Pearl Harbor

Star Wars - It happened a long, long time ago. Yeah, right!

Murder in the First!! For one thing Henry Young is portrayed as someone who stole $5 to feed his sister. In reality he was a hardened bank robber and had commited murder by 1933. After doing time in some state prisons he was ultimately sent to Alcatraz. In the movie he tried to escape and was locked in a jail cell naked and beaten as punishment for trying to escape. In real life the only part of that that is true is that in 1939 he really did attempt escape from Alcatraz. And the part where they cut his Achilles Heel to prevent further escape attempts is also false. In the movie he goes insane from the brutal treatment and stabs inmate Rufus McCain to death. He really did stab Rufus McCain to death but it was because they had tried escaping together (1939) and Young and McCain blamed each other for the failed attempt. And lastly in the movie Young commits suicide. In real life he was transferred from Alcatraz to Missouri State to finish his sentence for the original crimes. Then he was transferred to Washington State to serve a sentence for the murder of McCain and escaped and hasn't been seen since. And because Henry Young was born in 1918, chronologically he could also still be alive.

10,000 BC they had wolly mammoths working on the pyramids in Egypt!!! if you ment one that was supposed to be based on true events im not sure though

Farenheit 9/11 But in the (didactic) entertainment department, it's a toss up among: Elizabeth, 1492, Dances With Wolves, Last Samurai, King Arthur (it claims to be based on "recently discovered historical evidence that shed light on the origins of the Arthurian legend"), Kingdom of Heaven and just about every movie ever set in ancient Rome including: Ben Hurr, The Robe (1&2), Quo Vadis, Spartacus, Clepoatra, The Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire, and Gladiator. Apart from the many incidental historical inaccuracies of these movies (any of which can be forgiven when they a) are trivial, and b) make for a beter movie), all of these err in two major ways: 1) they evince a total misundertanding of the social, cultural, religious and political backdrop - and thus convey that misunderstanding to audiences, and 2) even worse is they engage in gross moral anachronism, projecting ideologies and attitudes and issues that don't belong there. Many of the recent slate of "(un)historical epics" over the last 20 years have indeed gone overboard in slandering religion in general and Christianity in particular, while turning their heros into talking heads for Political Correctness and all the soft-Left ideals of Academia and the Arts. But just on the issue of errors/misrepresentations of historical details, I'd also have to say BRAVEHEART -- but while it got a huge number of the details wildly wrong (including depicting Wallace as a kilt-wearng Highlander but painting his face like Bretons of a millennium earlier, when in fact he was an armored Lowland knight from the poor gentry), it so perfectly captured the situation, the attitudes and practices of the nobles in both England and Scotland, and the plight and spirit of the rebels, it's message is true to history, while the other movies I've listed were really just preaching contemporary and anachonistic messages that were completely alien to the periods and situations the film-makers used to present them. FYI: if you want to see a movie that really captures Roman society, then watch A FUNNY THING HAPPENED ON THE WAY TO THE FORUM. Remove Sondheim's music, and you've got a faithful amalgamation of 3 great and classic Roman satyres by Plautus.