Period dramas are often judged based on their historical accuracy, since anachronisms can break the sense of immersion. Even the best and most meticulous historical movies and TV shows often have a few minor details which don’t stand up to scrutiny, but having too many glaring errors can ruin a show. Audiences want to feel transported to a different historical period.
Many of thebest period dramasintentionally use anachronisms as a way to bridge the gap between the past and the present. For example, modern audiences wouldn’t understand what was being said if shows set in the Middle Ages didn’t update their language. However, there’s a big difference between these permissible, deliberate inconsistencies and ones which can threaten a show’s authenticity.
10 Little-Known UK Period Dramas US Viewers Need To Watch
The US loves British period drama TV shows like Bridgerton and Downton Abbey, but there are other fantastic titles that they have yet to discover.
Downton Abbeyis one of the most successful period dramas of all time, and its popularity has attracted several critics. While the show has been scrutinized more generally for its fawning treatment of the British aristocracy, there are also some more specific points which historians and other experts have questioned.From the costumes to the props, everything on-screen inDownton Abbeyis judged for its accuracy.
“I’m just saying"wasn’t used in the 1910s, and"When push comes to shove"was seen as an example of AAVE until after the Second World War.
Linguist Ben Zimmer has noted that some of the phrases which characters use don’t make sense in thetimeline ofDownton Abbey,either because they were coined much later or because the British upper class would never have used them. (viaNPR) For example,“I’m just saying"wasn’t used in the 1910s, and"When push comes to shove"was seen as an example of AAVE until after the Second World War.
The Imitation Gamecombined commercial success with critical praise when it was released in 2014. After grossing over $200 million at the box office and earning eight Oscar nominations, the one thing which has caused a dent in the movie’s reputation is its egregious misrepresentation of the past. The story follows British mathematician Alan Turing during his time working at Bletchley Park, attempting to decrypt German communications in the Second World War.
The Imitation Gamehas also been criticized for ignoring Turing’s homosexuality.
The Imitation Gameis a poor portrayal of history. It suggests that Turing was a visionary who received very little help, and that he essentially had to build his computers with his bare hands. This ignores the valuable contributions of hundreds of mathematicians, cryptographers, engineers and other people who worked alongside him.The Imitation Gamehas also been criticized for ignoring Turing’s homosexuality.GCHQ Departmental Historian Tony Comer offered the most scathing review, claiming that the movie gets just two things right:“There was a Second World War and Turing’s first name was Alan."(viaThe Infinite Monkey Cage)
From the very first trailer forNapoleon,there appeared to be some glaring historical inaccuracies.Trailers for the biopic show Napoleon’s troops firing their cannons at the pyramids in Egypt, which is something that most historians agree never happened. This proved to be just a minor taste of what was to come, asNapoleonis filled with falsehoods. Thedirector’s cut ofNapoleonmay improve the movie in some aspects, but it also means that there is more time for imagined scenarios which never happened.
Andrew Roberts recognized the fact thatNapoleonpaints the military leader in an unflattering light without referring to his positive achievements.
Andrew Roberts, who wrote a critically-acclaimed biography of Napoleon in 2014, disagreed with the movie’s representation of its central figure. (viaThe Times) Like many other reviewers, Roberts recognized the fact thatNapoleonpaints the military leader in an unflattering light without referring to his positive achievements and the love that the French people had for him. Ridley Scott has shown little patience for his critics, saying"When I have issues with historians I ask: Excuse me, mate, were you there? No? Well shut the f*** up then.”
The Untouchablesis a great crime drama about a tumultuous period in American history, but it is far from an accurate representation of Elliot Ness' pursuit of Al Capone.Brian De Palma repeatedly chooses action and excitement over historical accuracy. This is best illustrated by the tense courtroom scenes at the end, which De Palma decides to punctuate with a completely fictional rooftop chase between Ness and one of Capone’s associates.
Robert De Niro’s most memorable scene as Al Capone is entirely fictionalized, since he never killed an associate with a baseball bat at a classy dinner.
In an article forThe Guardian,British historian Alex von Tunzelmann gradedThe UntouchablesE- for its historical accuracy. She noted inconsistencies with both Ness and Capone’s characters. In reality, Ness never demanded that the men on his team refrain from drinking, and he never had an accountant on his team. Robert De Niro’s most memorable scene as Al Capone is also entirely fictionalized, since he never killed an associate with a baseball bat at a classy dinner.
Alex von Tunzelmann has reviewed many period dramas forThe Guardianin a series called “Reel History”.The Untouchablesisn’t the only Kevin Costner movie she has analyzed, but she gaveJFKan even worse score. (viaThe Guardian) Like many other historians, and people who don’t necessarily classify themselves as experts, von Tunzelmann criticized Oliver Stone’sJFKas one of the most inaccurate period dramas ever made.
JFKearned over $200 million at the box office, so it has influenced how people see Kennedy’s assassination and the Warren Commission.
