Main > The Library

Iron clad trailer

<< < (9/15) > >>

Sir William:
There is just no pleasing everyone, is there?  I imagine they could've done those things but it wouldn't have served the storyline much...I made mention of this before but I never look to Hollywood to keep things historically accurate- probably too costly in research and materials and would only please those of us who know better.  We are a much smaller minority compared to the unwashed masses, who will eat whatever is placed in front of them and call it good.  ;)

Sir Edward:
Yeah, there's a lot we have to overlook in films. The one thing I always feel that is done "wrong" in most period films is that the way in which the characters talk and carry themselves often overlooks the culturally ingrained behaviors that they would have had regarding their station.

That is, they often have characters "speaking out of turn" and getting away with it, in ways that simply would not have been acceptable back then. The societal strata were seen as all part of God's plan. You knew your place, and you stayed in it. To do otherwise was to risk a harsh and brutal punishment. To be accurate, characters should never speak plainly and without prompting to those of a higher station. Not without showing proper reverence.

Having said that, in Ironclad, when Baron Aubigny says something like "Hi John!" from the top of the wall, it worked, because he was at that point supposed to be showing open defiance. Most audience members either wouldn't catch that, or they'd realize it was an insult to King John. But to those of us in the know, we realize that it was a deep insult to talk that way to a king. A clear defiance meant to say that he didn't recognize him as royalty.

Sir William:
You know...that is not something I have ever thought to listen for but you are absolutely right.  Funny, I'll have that little filter on henceforth when viewing.  Cheers, I learned something new today.

Sir Edward:

Here are some more details that they got wrong in Ironclad, but you can understand why they did them, for dramatic effect.

The rebels had more than a team of 7 men to take control of the castle and secure it before King John's army arrived. But it was still a small force, of about 100.

Also, the pigs used for the fire in the mine were actually slaughtered so that the pig fat could be coated onto the support timbers in the mine shaft, ensuring they burn away rapidly and cause a sudden collapse.

They mined the curtain wall first. Then a second time against the keep, but the keep was bisected with an interior wall, and the other half remained fortified.

Reinforcements for the rebels were expected from London, but they turned back when they heard how large John's army was, and also John had the bridge to Rochester destroyed, blocking their access anyway.

Also, the rebels ended up surrendering to King John after being starved out (they ate the horses, but that ran out too).

Sources:

I don't know how accurate it is, but here's a good little description of the historical siege: http://www.jamesmdeem.com/castlestory2.htm

Wikipedia:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rochester_Castle

Some photos of the castle:  http://www.anxietymadewell.com/photos/castles/rochester_castle.html

Sir Wolf:
nice lil history lesson there. thank you!

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page