Even if you favor entertainment over education when it comes to cinema, you probably care at least a little about historical accuracy when watching historical dramas. A little creative license never hurt anyone, but attention to detail adds an authenticity that makes the viewing experience feel richer. That’s especially true of war movies, which attract two overlapping sets of people sometimes known for being persnickety: history buffs and cinephiles. If you belong to either camp, you’ll want to watch these five war movies known for their historical accuracy.
Though most war movies are praised or criticized for how accurately they portray the battlefield, Fred Zinnemann’s Best Picture winner has been noted for capturing another aspect of military life: the U.S. armed forces’ “obsession” with sports, which reached its zenith during World War II.
From Here to Eternity is mainly about the months leading up to the attack on Pearl Harbor, but one of its most significant subplots involves a regimental boxing team, which were common during World War II. (Its most famous scene, however, has nothing to do with either — and you’ve almost certainly seen it even if you’ve never seen the actual movie.) Soldiers were encouraged to pursue athletics to raise morale, with baseball and football also proving popular — not least for the way they contrasted with the preferred sports of the Axis.
Advertisement
More from our network
History Facts is part of Inbox Studio, an email-first media company. *Indicates a third-party property.
The threat of nuclear war was more prevalent when Threads was made in the 1980s than it is today, but watching this uniquely unsettling television movie will have your pulse pounding all the same.
Hailed as “a film which comes closest to representing the full horror of nuclear war and its aftermath” in Toni A. Perrine’s Film and the Nuclear Age: Representing Cultural Anxiety, the documentary-style drama takes place in Sheffield, England, over the course of more than a decade and pulls no punches in its portrayal of nuclear winter and the utterly devastating effects it would have. There’s little hope to be found in Threads, but the film is said to have had a sobering effect on everyone from Ronald Reagan to British Labour Party leader Neil Kinnock.
There’s a very good chance that, even if you agree with the consensus that Come and See is among the greatest movies ever made, you won’t want to watch it more than once. It’s simply that disturbing, but director Elem Klimov’s insistence that his movie had to be “realistic to the maximum” is evident in every scene. That’s particularly true of its depiction of war crimes carried out by Germany during its occupation of Belarus, which has been singled out as the most shocking — and, tragically, historically accurate — aspect of the film.
It took $12 million, four weeks, and 1,500 background actors to film Saving Private Ryan’s landmark opening sequence, which shows the D-Day landing on Omaha Beach in excruciating detail. The result was clearly worth it, as Steven Spielberg’s World War II epic is regarded as one of the greatest movies ever made, earning $482 million at the box office on the way to winning five of the 11 Oscars for which it was nominated (though not, in a stunning upset, Best Picture).
Spielberg interviewed several World War II veterans during pre-production, and that same community was among the most laudatory when the movie was released. There were reports of veterans weeping during and after Saving Private Ryan, with one remarking that “the only thing that was missing was the smell.”
Despite how memorable it is, Saving Private Ryan wasn’t even the best World War II movie released in 1998. That would be Terrence Malick’s The Thin Red Line, which, despite ultimately being about so much more than war in general or World War II in particular, faithfully captures both the Battle of Guadalcanal and the actual experience of being a soldier.
Malick’s philosophical, even poetic approach to the “overlooked” conflict at the film’s center didn’t get in the way of attention to detail, with historian John McManus praising the film for getting everything from how soldiers move across the field of battle to the actual blades of grass on that field right, and ultimately grading its accuracy a nine out of 10.
For similar articles, subscribe to our sister brand Movie Brief, brought to you by our resident film critic Michael Nordine. You’ll receive a weekly review and recommendation of a new movie, whether in theaters or available to stream, as well as a list of 25 must-see movies when you first sign up.
When Jurassic Park premiered in June 1993, it wasn’t just another summer blockbuster. Many of us still remember sitting in the theater, popcorn in hand, in awe as a shockingly lifelike brachiosaur appeared. The dinosaur moved, ate, and roared across the screen with a realism we’d never seen before.
Director Steven Spielberg worked closely with paleontologists such as Jack Horner to base the film in modern scientific understanding, but as Horner himself has said, “We weren’t trying to make a documentary.” Today, more than 30 years and six sequels later, the question is still on our minds: Are Jurassic Park’s dinosaurs more science or spectacle?
Credit: Bettmann via Getty Images
T. Rex and Raptors
The Tyrannosaurus rex was the undisputed star of the original film. Speaking with NPR recently, paleontologist Matt Lamanna called its depiction “pretty awesome,” with its size, shape, and most behaviors reflecting what paleontologists understand today. But one of the movie’s most famous lines — “He can’t see us if we don’t move” — suggests the predator’s vision is based solely on movement, which isn’t quite true. Fossils show that the T. rex had forward-facing eyes, and the shape of the dino’s skull means it likely had excellent depth perception. In fact, scientists think it may have had among the best eyesight of any dinosaur.
More recent discoveries also suggest the T. rex, along with most dinosaurs, may have had feathers. While it’s likely that earlier Tyrannosaurus species had more significant plumage, T. rex, which lived later in the Cretaceous Period, could still have had feathers along its back.
