Reference guides for Film and TV

[TITVS SABATINVS AQVILIVS]

bombing because of it's historical accuracy in costume and production design

The problem is in the discerning. Why the public has to trust the director about the accuracy for Barry Lindon and not for Troy? The public trusted Kubrick because of his well known maniacal accuracy in his works, but a director can capitalize the ignorance of the public making a sumptuous movie fullfilled of mistakes... Making the public discern is fundamental for the growing of the public. The director with an explaining caption signs a contract with the public where he bets his own reputation. That gives penetration, depth and public appreciates this form of respect.

What against a simple caption like those ones of "Star Wars" that justifies even if it does not explain everything of course, that, when in the movie you see "strange things", make the public understand that those oddities are not just funny "creative inventions" of a director in the mood for amazing at all costs?

Of course I don't know deeply the behaviour of the anglo-saxon average public, as well as I don't know the asian one, but I know very well the behaviour of the average italian (latin too?) public, and believe me, when you are on "historical" mode, a caption (or more captions within the movie) is better and costs nothing. After it, they'll follow you everywhere yuo'll be so crazy to bring them. It's like a warranty about the quality of a part of the movie. They'll think: "ok, you've started seriously, now I follow you: thrill me, teach me and move me... and I'll see the movie many times, and I'll buy the DVD and the tee-shirts too, and maybe I'll get closer to the History, and maybe I'll become a roman re-enactor too, and..." wink:

Just you have to make good captions and put them there in a nice way, along the action, many cinema masters did so, even if for other purposes...

Vale,