A few days ago I watched a special report on BBC News 24 during the European report hour, one such report came from germany. The gist of the report was about repackaging Germany as a product that isn't always associated with its Nazi past. It appears that WW2, Hitler and the Nazis are almost always the immediate association made by someone when they hear the word 'Germany', and that it is having a negative effect on German peoples lives, particularly when it comes to tourism.

One of the main reasons listed by the general public was first hand experience of foreigners confusing fact with fiction, all down to how Germans are portrayed in WW2 movies. Of course, there are so many WW1/2 movies that it could be called a genre in itself, and many of them show the average German soldiers POV instead of just showing allied troops pummeling faceless 'evil' Germans. But are there films that do act in this way? I cant think of any off the top of my head, but I see it as being very plausible that most people will think 'Hitler' before they think of anything positive, and just as plausible that this could be down to German portrayal in movies.

Now nobody is suggesting we forget about the past, indeed all the Germans interviewed in the report saw it as the most impotant thing in their 20th century heritage and something that should be remembered. But should more rules be put on filmmakers to correctly depict events that really happened? Making historical films is going into very dangerous terrirtory. From personal experience, Braveheart had a negative effect on Scottish people as they either a} saw it as an incorrect portrayal of a Scottish legend in which there was just as much fiction as truth or b} it stirred up hatred against the English even though these people existed hundreds of years ago. And thats one of the better historical films of recent years.

Another that springs to mind was the one with Samuel L Jackson as an American soldier who is imprisoned after giving the order to open fire on a crowd in Yemen - Rules of Engagement. At the time it never immediately occured to me, but after watching it a second time it became clear that this is a very irresponsible film. Samuel L Jackosn is eventually cleared after proof is uncovered that the crowd did in fact have weapons, not just the men, but the women and the children too. This, a crowd of Arabic civillians.

Of course, if it were any specific group of people it could be looked on just as wrongly - for example if I were a Catholic in Northern Ireland and a British movie was made that was the same, but replaced Jackson with a British soldier and the Arabs with irish Catholics, id be outraged. Everyone would be outraged, Im pretty sure it would even get banned.

But bear in mind that this movie came out when there is a lot of western tension with the Arab nations of the Middle East. This tension existed long before 9-11. Isnt it irresponsible to make a movie like this, that sterotypes Arab people, women and children, as being terrorists? Uncivilised? Wont this kind of material subliminally install hatred or resentment toward a race in the mind of the ignorant Western person, and likewise resentment towards Western culture in the minds of people being stereotyped?

You raise a lot of very interesting issues here. (I suspect a moderator will ask for a more specific question to debate.) As far as "realistic" portrayals of the average German solider in WWII, I can think of films like The Iron Cross and Das Boot that did a good job of this.

Any historical film has to strike a balance between good fiction and some level of authenticity to the period. I can remember when there was controversy about the film The Deer Hunter because it showed North Vietnamese soldiers forcing American prisoners to play Russian roulette, and there was no evidence that this had ever happened. I thought this was a false issue, because the film was clearly fictional, and it is certainly true that atrocities of this kind have happened on all sides in all wars. The same might be said about Apocalypse Now; some might object to the portrayal of an American officer as an insane war lord, but I thought it was acceptable as fiction. It's more questionable when important historical events are clearly distorted. I think that one could reasonably criticize the film U-571 for having American forces capture a German Enigma machine, when this was, of course, a British triumph. (By the way, an accurate depiction of the entire story of Enigma, including the part played by pioneering computer scientist Alan Turing, would be a fascinating film.)

For many years the "Arab terrorist" has been an easy stereotype in films like Black Sunday. Perhaps this will become less common in purely fictional, action-adventure films because of real-life events. Let's hope so.

I don't know what the question exactly is yet, but I am inclined to say that if Americans can cast as rude arrogant foreigners than Germans can be Nazi's, french can be cowards and the japanese can always be efficient.

As far as movies being socially irresponsible, I think people should get over it. It's a movie and if you're relying on it for historical accuracies and moral truths than you should be reading history books and the Bible.

Agree jl, but the problem is a greater % of people really do believe everything they see in the movies, most of the time it seems to be subliminal, but occasionally Ive met people who are deadset that movies are truth.

What Im asking essentially is 'should there be greater moderation by boards of film certification when it comes to historical facts and extreme social/racial/national stereotypes'

Of course it could be looked upon as censorship run amok, and Im no fan of censorship. I would hope that most people who watch movies can do so for the entertainment value and disregard any ideas the film may suggest. But its pretty obvious that isnt the case.

This little fact is from From 'Stupid White Men' by Michael Moore - the average American reads 99 hours per year, compared to watching TV for 1,460 hours. Im sure the figures are similar in other nations around the world where TV is such an important part of life. More people dont seem to question things, or join political debate forums ( ), more people seem to just accept what they see/hear as fact. I wish I had more faith in people, but Im a big ol pessimist

All I think is that the movie makers should show a little more tact. Sterotypes are ok, I dont get mad because people think I sit about in my kilt eating haggis and speaking like groundkeeper Wullie (which i think is hilarious btw ), and I dont really see the connection between being stereotyped as an arrogant American and a Nazi German. While being arrogant may be negative, it isnt suggesting that Americans served an evil tyrant and were without morals. Im happy to say most of the WW2 movies I have seen haven't done this, but then I tend to just watch films that have at least been given a passable review.

I dont know anyone who hates Americans because of their portrayal in fiction. Sadly I do know people who have a dislike for the English (because of movies), Germans (because of WW2, even tho it happened 10-40 years before they were born) and Arabic people (which I think the media may have as much a part to play as movies). Great. That really depressed me. Think Ill have to go watch some mind numbing TV to take my mind of how hollow people can be

The thing that is lacking in many American films is intelligence.
Most box office "blockbusters" pander to an intellectually bankrupt
demographic.

Action movies are nothing but gratuitous violence.
It's hard to find a comedy (that a person with an IQ above 100 can enjoy).

Independent and foreign films tend to have the most substance.....

Of course there are some excellent American directors, who make some
really awesome movies, but they are few and far between. I guess it is
supply and demand. More people are interested in The Terminator than
something like Shawshank Redemption.

Also: it is irresponsible for movie makers to charge $9.00 for admission
to a movie that the star got paid 20 million to act (badly) in......
How about finding an actor willing to take, say, a million, and then they
can reduce the admission price of the tickets.....that'll never happen, though...

The movie BIZ is filled with GREED!!!