Feathers — or the lack thereof — play an even bigger role with velociraptors, perhaps the most exaggerated dino in the franchise. In reality, these dinos were covered in feathers and only about the size of a turkey. The film also gave the raptors down-facing hands, but paleontologists say that their palms would have faced each other (as would a T. rex’s), as theropods were known as clappers, not slappers.
Jurassic Park’s sneaky, scaly raptors were actually based on their larger cousin deinonychus. Some details were on point, though: According to fossil records, the raptors’ sickle-shaped claws were accurate, and like the movie versions, real velociraptors were indeed thought to be smart, fast, and ferocious, though probably more solitary than the pack hunters that terrorized the cast.
Advertisement
More from our network
History Facts is part of Inbox Studio, an email-first media company. *Indicates a third-party property.
Other creative liberties were taken with the dinos in the original Jurassic Park. The Dilophosaurus, for instance, was one of the 1993 film’s most memorable creatures despite being only partially similar to the real thing. The movie did keep the dinosaur’s distinctive twin skull crests, but the scene-stealing frilled neck and venom-spitting were purely fictional.
Later Jurassic World films also introduced entirely new species: Hybrids such as the Indominus rex, the indoraptor, and most recently, the malformed Distortus rex and Mutadon — a combination of a pterosaur and a velociraptor — from 2025’s Jurassic World Rebirth, mix multiple dinosaurs together purely for entertainment.
The dinosaurs’ voices throughout the franchise were also Hollywood creations. The T. rex’s terrifying roar? Sound designer Gary Rydstrom made it from layers of baby elephant squeals, alligator growls, and other animal noises. Scientists think the real predator most likely would have made deep, low-frequency rumbles that might be felt more than heard.
Jurassic Park deeply shaped how people imagined dinosaurs — inaccuracies and all. But the park’s dinosaurs were never meant to be exact reconstructions; they’re lab-built hybrids, after all, patched together with other species’ DNA. Compared to previous depictions, though, the portrayals in the 1993 film were groundbreaking, turning dinosaurs from largely imaginary reptiles to dynamic animals (and, of course, iconic movie monsters).
Over the years, the films in the franchise have begun to flirt with updated paleontological understandings of the animals, too. In 2022, Jurassic World Dominion finally gave us a feathered pyroraptor, a detailed feat of practical and digital effects that helped bring an otherwise unseen prehistoric world to life.
Credit: Sunset Boulevard/ Corbis Historical via Getty Images
AuthorMichael Nordine
August 13, 2025
Love it?28
There’s never been a period of American history quite like the Great Depression, and hopefully there never will be again. Coming about at the same time movies were becoming an increasingly dominant cultural force, the economic downturn lasting from 1929 to 1939 was, perhaps counterintuitively, inextricably linked with the golden age of Hollywood. Some of the best movies made during the Depression were also about the Depression, though a number of later productions captured the era just as well. Here are the 10 best.
You might not think that a musical about the Great Depression made during the height of the economic crisis would be a good idea, but Gold Diggers of 1933 was the third-most successful movie at the box office the year it was released and has been considered a classic ever since. Going to the movies was a vital form of escapism throughout the 1930s, and spectacle-driven pictures like this one — big, bold, and fun — proved to be especially welcome distractions from life outside the theater. Based on the 1919 play Gold Diggers and following the story of four aspiring actresses hoping to improve their station, the movie featured themes of upward mobility that were clearly relatable to audiences of the time.
Advertisement
More from our network
History Facts is part of Inbox Studio, an email-first media company. *Indicates a third-party property.
At just 67 minutes, Wild Boys of the Road packs more of a punch than its breezy running time suggests. William Wellman’s adaptation of the aptly titled story Desperate Youth is about two teenage boys forced to ride the rails as vagabonds just as hundreds of thousands of actual teenagers did during the Great Depression. (In the original trailer, the lives they turn to — “Vagrancy! Crime!”— are described as “fates worse than death!”) Deeply moving and offering a faint glimmer of hope at the end (albeit against Wellman’s wishes), the film offers a more youthful perspective than most Depression-era stories.
Between shorts and features, Charlie Chaplin played the iconic “Little Tramp” character more than 50 times between 1914 and 1936. The last of these portrayals may also be the best. Modern Times is a classic among classics, using the extreme economic downturn as the backdrop for a story about adapting to a rapidly industrializing society that the Tramp — and, indeed, millions of other Americans — would appear to have no place in.
Throughout his legendary career, actor William Powell somehow earned only three Oscar nominations. One was for My Man Godfrey, a screwball comedy in which he stars as a homeless man who is offered $5 to be a socialite’s “forgotten man” at a party. There’s more to Godfrey than meets the eye, of course, just as there’s hidden depth to this lighthearted romp that was made at the height of the Depression and never once feels like it’s exploiting that ongoing crisis for cheap laughs.
No writer captured the Depression era quite like John Steinbeck, whose work lent itself to unusually good movie adaptations. The first of these was Of Mice and Men, based on Steinbeck’s novella about two migrant workers eking out a meager existence in California. Burgess Meredith and Lon Chaney Jr. star as George and Lennie, respectively, whose intertwined fate leads to inescapable tragedy.
