MovieChat Forums > New Worlds (2015) Discussion > I guess the writers didn't bother with h...

I guess the writers didn't bother with historical research then...

posted 10 years ago by Reva_C
24 replies | jump to latest

Just awful...I mean....if you're going to write an historical based drama, based heavily on real people of the time, the least you do is research the fundamentals of those people and their stories.

There are so many huge mistakes/or deliberate false portrayals of real people and what they did during this time (and I mean, so big that they've used things as part of the plot even though they are literally and completely untrue...so much so that if the falsities were taken out, they wouldn't have a plot!) that it's nonsensical to anyone with at least basic knowledge about Charles II's reign.

Unless they think audiences are so stupid that they won't realise they've rewritten history and rewritten's real people's personalities and actions? That in itself is pretty insulting.

It's a shame...I had high hopes for this, and there's some good actors in it.

I just wished they'd used completely fictional characters and events in it rather than using real people and events but then completely ignore basic truth and fact to fit their story, it completely ruins it and makes it laughable......the story here hasn't been fitted to tell the story of the time, the writers clearly had a story in their head and have hacked up history and people to try and make it fit.

Just have the balls to write something completely fictional if you don't have the skill or want to do the research required for historical writing.

Blah. Disappointed.

~ I hardly looked at his face. His knees were what I wished to see. ~

[–] abi-school 10 years ago

stop being so uptight, so its not accurate you trying righting to impress alot of people. its hard, and what right do you have to criticize its a programme to entertain others if you're not impressed instead of ranting on a wbpage and wasting half an hour whut up and change the channel

[–] abbadon-hades 10 years ago

Hey, I like this show,I am entertained by it, so I'll keep watching. Liking something doesn't mean you can't criticize it,or see areas where it could be better. If you were forbidden to point out the flaws of things, it would tend towards fundamentalism.

Maybe poker's just not your game Ike. I know, let's have a spelling contest.
(Tombstone)

[–] marudd50 9 years ago

I'd say one right he has to criticize is that he is obviously educated and you obviously are not. You need to listen more. You might learn something. I could take half-an-hour ripping up your writing, but I will merely observe that "a lot" is two words, not one. See there? You learned something. You would be amazed at how much more can enjoy movies, and even life, when you have some idea of what's going on. It's sort of like how making love with someone you really love is so much better than doing it with someone you picked up in a bar. Know what I mean?

Beauty is truth, truth beauty.

[–] GladysOver 10 years ago

I think one of the greatest shortcomings of 'New Worlds' is that despite it's evident aspirations of being an engaging, complex and thought-provoking drama set against a fascinating historical backdrop of religion, politics and faith, it regrettably exudes a debilitating undercurrent of crude sixth-form-esque politics rendering many of the characters and sub-plots disappointingly one-dimensional and laughably anachronistic in tone.

New Worlds, old tropes.

Shame.

[–] lottadi 10 years ago

The thing that bothered me the most, and it might seem stupid, was all the gunfights. They DID NOT use guns back then, and using rifles was a difficult task. That one thing put me off.

[–] bob-1135 10 years ago

They had been using guns in Europe for about 300 years before the time this series was set. Prince Rupert, a Royalist Cavalry commander in the civil war, was a crack shot with a pair of pistols. Using rifles wasn't particularly difficult, but most of the long arms in this series and at this time were smoothbore muskets, that replaced the bow as the main long range infantry weapon because they were so simple to use. I could teach you to use one in less than ten minutes.

[–] arielle-68486 9 years ago

When I saw the opening scene I was elated. I'm a direct descendant of John Taylor who lived/died in Hadley, Mass in the late 1600s. http://www.findagrave.com/cgi-bin/fg.cgi?page=gr&GRid=15089212

Then the plot continued.

I don't know the complete history, but the Indian attach was shocking. I don't recollect this in family tree notes? Also the townspeople depicted are really passionate and animated. On top of that you get a Zena-like wild woman as a heroine?

These were boring, dour people who liked to work. The kind who wore black all the time, because wearing colors were scandalous.

Some of the early pioneers were former indentured servants in CT. At least my John Taylor ancesor was. It was serious business. The whiplash fast plot with ugly English-side attire is turning me off so much I don't think I can finish up the first show.

If only it depicted the Hadley, Mass I was informed of.

Or maybe I'm just wrong.

Arielle (Taylor) Magnusson