Attila wasn't WHITE!
Next thing you know, they'll make a movie about the Mongols starring Jude Law as Genghis...
share
This is A Sig
---
IMDB...its not fanboard
MovieChat Forums > Attila (2001) Discussion > Attila wasn't WHITE!
They already made a Genghis Khan movie, starring John Wayne...Lol
share[deleted]
if you knew anything about history. you would know that attila was a euroasian man meaning of both asian and european lineage. just as all huns were and that is exactly what he looked like
shareWRONG! If you've ever been to Hawaii you'd know that their called hapa and they look nothing like the ppl in this movie! I cant believe they made an Attila movie w/ Gerard as Attila, smfh
My IMDb credentials:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur7441441/comments
Some people need to chill out and repeat: "It's just a movie..."
When darkness overcomes the heart, Lil' Slugger appears...
Attila was Eurasian. The Huns were a combination of both east and west, very similiar to the Slavic peoples of today. Where do you think the name of HUNgary came from? Take a look at a Hungaryian, Russian or other peoples now living in Eastern Europe. They are the true descendents of the Huns. And guess what? They're "white", or Caucassian, a name that comes from the Caucas mountains. The main Greater Caucasus range is considered to be the dividing line between Asia and Europe. Too many people hear "Attila" and they think "Gengis" and they then think "Asian". In doing so they are showing their true racism by stereotyping. Many German and Finnish people also carry Hunic DNA.
shareThe Huns were originally from Asia, and mixed with Europeans as they moved westward. The reason their descendants don't look like them anymore is because it's been over 1600 years. Some Eastern Europeans still have vaguely Asian features, but I doubt that's what they looked like in 400 AD. They sure as hell didn't look anything like Gerard Butler.
shareGerard Butler is Scottisch right? He might play a celt but eastern european? Not really...They just wanted a hot action actor someone that would appeal to a large croud....Gerard Butler fitts the bill. I didn't mind him though...as long as you don't expect a historically correct movie it's fine. He is very easy on the eye...whatever his origins.
I didn't mind Gary Oldman playing a eastern european count Dracula either...I thought he did it quite well....loved the part where he speaks of being related to Atilla!
The HUN part in Hungarian did not come from Huns. It's a coincidence. It comes from the word Ugor or Onogur with a silent H put in by French, which is the base of the English word for Hungarians. Why do you think there no H in German or Italian (Ungarn, Ungherese)? Also, Hungarians are Finnugric, and Russians are Slavic, they can't be descendants of the same nation. Hungarian language is also considerably older than the Hunnic empire. Don't make thing up.
shareWe don't know for sure what Hungarians are and where are they from really 100%. The Finno-Ugric theory is a theory, not a fact, only around 300 words shared from this language group and majority of the Hungarian vocabulary is not related to any other language's so it had to come from a different source.
Unfortunately there aren't many evidence left from the Huns' language but there are a lot of shared vocabulary from the remaining language with Hungarian like balta, sisak, béka, sár, árpa(means barley, Árpád=Hungarian grand prince, founding father, in one of the Hungarian codexes he claims to be Attila's descendant and successor) etc.
Also a lot of Hun legends survived through Hungarian codexes from the XIIIth century)
Another thing is the most recognized Attila researcher claims that the Holy Crown of Hungary is the crown which was promised to Attila(&descendants) from the Pope if he abandons his plan to attack Rome.
Buda(now Budapest), the capital of Hungary shares the same name as Attila's brother.
Even in the XIXth century it was a generally accepted fact that Hungarians are descendants of the Huns, even the national anthem references this(Blood of Bendegúz->Attila's Father). It was only after that the Habsburgs tried to erase the national identity and came up with this Finno-Ugric-stupidity and started promoting it and at the same time silenced any other researcher with different studies. It was easy to accomplish that since they had censorship and every publication in the country went through them.
Attila was born in the Western part of today's Russia but the Russians are not descendants of the Huns, I think he/she meant Bulgaria, who were Huns but went through forceful Slaviczation but still remember the relation to Hungarians and Huns.
Who the hell knows what Attila looked like; we don't have any exact portraits or statues of him so what he looks like all depends on the point of view of whoever is depicting him, be it in film or art. Granted, he most certainly didn't look like Gerald Butler but it's a movie, not a history class. Geeeezzzzz!
shareThat doesn't make it any less historically inaccurate. We know for at fact that he wasn't Caucasian.
share[deleted]
BS, the Huns did come from Mongolia, but were later mixed with Central Asians, there are historical evidence for this, Attila was described having small eyes, a flat nose and a dark skin tone indicating his east Asian origins. Gerard Butler have none of these features.
share[deleted]
Wikipedia reads:
Since Joseph de Guignes in the 18th century, historians have associated the Huns who appeared on the borders of Europe in the 4th century with the Xiongnu who migrated out of the Mongolia region some three hundred years before. Due to the conflict with Han China, the northern branch of the Xiongnu had retreated north-westward; their descendants may have migrated through Eurasia and consequently they may have some degree of cultural and genetic continuity with the Huns.[7] The evidence for continuity between Huns and Xiongnu has not been definitive.[7] A school of modern scholarship instead uses an ethnogenetic, rather than essentialist, approach in explaining the Huns' origin.
Xiōngnú is the modern Mandarin Chinese pronunciation, while it is pronounced as Hung-no in modern Cantonese. It was pronounced /xuawŋ-nɔ/ in Early Middle Chinese.[19] Apart from the similarity of the names, evidence includes the transmission of grip laths for composite bows from Central Asia to the west[20] and the similarity of Xiongnu and Hunnic cauldrons, which were buried on river banks both in Hungary and in the Ordos.[21]:17
The ancient Sogdian letters from the 4th century mention Huns, while the Chinese sources write Xiongnu, in the context of the sacking of Luoyang.[22][23] However, there is a historical gap of 300 years between the Chinese and later sources. As Peter Heather writes, "The ancestors of our [4th century European] Huns could even have been a part of the [1st century] Xiongnu confederation, without being the 'real' Xiongnu. Even if we do make some sort of connection between the 4th century Huns and the 1st century Xiongnu, an awful lot of water has passed under an awful lot of bridges in the three hundred years' worth of lost history.''
share
Should also mention that Chinese writing didn't have a good way of expressing all foreign sounds.
Xiong Nu sounds something like "shung nu".
It's possible that the Xiong Nu is the closest they wanted to get to the word Hun.
This movie was historically inaccurate, The Huns were a Confederate Barbarian Nomadic tribe in the steppes of inner Mongolia, The Huns are the ancestors of Mongols, Koreans and Japanese. They were reffered to in Ancient times as the Xiongu by the Chinese, who erected the great Wall to keep Barbarian tribes like the Xiongnu/Huns from invading and pillagin their Kingdoms. As you might expect The Huns/Xiongnu are not Caucasian types but a Sino-Mongol people and are genetically related to Mongolians and Siberians and other Northeast- asian peoples.
shareBy the time the Huns got to Europe they were most likely a polyglot people who also included Central Asians, Scythians/Sarmatians and Slavs.
share