If you were to read just one book or watch one movie about the Depression, you could do far worse than The Grapes of Wrath. Steinbeck’s saga of the westward migration necessitated by the Dust Bowl is one of the 20th century’s most essential novels, and director John Ford’s take on the literary classic matches the power of its source material. Henry Fonda is superlative as the patriarch of an Oklahoma family that migrates to California in search of work, fertile land, and a better life — only to realize that some of the era’s problems extend far beyond the Dust Bowl.
If laughter is the best medicine, then Sullivan’s Travels deserves pride of place as one of the best movies made about the Depression. It’s also one of the best movies about movies. Preston Sturges’ screwball classic stars Joel McCrea as a Hollywood director who specializes in comedies but longs to mount a more serious production — and ventures among the downtrodden in order to do so. Veronica Lake co-stars as a struggling actress who accompanies him on his ill-advised journey, which ends up being as funny and socially relevant as he’d always hoped.
Credit: Universal Pictures/ Moviepix via Getty Images
To Kill a Mockingbird (1962)
Both Harper Lee’s novel and Robert Mulligan’s adaptation of it are about so many aspects of American society that the story’s Great Depression backdrop is sometimes forgotten in the larger discussion around racism and the loss of innocence. It’s nevertheless a crucial part of one of the most fundamentally American texts ever written or filmed, as many of the cases protagonist Atticus Finch takes on are from clients who can’t actually afford to pay him. It’s one of those rare movies that just about everyone should see.
A true watershed event that marked a before-and-after moment in the history of cinema, Bonnie and Clyde ushered in the director-driven New Hollywood era of filmmaking and became one of the most influential movies ever made, despite initially flopping with critics and audiences alike. And yet, on paper, the film was fairly traditional: a crime drama based on the true story of two lovers-turned-bank robbers active between 1932 and 1934, played by the glamorous stars Faye Dunaway and Warren Beatty. Outlaws Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow might never have turned to a life of crime under different economic circumstances, something Arthur Penn's counterculture classic explores with grit and grace. Nominated for 10 Academy Awards and winning two, Bonnie and Clyde has since been hailed as one of the 100 greatest American films by the American Film Institute.
If you’ve ever wondered where the Coen brothers got the title for their turn-of-the-century screwball comedy, the answer is another movie on this list: Sullivan’s Travels. In that movie, the film that Joel McCrea’s character hopes to make is called O Brother, Where Art Thou? and is an adaptation of a fictional book about the Depression. A little intertextuality never hurt anyone, but what really makes this Coen brothers film a classic are the zany plots inspired by The Odyssey; a trio of memorable performances by George Clooney, John Turturro, and Tim Blake Nelson; and era-appropriate folk numbers so catchy, they inspired a concert tour. There were many men of constant sorrow in 1930s Mississippi, and O Brother captures their plight beautifully.
For similar articles, subscribe to our sister brand Movie Brief, brought to you by our resident film critic Michael Nordine. You’ll receive a weekly review and recommendation of a new movie, whether in theaters or available to stream, as well as a list of 25 must-see movies when you first sign up.
Only one person has been portrayed on-screen more than Abraham Lincoln, and he doesn’t actually exist: Sherlock Holmes. Honest Abe has been inspiring filmmakers since 1908, when Van Dyke Brooke directed The Reprieve: An Episode in the Life of Abraham Lincoln, and has since appeared in more than 300 movies.
An unknown actor played the 16th president in The Reprieve, which concerned Lincoln’s pardon of the “sleeping sentinel” — a Union soldier who fell asleep on duty and was initially sentenced to death for his mistake. Given Lincoln’s status as one of America’s most revered leaders, it’s little surprise that the first movie made about him focused on his mercy and compassion — traits highlighted in just about every other film inspired by Lincoln.
But which of these portrayals was most accurate? Before answering that, it’s worth taking a look at some honorable mentions.
Before he was president, Lincoln worked as a lawyer. Oscar-winning director John Ford chose to focus on this era of Honest Abe’s life in his excellent biographical drama. Henry Fonda — another screen legend who received an Oscar nomination for his leading role in The Grapes of Wrath and also starred in such classics as The Lady Eve and 12 Angry Men before winning Best Actor for 1981’s On Golden Pond — was perfectly cast as the idealistic attorney defending two brothers who are falsely accused of murder.
Screenwriter and critic Frank Nugent lauded Fonda’s performance as one of those “once-in-a-blue-moon things: a crossroads meeting of nature, art, and a smart casting director. Nature gave Mr. Fonda long legs and arms, a strong and honest face, and a slow smile; the make-up man added a new nose bridge.” You could argue that on a physical level, Fonda captured Lincoln’s essence better than any other actor.
Advertisement
More from our network
History Facts is part of Inbox Studio, an email-first media company. *Indicates a third-party property.
