Leonardo Da Vinci - Should History Be Altered to Sell TV Series?
Ask a Question
I read that a new series called ‘Leonardo’ is being made. Apparently he is portrayed as a murderer and obsessed by a woman. Neither of these facts are true.
Do you think it’s right to alter history to sell entertainment?
BlueEyesX tricky one. It's entertaining I suppose but if it sways too much from facts and truth then it doesn't appeal to me. Mind you, there's always Aiden Turner who will be portraying him......
If there’s a disclaimer to say it’s been altered for entertainment purposes then don’t see harm.
No, I don't think it's right. If it is a fictional story why do the characters have to be portrayed as real historical figures.
It is also misleading for schoolkids studying history as they may believe it to be true.
We overlapped but I completely agree with you. There are some that never bother to research the facts and probably don't enjoy history but they will lap this up and believe.....
The problem with changing history to sell a story is that the many will believe it to be accurate. It won't hurt that Aiden Turner is taking the lead but anyone who enjoys history will mutter throughout the programme about changes. (me included but I will watch it for 'Poldark') He was never formally educated and yet was a genius and it was more likely that he was obsessed with males.
There has already been quite a comprehensive series about da Vinci where he was played by Tom Riley.
I remember wondering at the time whether it was accurate but apart from the Medici and Borgia families I have not bothered learning much about Italian history. Still too much English history to get through!
I completely disagree with changing things like that because even with disclaimer some people will believe it. They could have simply created a fictional character having said that if Aiden Turner is in it I will watch
Imnotcheap completely agree that Aidan Turner is very viewable. Always liked him in Poldark. And you are correct in that people believe these ‘historical’ programmes despite disclaimers.
Lots of people believe in the bible and that's a work of fiction. People believe what they want to believe whatever is presented to them. You see people now that take their news and viewpoints from facebook rather than normal news services. Lots of movies completely rewrite history and because movies are watched more than history books are read you end up with people believing in the movie narrative. Sadly its perfectly normal and always has been. In the past the powerful dictated history not the facts. We like to think of our society as being honest and truthful but I would say the opposite is true. A huge part of the world population is Chinese and that government churns out huge amounts of lies and propaganda.
It's standard practice for films & TV shows based on real people or events to embellish or fabricate details for entertainment purposes. For example, the first officer of the Titanic, William McMaster Murdoch, was portrayed as a nasty coward in the 1997 film starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet. But, in reality he is believed to have acted heroically while the ship was sinking. More recently the TV show The Crown isn't exactly an authentic portrayal of the Monarchy. This type of film or TV show can make viewers more interested in the lives of certain people. But, you'll need to look at written and documentary sources if you want to get a more accurate view of historical figures.
We're just watching the Crown and I admit to being irritated that there is so much fabrication ....embellishment would be ok for me as I accept it's for entertainment. I'm getting around it by listening to Robert Lacey's (the historian) 'The Crown' as an audio book from the library but it's hard going at times. My memory's not good and I can see me remembering the fiction and not the fact! ACR and BlueEyesX .... I agree with Lynibis really .... I'd say just create a fiction loosely based on events but give it fictional characters to avoid any confusion!
BORDERJOE This is why I enjoy reading historical fiction so much. Real characters, real facts and quite often the story is true but of course the dialogue and interaction can only come from the author's imagination as no one knows what was said and done behind closed doors. I love to read author's notes at the end where they set out the facts and confess to anything they have added for effect and tell you more about the events that did happen. Currently reading about Edward I (Longshanks) and his relentless suppression of Wales and Llewellyn ap Gruffydd.
BORDERJOE I can highly recommend the following authors for this genre: Sharon Penman, Anne O'Brien, Elizabeth Chadwick, David Gilman, Ken Follett and loads more. Gilman books I feel would be more suited to men who are maybe not so interested in the romanticism of the others, but I love them just as much and I believe sunny101 also enjoyed them. After my current read I will start his 6th in the Masters of War series recently released.
Well we all know it’s a drama and not a factual documentary, just so happens to be called Leonardo.
I hear you. But it never ceases to amaze me how many people can't tell the difference between an actor and the role they play, thinking the character is real. Some have even been attacked for the wrongdoings committed by their character.
Isn't all history, as noted by Napoleon, "Written by the winners". Quite a lot of source material is fabricated as well - take the accounts of mermaids and strange exotic creatures reported by sailors discovering the new world. Should we be taking a TV/Film source as 'authentic' only because it has the furthest reach?
Join for free to get genuine deals, money saving advice and help from our friendly community
Chief Bargain Hunter