JFKearned over $200 million at the box office, so it has influenced how people see Kennedy’s assassination and the Warren Commission. However, it has been accused of peddling conspiracy theories, as it focuses on the trial of Clay Shaw.JFKalso presents the “magic bullet” theory as fact, although it has been thoroughly debunked many times over.JFKis a compelling, well-acted drama, but a crime against history.
Martin Scorsese’s moviesare often recognized for their extreme violence, so it’s no surprise thatGangs of New Yorkexaggerates the conflict that took place in the Five Points neighborhood of Manhattan.Gangs of New Yorkgets a lot right about the city’s immigrant population, as well as the look and the language of the era, but it loses some of its authenticity in the details.
In an interview withNPR, historian Professor Tyler Anbinder claimed thatGangs of New Yorkmassively exaggerated the scale of the bloodshed.
In an interview withNPR, historian Professor Tyler Anbinder claimed thatGangs of New Yorkmassively exaggerated the scale of the bloodshed.Although some of the riots and gang fights depicted in the movie did happen in real life, they resulted in only a couple of casualties, not the dozens of bodies piled up in the streets that Scorsese shows. The scene with the Navy ships firing on the city is another one of the director’s inventions.
It would be foolish to expect too much realism from a glitzy Hollywood musical, butThe Greatest Showmanis even more out-of-touch with reality than it has any right to be.The Greatest Showmanportrays P.T. Barnum as an entertainer who created a home for people who otherwise had nowhere to turn to, and an innovator who enjoyed putting on a show for the public.In reality, he was a vile con man.
It would be foolish to expect too much realism from a glitzy Hollywood musical, butThe Greatest Showmanis even more out-of-touch with reality than it has any right to be.
An article inThe Smithsonian Magazinelays out a timeline of Barnum’s crimes and abuses, contrasted with the glamorous profile of the musical. One of Barnum’s first great successes came when he exhibited an enslaved woman who he claimed was 160-years-old. He later made money by selling tickets to her autopsy, featuring enslaved people of different races in his “human zoos,” and selling hoaxes.
Although book adaptations are mainly judged based on how they interpret the characters and the story, they can also be criticized based on the way they recreate a historical time period.Little Womenis one of the most popular American novels of all time, and there have been plenty of TV and movie adaptations over the years. Fans of the book have their own ideas about how it should look, and Greta Gerwig’s 2019 version drew some criticism.
Gerwig’s choices mean she can bridge the gap between past and present, but it costs her some points with fashion historians.
WhileLittle Womenreceived positive reviews,some harsher critics noted the anachronistic clothing, and the hairstyles were particularly controversial.In an article forVarsity,fashion columnist Sarah Abbas writes"the inaccuracies in the film’s hairstyling are indefensible.“Women of the era would have worn bonnets more often than the March sisters do in Gerwig’s movie, and some of their hairstyles are decidedly modern. These choices mean that Gerwig can bridge the gap between past and present, but it costs her some points with fashion historians.
Margot Robbie and Saoirse Ronan star inMary Queen of Scotsas Queen Elizabeth I and Mary I of Scotland.Although the movie’s costumes and language have both been praised by historians, there are still a few inaccuracies.In a video forPenguin Books,Dr. Joanne Paul highlights some of the conversations which take place in the movie which never would have occurred in real life.
Mary Queen of Scotstends to include some conversations for dramatic effect, even though they wouldn’t have actually taken place.
Mary Queen of Scotstends to include some conversations for dramatic effect, even though they wouldn’t have actually taken place. One scene sees Elizabeth professing her jealousy of Mary’s motherhood, although it’s likely that if Elizabeth had really wanted to become a mother, then she could have done so. Another scene sees Elizabeth talking about her succession plan with her privy council, but talking about the potential death of a monarch in such a way could have been grounds for treason.
The British miniseriesWolf Hallis based on the novel of the same name by Hillary Mantel, and it is just as controversial among historians. Mantel’s book has been criticized for misrepresenting the past, particularly with its generous depiction of Thomas Cromwell, one of King Henry VIII’s closest advisors. The TV adaptation naturally suffers the same criticisms, butits costume design has also been questioned.
The show’s conflict between Cromwell and Sir Thomas More is wildly exaggerated.
Professor David Starkey offered a particularly harsh assessment ofWolf Hall,claiming that there is"not a scrap of evidence"for the narrative in the drama series. (viaThe Washington Post) The show’s conflict between Cromwell and Sir Thomas More is wildly exaggerated, and shaped to fit the narrative that Cromwell was a revolutionary hero.Wolf Hall’s costuming choices have also been scrutinized, with characters wearing strictly outdoor clothing to balls, and Anne Boleyn’s dresses standing out from the crowd.
Sources:NPR,The Infinite Monkey Cage,The Times,The Guardian,The Guardian,NPR,The Smithsonian Magazine,Varsity,Penguin Books,The Washington Post.