Despite being the title character in Anthony Mann’s underseen thriller, Lincoln himself appears for less than a minute of The Tall Target. And yet the film is worth mentioning not only because it’s a good movie but also because it focuses on a lesser-known chapter of the former president’s life: the unsuccessful Baltimore Plot. The assassination attempt occurred just prior to Lincoln’s inauguration and was initiated by Southern sympathizers to prevent him from taking office. Dorothea Dix, a nurse who heard rumors of the conspiracy and alerted authorities, described it simply: “Mr. Lincoln’s inauguration was thus to be prevented, or his life to fall a sacrifice.” Leslie Kimmel played Lincoln during what was essentially a cameo appearance, doing a fine job given his limited screen time.
This adaptation of the novel by Seth Grahame-Smith deserves a brief mention for the outlandishness of its premise. Though it’s feasible that Lincoln might have spent nights and weekends slaying the undead if they actually existed, they of course do not. Manohla Dargis of The New York Times put it best when she wrote that the title Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is so good that “it’s too bad someone had to spoil things by making a movie to go with it.”
On the question of both the best and most accurate portrayal of Lincoln, the consensus is clear: Daniel Day-Lewis in Steven Spielberg’s Lincoln. Between 2002 and 2017, Day-Lewis appeared in just seven movies. He received Oscar nominations for four of them, and won twice: once for There Will Be Blood and again for Lincoln. The famously unprolific thespian is among the most renowned screen actors of all time, and the many fans who were saddened to hear of his second retirement following Phantom Thread are surely looking forward to his return in 2025’s Anemone, which was directed by his son Ronan.
While there’s no question that Day-Lewis’ portrayal of Honest Abe was amazing — in addition to his third Academy Award, he also won a BAFTA Award, Golden Globe, and Screen Actors Guild Award, among others — many viewers were naturally curious as to its historical accuracy.
The actor, whose reputation for being choosy about his roles precedes him, was hesitant to sign on to the project because, he told The New York Times, he felt that Lincoln had “been mythologized almost to the point of dehumanization.” He only accepted the role on the condition that he be given a year to prepare, which he spent reading books about the president as well as Lincoln’s own speeches. Latching on to historical accounts that Lincoln had a somewhat reedy voice, Day-Lewis made this a crucial aspect of his performance — in part because high-pitched voices carry better in crowds, which could have contributed to Lincoln being such a compelling orator.
The result received high marks from historians. In an interview with NPR, A. Lincoln: A Biography author Ronald White praised Day-Lewis for his “delicate balance between the homely Lincoln — the homespun Lincoln — and the high Lincoln of the second inaugural address,” adding that the actor “walks like Lincoln, the way he puts his feet down one at a time. He talks like Lincoln — not the baritone voice of Disneyland, but the high tenor voice. Daniel Day-Lewis studied Lincoln intensely, and what comes out is a very accurate depiction of the spirit of the man.”
Allen Guelzo, a Civil War professor at Gettysburg College, was similarly laudatory. “I remember thinking afterwards that all the time I’d been watching the movie I had never thought that Daniel Day-Lewis was acting,” he said in an interview, “because what he portrayed seemed so close to my own mental image of what Lincoln must have been like.” Given the universal praise and bevy of awards Day-Lewis received for his performance, it’s hard to disagree.
For similar articles, subscribe to our sister brand Movie Brief, brought to you by our resident film critic Michael Nordine. You’ll receive a weekly review and recommendation of a new movie, whether in theaters or available to stream, as well as a list of 25 must-see movies when you first sign up.
Credit: ullstein bild Dtl./ ullstein bild via Getty Images
AuthorMichael Nordine
March 6, 2025
Love it?52
Just as we’ll never run out of history to study, nor will we run out of historical movies to watch anytime soon. Filmmakers have always looked to the past for inspiration, with period pieces and historical dramas enduring as one of the medium’s most popular genres. Read on to discover some of the best historical movies ever made.
Though it began in the late 1960s with movies such as The Graduate and Drugstore Cowboy, the New Hollywood movement was at its peak in the 1970s. That’s when filmmakers including Francis Ford Coppola, Terrence Malick, Martin Scorsese, and John Cassavetes came into their own and studios allowed directors unprecedented control over their productions. The result was a slew of all-timers: The Godfather, Days of Heaven, A Woman Under the Influence, The Deer Hunter, Alien, Taxi Driver, Jaws, 3 Women, Star Wars, Eraserhead, and Killer of Sheep, just to name a few.
If you’ve already seen the classics and are ready to find out what the auteurs of today are up to, there are a number of instant classics from the last few years. At the top of that list would have to be Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer, which was about as successful as any movie could hope to be: In addition to winning seven Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Director, it also grossed nearly $1 billion worldwide. But it’s far from the only worthy historical title, as anyone who’s seen the likes of The Brutalist and Killers of the Flower Moon can attest.
Considering more than 300 million people subscribe to the service, there’s a good chance you are. Netflix’s catalogue has received valid criticism for skewing almost entirely toward newer movies, especially following the reveal that, as of a month ago, 1973’s The Sting was its oldest offering. (That dubious honor now belongs to 1957’s An Affair to Remember, but the larger point stands.) But while not all of the streaming service’s best historical movies are exactly historical themselves, there are still a number of films worth seeking out.
