Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies (Henry Holt Reference Book) [Paperback]

Mark C. Carnes (Author)

Book Description

Series: Henry Holt Reference Book | Publication Date: November 15, 1996

In this widely-acclaimed volume, some of our greatest historians address the facts—and fiction—as seen in Hollywood’s often epic recreations of historical events. Distinghuished historians such as Stephen Ambrose, Antonia Fraser, James McPherson, Gerda Lerner, Dee Brown, Frances FitzGerald, David Levering Lewis, and Simon Schama explore the relationship between film and the historical record. Offering hundreds of movie stills, archival photographs, maps, and other illustrations, along with sidebars on related historical events, Past Imperfect sheds new light on the uses of history in popular culture.

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review

In our increasingly visual culture, a growing amount of what we learn about history comes from the movies. This unusual and cornucopian book draws on the knowledge of 60 experts who examine the historical accuracy of a splendid array of classic movies such as Julius Caesar, Aguirre the Wrath of God, Mutiny on the Bounty, The Last of the Mohicans, Gallipoli, and Gandhi. They reveal what each movie has done right and wrong in portraying the complex threads of the stories as known to the world's most qualified scholars. Highly Recommended. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Library Journal

Perhaps this summer's boomlet of historical movies and costume dramas have sparked interest, for this is only one of several recent books by historians examining films set in the past. Editor Carnes (Secret Ritual and Manhood in Victorian America, LJ 8/89) persuaded 60 historical writers, including such popular figures as Gore Vidal, William Manchester, Antonia Frasier, James McPherson, and Frances FitzGerald, to write an original piece on an historical film. The authors gleefully skewer, pick apart, praise, and censure film classics such as Gone with the Wind, Mutiny on the Bounty, A Man for All Seasons, Spartacus, Jurassic Part, Patton, etc. There is, not surprisingly, considerable nitpicking over historical details, but the writers seem to share a common fondness for the movies. Indeed, several confess that their interest in history was first awakened by a film they saw as a child. Film buffs will thoroughly enjoy. Highly recommended for large public libraries and subject collections.?Marianne Cawley, Enoch Pratt Free Lib., Baltimore
Copyright 1995 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 320 pages
• Publisher: Holt Paperbacks (November 15, 1996)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0805037608
• ISBN-13: 978-0805037609
• Product Dimensions: 9.8 x 8.3 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 2 pounds
• Average Customer Review: 4.3 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (13 customer reviews)
• Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #329,615 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

15 of 15 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Can you properly portray history in the movies?, November 13, 2001

By 

Michael K. Smith (South Louisiana) - See all my reviews
(TOP 500 REVIEWER)   

This review is from: Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies (Henry Holt Reference Book) (Paperback)

When you're both a student of history and a movie buff, as I am, it can be difficult to sit and watch a film that presumes to have an accurate historical context without fighting the urge to evaluate it and pick holes in it. And I'm not the only one. This is a collection of analytical essays, most of high quality, by experts (not all of them historians) analyzing and critiquing individual films: Stephen Jay Gould on _Jurassic Park,_ Antonia Fraser on _Anne of the Thousand Days,_ Thomas Fleming on _1776,_ Dee Brown on _Fort Apache,_ William Manchester on _Young Winston,_ and numerous others. Sticking to those films about which I have some knowledge of the historical events they claim to portray, most are right on the money. James McPherson, commenting on _Glory,_ points out that while the context and general atmosphere are very well done, and the costuming and so on are exact, there are still deliberate historical errors for the sake of drama; none of the soldiers in Col. Shaw's 54th Massachusetts were ex-slaves, for instance, all of them having been recruited from among the state's free black population. And Catherine Clinton does an excellent job taking the wind out of _Gone with the Wind_'s mythical sails. There's a great deal of good information and criticism here and it's a compliment to say that nearly any of these essays will start an argument.

17 of 18 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Let's have a revised edition...PLEASE???, November 7, 2000

By 

"rrr338" - See all my reviews

This review is from: Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies (Henry Holt Reference Book) (Paperback)

This book is just too damn interesting not to go into a revised edition that would, welcomingly, include a few more recent examples of the movies portending to convey history. It is cleverly organized, with an actual historical "timeline" that is matched with a selected movie that attempted to portray events for that period or year. It starts all the way back in the Jurrasic period, with "Jurrasic Park," of course. Each movie critique is written by a different film expert or historian, so you get a lot of diversity of perspective as well as writing style. There is a very intelligent interview of director John Sayles ("Eight Men Out" "Metowan") in the preface, which may be reason enough for film buffs to purchase this book.

One can either browse through the book and focus on "favorite" or "hated" films of the past, or read it straight through. Each essay offers at least one very good insight on the nature of history and how elusive the "accurate" accounting of an era or event can be.

The overall impression this book leaves is that movies, for all their ostensible efforts to "recreate" historical realities, will NEVER get it quite right. That's because they are products of their own times, and cannot ever fully escape the sensibilities of their own historical eras. Given this approach, the reader cannot help but gain a deeper appreciation for the exacting work of historians -- even if he or she is first attracted to the book out of interest in film. Films (and histories) explored here include "Spartacus," "Aguirre, Wrath of God," "Houdini" "Anne of a Thousand Days," "Henry V" (both Oliver and Branagh)"They Died With their Boots On", as well as many more. Since this book's publication, there have been more films that have either come close to, or completely mangled historical reality, so a revised edition would be most welomed. So to Mark Carnes, et al. -- PLEASE???

8 of 8 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Perfect for the film buff and the historian., July 12, 2000

By A Customer

This review is from: Past Imperfect: History According to the Movies (Henry Holt Reference Book) (Paperback)

A book that unites two of my passions: history and cinema. Great essays that not only discuss the movies themselves; but also put the times that movies were made in a historical context. These movies often reveal more about the time the movie was made in than the historical period the movie is about.

My only complaint? Wish there wasa volume two!