a war with the Native Americans. Custer gets portrayed as the good guy to the Indians.
1) Custer was not the one who made the claims about gold. 2) He did not start the war, he was brought in by congress. 3) He was well liked by many of the smaller tribes who sided with the US against the larger tribes. In fact the Kaw, Arikara, Crow and others helped him against the Soiux led coalition. When he was killed the Arikara even held a memorial for him with the tribal chief giving him posthumous membership. These things were complex when you look into Native American politics between tribes. The main thing the breaking of the treaty with the Lakota that started the war, but he was not the one who broke it, he was the one sent in to solve it.
Battle Of The Bulge
1965 | 2h 47m | Directed by Ken Annakin | IMDB: 6.8/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 63%
Starring Henry Fonda, Robert Shaw, and Robert Ryan
Even Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied Commander during WW2, came out of retirement to bash this movie for historical inaccuracies. One of the essential elements that everyone likes to point out is the weather presented. Allied and German forces had to fight during a snowy season and had to do it with fog present — two major elements of this battle.
The Private Life Of Henry 8
1933 | 1h 37m | Directed by Alexander Korda | IMDB: 7.0/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 95%
Starring Charles Laughton, Robert Donat, and Franklin Dyall
The interwar period politics influenced this historical movie of Henry VIII. There are a lot of references to German-French relationships and the rivalry they have. Also, some historical figures are not even mentioned, while others get dramatized as the complete opposite of how they were in real life.
Foxcatcher
2014 | 2h 14m | Directed by Bennett Miller | IMDB: 7.0/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 87%
Starring Steve Carell, Channing Tatum, and Mark Ruffalo
Steve Carell might have captured the mannerisms of John du Pont, but sadly, some historical facts are incorrect. Yet, it shows false information and forgets to mention some important factors. The movie fictionalized the relationship between Mark and du Pont and didn't mention the impact Dave had in the sport of wrestling.
The Favourite
2018 | 1h 59m | Directed by Yorgos Lanthimos | IMDB: 7.5/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 93%
Starring Olivia Colman, Emma Stone, and Rachel Weisz
The movie is very accurate in that it shows how women can influence a monarch. But there are also a lot of events that can’t be answered with a 100% guarantee, like if Queen Anne was a lesbian. However, the movie also takes some artistic license, like when it shows Abigail poisoning Sarah.
The Patriot
2000 | 2h 45m | Directed by Roland Emmerich | IMDB: 7.2/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 62%
Starring Mel Gibson, Heath Ledger, and Joely Richardson
Roland Emmerich is known for his historical inaccuracies. This movie, which focuses on the American Revolutionary War, is not the exception, and the movie has taken a lighter look into the event. The film showcases the Americans as angels who can’t do anything bad while the British, especially William Tavington, are shown to be butchers.
Anonymous
2011 | 2h 10m | Directed by Roland Emmerich | IMDB: 6.8/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 46%
Starring Rhys Ifans, Vanessa Redgrave, and David Thewlis
Before the movie landed on the screens of theaters, the screenwriter claimed that, besides the Shakespearean theory, it was a historically factual movie. However, this is far from the truth in some areas. The timeline is compressed, and while the costumes and locations seem historically correct, the characters get portrayed incorrectly.
10,000 BC
2008 | 1h 49m | Directed by Roland Emmerich | IMDB: 5.1/10 | Rotten Tomatoes: 9%
Starring Camilla Belle, Steven Strait, and Marco Khan
Since the movie takes place in a period of history with no written record, it’s hard to determine what is historically correct. However, we can easily say that the portrayal of mammoths in this movie is incorrect. Besides the fact that they might have already been extinct before 10,000 B.C., it would also be impossible for a single person to take one down.
People take inspiration from history and can base a movie off of the past without having to make it 100% accurate. How boring would that be?? All these great movies would be just another droning documentary on the history channel. If nobody took their own creative license the world would be a really boring place..especially at the movies
People take inspiration from history and can base a movie off of the past without having to make it 100% accurate. How boring would that be?? All these great movies would be just another droning documentary on the history channel. If nobody took their own creative license the world would be a really boring place..especially at the movies