Long before aggregators such as Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic forever changed the way moviegoers read reviews, individual critics held massive sway. One of them was Bosley Crowther of TheNew York Times, who so loathed the film Bonnie and Clyde that he wrote more than one diatribe against Arthur Penn’s landmark crime drama starring Warren Beatty and Faye Dunaway. This was ultimately to his detriment, as Pauline Kael’s now-legendary defense of the film helped turn the tide in its favor — and against Crowther, who lost his job by the end of the year. Kael, meanwhile, is now considered one of the most influential film critics of all time, just as Bonnie and Clyde is hailed as a cinematic revolution that helped launch the New Hollywood era.
Credit: Silver Screen Collection/ Moviepix via Getty Images
If You Want a Little of Everything
Despite claims to the contrary, there’s only one Spartacus. There’s also only one Spartacus, and it’s one of Stanley Kubrick’s greatest films — as well as one of my favorite historical dramas. That list also includes Lawrence of Arabia and Dersu Uzala, one of which is obviously much more famous than the other. And yet the latter stands out among filmmaker Akira Kurosawa’s august filmography as his only non-Japanese-language movie as well as one of his most sensitive. Alongside Rashomon, it’s somehow also the only of Kurosawa’s films to win the Academy Award for Best International Feature Film.
War never changes, as the famous line goes, but the movies about it do. Filmmakers have been making them since at least 1898, when Tearing Down the Spanish Flag caused controversy despite barely being a minute long, and they show no signs of slowing. World War II and Vietnam in particular have captured filmmakers’ imaginations, with classics such as Saving Private Ryan and Apocalypse Now regularly appearing on lists of not only the greatest war movies ever made but the greatest movies, period. Those two are just scratching the surface, however: The Thin Red Line, released the same year as Saving PrivateRyan, takes a considerably more philosophical approach to its portrayal of soldiers at war, and To Be or Not to Be shows that there’s comedy to be found even in the darkest of times.
For similar articles, subscribe to our sister brand Movie Brief, brought to you by our resident film critic Michael Nordine. You’ll receive a weekly review and recommendation of a new movie, whether in theaters or available to stream, as well as a list of 25 must-see movies when you first sign up.
Despite their differences, the United States and England have a lot in common. A “special relationship” has bound the countries together since at least 1946, when Winston Churchill coined the phrase after the Allied victory in World War II. For evidence of the similarities, one need look no further than the movies of that era. Actors such as Cary Grant, Katharine Hepburn, and other luminaries of Hollywood’s golden age — which peaked in the 1930s and ’40s — spoke in a way that was common at the time but now seems a relic of the age.
Technology was a factor: Sound recording wasn’t as advanced as it is today, with companies such as Western Electric promising “noiseless recording” that might not sound fully noiseless to 21st-century ears. And many actors of the era began their careers on the stage and had been trained to deliver lines in a way that likewise sounds old-fashioned. Most distinctive of all, however, was the accent. It sounded like a fusion of American English and British English, hence its name: the transatlantic accent.
Also known as the mid-Atlantic accent, this affected manner of speech wasn’t actually a cinematic invention. It has its roots in the Northeastern U.S. elite accent, which can be traced back to wealthy New Englanders of the late 19th century. That accent is itself based on Received Pronunciation (RP) — often considered the “standard” British accent and also known as the Queen’s English, Oxford English, or BBC English. As such, the transatlantic voice is closer to accents in New York, Boston, or Philadelphia than those heard in Chicago, Dallas, or Los Angeles.
Americans who were taught to adopt this accent, often in elocution class at private schools, were told it was the “proper” way to speak, and because it sounded formal it became common among actors taking on serious roles — first onstage and then on-screen. Here is an example of the accent in The Philadelphia Story, a classic among classics, starring Grant and Hepburn:
A few of the accent’s trademarks can be heard in that scene, namely the dropped “r” sounds (“mothah” rather than “mother), also known as a non-rhotic accent; an emphasis on the hard “t” (“writah” rather than “writer”); and stretching certain vowels (“dance” becomes “dahnce”), which is called a short-a split.
The transatlantic accent is also associated with the kind of back-and-forth, rapid-fire delivery often seen in screwball comedies such as His Girl Friday, starring Grant alongside Rosalind Russell. Another practitioner was Orson Welles, who used it in arguably the most acclaimed film of all time: Citizen Kane, the masterpiece he co-wrote, produced, directed, and starred in as the title character. Beginning in the 1930s, actors working within the Hollywood studio system were actively encouraged to do likewise.
Advertisement
More from our network
History Facts is part of Inbox Studio, an email-first media company. *Indicates a third-party property.
But it wasn’t just actors who adopted the transatlantic accent. Franklin D. Roosevelt, the longest-serving president in U.S. history, did as well, and it’s no coincidence that he was born in New York to an extremely wealthy family; ditto Jackie Kennedy. America has never had a formal aristocracy the way its friends across the pond do, but old-money families from New England and the Northeast come close, and the mid-Atlantic accent was a marker of such groups.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Credit: Courtesy of Amazon
That said, not every actor who spoke this way was born in the U.S. Northeast, nor were they all wealthy. The mid-Atlantic accent was further popularized by vocal coach Edith Skinner, whose 1942 book Speak With Distinction became a sort of how-to guide for aspiring actors from all over.
Her lessons began falling out of favor in the 1950s, by which time the accent became less prominent in movies — a decline that has been attributed to the growing middle class in the wake of World War II and an emphasis on stories of everyday Americans rather than those who either belonged to or longed to join the upper class. Not unlike black-and-white cinematography and scratchy sound, the distinctive accent is now a relic of a bygone era, and an instant reminder that a movie was made in Old Hollywood.
Credit: Bob Riha Jr/ Archive Photos via Getty Images
AuthorMichael Nordine
February 20, 2025
Love it?33
The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences hands out 23 awards on Oscar night, one of which gets pride of place as the real star of the show: Best Picture. Studios spend millions of dollars on campaigns they hope will crown their nominee the winner, prognosticators spend 365 days a year trying to divine which movie will take home the top prize, and millions tune in to see what all the fuss is about.
The coveted award has had several official names since ending the first ceremony on May 16, 1929, including the Academy Award for Outstanding Picture and the Academy Award for Outstanding Production, and it took on its current moniker in 1962. The number of nominees increased from five to 10 in 2009, likely in response to complaints that the usual slate was too rarefied after popular favorites such as The Dark Knight and WALL-E failed to be nominated. The most recent winner is Christopher Nolan’s Oppenheimer, which took home a total of seven Academy Awards in addition to grossing $976 million at the box office — proof that commercial success and Oscar glory are far from mutually exclusive. Here, we look back at the film that won Best Picture every year in Oscar history.
2022: Everything Everywhere All at Once (Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert)
2023: Oppenheimer (Christopher Nolan)
For similar articles, subscribe to our sister brand Movie Brief, brought to you by our resident film critic Michael Nordine. You’ll receive a weekly review and recommendation of a new movie, whether in theaters or available to stream, as well as a list of 25 must-see movies when you first sign up.
Credit: L. J. Willinger/ Hulton Archive via Getty Images
AuthorTony Dunnell
February 5, 2025
Love it?114
Film actors have adopted stage names since the earliest days of cinema, and some of the most recognizable names in entertainment history were in fact carefully considered pseudonyms.
These stage names were adopted for various reasons. In many cases, actors, often under the guidance of their agents or studio executives, chose a pseudonym simply because it was more marketable than the name they were given at birth — whether because it was more memorable, more glamorous, shorter, or simply easier to say or spell.
In other cases, actors adopted names that were considered more American-sounding than their given names. Martin Sheen, for example, was born Ramón Antonio Gerardo Estévez, but was persuaded to change his name to something considered more Hollywood-friendly — a decision he later regretted. Keanu Reeves also was told to change his name early on in his career, but he stood his ground and stuck with “Keanu.”
Here are six of the most legendary Hollywood stars who adopted stage names, including screen icons such as Judy Garland, Cary Grant, and Marilyn Monroe.
Judy Garland, born Frances Ethel Gumm, began her career when she was just a child, performing with her two older sisters in a vaudeville group called the Gumm Sisters. In 1934, when the group began attracting attention, comedian and emcee George Jessel suggested the sisters change their last name to something more glamorous and theatrical. He recommended “Garland,” possibly inspired by Carole Lombard’s character, Lily Garland, in the film Twentieth Century, or perhaps after the acclaimed drama critic Robert Garland.
A year later, Garland chose to change her first name, too, adopting “Judy” after a popular Hoagy Carmichael song of the same name. The new stage name helped launch Judy Garland’s glittering career, beginning with her starring role in the 1939 classic The Wizard of Oz.
Advertisement
More from our network
History Facts is part of Inbox Studio, an email-first media company. *Indicates a third-party property.
Fred Astaire’s career on stage, film, and television spanned 76 years, and his name is now synonymous with the golden age of Hollywood. Yet he was not born Fred Astaire: His birth name was Frederick Austerlitz. Astaire and his sister Adele changed their surname early on in their vaudeville career, when they performed as a double act. It was their mother who suggested the change, as she believed that “Austerlitz” was too strongly associated with the Battle of Austerlitz — a famous 1805 battle that was one of Napoleon Bonaparte’s greatest victories. Other sources suggest that Astaire’s mother deemed it necessary to simplify and Americanize their family name to make it more elegant, easier to pronounce, and less foreign-sounding.
Marilyn Monroe was born Norma Jeane Mortenson, and later took her mother’s surname, Baker. Norma Jeane’s transformation into one of Hollywood’s most iconic figures began with her name change in 1946, after she signed to 20th Century Fox. Coming up with her new name was a team effort. Studio executive Ben Lyon suggested “Marilyn” after the Broadway musical star Marilyn Miller. Norma Jeane, who was just 20 at the time, suggested “Monroe,” which was her mother’s maiden name.
For Marilyn, there were personal reasons for changing her name. In her unfinished autobiography, My Story, she explained that she didn’t relate to her birth name as she associated it with her troubled childhood and the neglect and abandonment she suffered in her formative years.
Marion Morrison’s transformation into John Wayne was a gradual process. His friends gave him the nickname “Duke” while he was still a child. Then, while working as a prop man and occasionally playing bit roles at Fox Studios, he was given an on-screen credit as “Duke Morrison.” A year later, in 1930, director Raoul Walsh took a gamble and cast Wayne in his first starring role in The Big Trail.
Walsh and studio head Winfield Sheehan agreed that neither “Marion Morrison” nor “Duke Morrison” was suitable for the rugged-looking actor. Walsh suggested “Anthony Wayne” after the Revolutionary War General “Mad” Anthony Wayne, but Sheehan rejected it as sounding “too Italian.” Walsh then suggested “John Wayne,” which both men accepted as being a solid, masculine, and altogether American name. Marion Morrison became John Wayne without even being present at the meeting.
During her early local radio performances in the 1930s, a young Doris Kappelhoff caught the attention of band leader Barney Rapp. At the time, Rapp was looking for a female vocalist. He asked Kappelhoff to audition, having already auditioned about 200 singers. She got the job, but Rapp had one request: She had to change her name. He felt that her surname was too harsh and awkward and that it took up too much space on the marquees.
Rapp suggested the name “Day” because he had been particularly impressed by the young singer’s rendition of the song “Day After Day.” Doris Day didn’t like the name at first, feeling that it sounded too much like a burlesque performer. But the moniker certainly served her well: She went on to become one of the leading Hollywood film stars of the 1950s and 1960s.
In 1932, 27-year-old actor Archibald Leach did a screen test for Paramount Pictures. The studio’s general manager, B.P. Schulberg, saw something in Leach and offered the young Englishman a five-year contract. But there was one condition: Schulberg told Leach he had to change his name “to something that sounded more all-American, like Gary Cooper.”
Leach took the first name “Cary” from the character Cary Lockwood, whom he had played in the Broadway musical Nikki. He was then handed a list of preapproved surnames by the Paramount publicity department, from which he chose “Grant.” And so, the debonair Cary Grant was born — along with one of classic Hollywood’s definitive leading men.
What’s past is prologue, and that famous phrase certainly holds true when it comes to movies. This year’s most notable historical dramas brought their subjects to life in a way that only movies can, using the unreality of filmmaking to show how our understanding of what’s come before informs the present. Here are five of the best of them.
Another word for “settler” is “colonialist,” and indeed the original Spanish title of Felipe Gálvez’s debut feature is Los colonos. Set in 1901 in Tierra del Fuego, an archipelago divided between Argentina and Chile whose name means “Land of Fire,” the film is nothing if not combustible. Inspired by real events, it ranks among the most brutal Westerns ever made. And yet it’s also strikingly beautiful, with cinematography that literally glows like a small, resilient campfire illuminating an otherwise pitch-black landscape from which anything — friend, foe, man, beast — could emerge. It’s not often that a film set in uncharted land feels so genuinely uncharted.
Advertisement
More from our network
History Facts is part of Inbox Studio, an email-first media company. *Indicates a third-party property.
One of the year’s best movies, historical or otherwise, is Brady Corbet’s stunningly ambitious The Brutalist. It plays like a sweeping biopic of its (fictional) protagonist, Hungarian architect and Holocaust survivor László Tóth, whose postwar arrival in America is signaled by the upside-down appearance of the Statue of Liberty in a stunning opening sequence. Adrien Brody plays Tóth in what’s surely the performance of his career — no small feat, considering he’s still the youngest Best Actor winner in history for The Pianist — alongside Felicity Jones, Guy Pearce, Raffey Cassidy, and Stacy Martin. It’s a marvel of a movie, the kind that doesn’t come around often and demands to be seen on the largest screen possible.
Cillian Murphy could have done just about anything after his well-deserved Oscar win for Oppenheimer, and it’s notable that he chose to star in and co-produce Small Things Like These. An adaptation of Claire Keegan’s 2021 novel, which won the Orwell Prize and was shortlisted for the Booker Prize, it both lives up to and transcends its humble title. Set in the 1980s but tracing its narrative back decades earlier, Small Things Like These concerns a coal merchant (Murphy) who lives near a school for girls that he gradually realizes is actually a Magdalene laundry — a cruel institution run by the Catholic Church for so-called “fallen women” who were exploited for cheap labor and essentially kept as prisoners. Irish cinema has a long tradition of taking hard, revealing looks at the darkest chapters of the country’s history, and Small Things Like These is no exception.
The first question to ask of a new Tom Hardy movie: What strange, compelling voice will the actor affect this time? The second: Is the movie any good? Both are worth finding out for yourself when it comes to The Bikeriders, but rest assured that writer-director Jeff Nichols’ latest film is very much worth seeing. Nichols, the thoughtful filmmaker behind movies such as Take Shelter, Mud, and Loving, charts the rise and fall of a late 1960s motorcycle club called the Vandals (based on the real Outlaws Motorcycle Club), that starts as something fun and ends as something much more sinister. Jodie Comer, Austin Butler (who still sounds like Elvis), and Michael Shannon co-star in the film, which shows the romantic sides of its subject without romanticizing it.
Not unlike The Settlers, Nikolaj Arcel’s The Promised Land charts the taming of a wild landscape. In this case it’s the barren moorland of Denmark, which Captain Ludvig Kahlen has taken on the quixotic task of cultivating in order to gain a noble title — an effort that some in power would prefer to fail. Mads Mikkelsen plays the gruff Kahlen, who was a real 18th-century military official, with his usual steely charisma. The soil is harsh, but that doesn’t mean nothing worthwhile will grow in it.
Credit: Columbia TriStar/ Moviepix via Getty Images
AuthorMichael Nordine
October 16, 2024
Love it?91
Historical movies are often as notable for their factual inaccuracies as they are for their emotional truths, a tension that continues to define the genre. The best of them strike a delicate balance somewhere in the middle, offering insights that no other medium can deliver in the same way. And while some of the films on this list have more fidelity to the historical record than others, all are worth seeking out for the fresh perspectives they provide on old topics.
For similar articles, subscribe to our new sister brand Movie Brief, brought to you by our resident film critic Michael Nordine. You’ll receive a weekly review and recommendation of a new movie, whether in theaters or available to stream, as well as a list of 25 must-see movies when you first sign up.
If you’ve ever seen a crowd of people break into chants of “I’m Spartacus!” but never seen Stanley Kubrick’s three-hour-plus epic, there’s no time like the present to watch one of the best movies ever made about the past. Kirk Douglas stars in the title role, an enslaved gladiator in ancient Rome who breaks his chains and starts an unstoppable movement. The actor lived to be 103 and received three Academy Award nominations as well as a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame for his legendary body of work, but no singular performance was more moving than this one. (Amazon Prime Video)
Advertisement
More from our network
History Facts is part of Inbox Studio, an email-first media company. *Indicates a third-party property.
An epic before it’s even begun thanks to its all-timer of an overture by composer Maurice Jarre, Lawrence of Arabia is, quite simply, one of the greatest films ever made. To say that David Lean specialized in large-scale productions would be putting it lightly — he also directed The Bridge on the River Kwai, Doctor Zhivago, and A Passage to India — as would calling Peter O’Toole’s performance in the title role memorable. (He was nominated for an Oscar for it but, as with all seven other nominations he received, didn’t win.) It’s a movie that has not only stood the test of time but transcended it; in its scope and heft, Lawrence of Arabia has achieved timelessness. (Amazon Prime Video)
Because choosing just one Akira Kurosawa movie to highlight in any list is a fool’s errand, it seems best in this case to go with a lesser-known entry in the Rashomon, Seven Samurai, and Ikiru director’s filmography. Based on a 1923 memoir about the Nanai trapper and hunter of the same name, Dersu Uzala was Kurosawa’s first film after a suicide attempt prompted by a career downturn. The movie was quite successful, winning the Academy Award for Best Foreign-Language Film and selling more than 21 million tickets in the Soviet Union (where it was produced as Kurosawa’s only non-Japanese-language movie). There’s a ruggedness to Dersu Uzala that, along with its unfamiliar setting, makes it feel like an outlier in Kurosawa’s nonpareil filmography, but the longer it goes on, the more you realize it couldn’t have been made by anyone else. (The Criterion Channel)
It’s doubtful that anyone expected David Lynch to follow the singularly disturbing Eraserhead with a movie as comparatively normal as The Elephant Man, but that versatility is part of what makes him one of our most treasured filmmakers. Based on the life of Joseph Merrick, who suffered from severe physical deformities and whose cruel nickname gives the film its title, Lynch’s second feature might just be the saddest movie ever made. It’s also among the most beautiful, with John Hurt’s endlessly sympathetic performance as Merrick standing as a marvel in its own right — just try getting through the climactic “I am a human being!” scene with a dry eye. Despite not winning any of the eight Academy Awards for which it was nominated, the film directly led to the creation of the award for Best Makeup and Hairstyling. (Kanopy)
The Last of the Mohicans is a highlight among highlights in the filmographies of both director Michael Mann and leading man Daniel Day-Lewis. But a warning before watching: You will very likely get the music accompanying its breathless final sequence stuck in your head on and off for the rest of your life. Not that this is a bad thing. Mann's adaptation of the 1826 novel by James Fenimore Cooper is a true epic featuring adventure and sorrow in nearly equal measure, with much of the latter owed to one of the most poignant shots ever captured on film. (Tubi)
Being familiar with the films of Terrence Malick is probably better preparation for The New World than being familiar with the story of Pocahontas. As in much of his work, the uniquely philosophical filmmaker uses his ostensible subject matter — in this case, the 1607 arrival of English settlers to what will soon be known as Jamestown and the subsequent meeting of John Smith and Pocahontas — as a jumping-off point for his usual preoccupations. These include lyrical voice-over narration, striking shots of nature, and a star-crossed romance between two lovers who are seeking the same thing in different ways yet can never seem to find it — or each other. (Max)
Advertisement
Advertisement
Another History Pick for You
Today in History
Get a daily dose of history’s most fascinating headlines — straight from Britannica’s editors.