MovieChat Forums > The Aeronauts (2019) Discussion > The REAL story was about two men. They e...

The REAL story was about two men. They erased Henry Coxwell and replaced him with a woman


This is the true story
http://www.thosemagnificentmen.co.uk/balloons/glaisher.html

"In 1862 the British Association for the Advancement of Science decided to fund a series of flights to study the upper atmosphere. The balloons would have to fly as high as possible. Member of the Greenwich Observatory and founder member of the British Meteorological Society, James Glaisher (1809-1903), volunteered to perform these potentially dangerous flights. In all he made 28 ascents between 1862 and 1866, 13 of which were funded by the Association. His usual pilot was the experienced balloonist Henry Coxwell (1819-1900). On their first ascent of 17 July 1862 they reached an altitude of 26,177 ft. without oxygen.

On 5 September, in a balloon called the Mars, they managed an altitude in the region of 30,000 ft., although it almost cost them their lives. Glaisher lost consciousness and Coxwell had to climb up into the rigging to free a tangled valve line. His hands were so paralysed with cold that he had to pull the chord with his teeth in order to check their ascent. Had he failed to manage it, they would both surely have died of hypothermia or oxygen starvation.
"

In the movie, Coxwell has been replaced by Amelia. Here you have the historical climb of Henry Coxwell to the balloon, with his hands paralyzed. But he has been deleted from his own story. Now it's female empowered Amelia who does it:
https://cdn2us.denofgeek.com/sites/denofgeekus/files/2019/08/the-aeronauts-trailer-release-date-cast.jpg

It seems that Coxwell doesn't deserve to appear in a movie that narrates his own achievements... because, well, he doesn't have a vagina. I'm sure he would be so happy about that!

reply

Who cares about your racist sexist history you angry incel? Women can do everything men can and better!

reply

Well since every Hollywood ever made has to feature a romance between the central characters, you should be grateful they made one of them a woman!

reply

That is TERRIBLE!! This RUINS the movie for me now. Why say it's a true story, and then not even pay homage to the person who saved the day? This SJW crap has gone waaaay to far in this case.

reply

[deleted]

They said it was BASED on a true story. How many movies are accurate anyway? However, if they want to do true stories about amazing women there are always Alexandra David Neil who traveled around Asia on foot or Fiona Kolbinger who recently won a transcontinental bike race in a field full of men.

reply

Quite a couple of women. I didn't know about Alexandra David Neil, what a woman. It would interesting to have a movie about her... or better not, since they would rewrite her as the usual proto-woke-feminist archetype when she was a mystic and an anarchist.

That's a problem I find in modern "historical" movies. Either they completely fake history (this movie), or they use real characters... rewritten to fit modern politically/religiously correct archetypes. When I watch a movie about an historical character, I can accept some degree of fictionalization (like dialogues or minor characters), but I expect the general portrait of those characters being faithful to the real historical ones.

reply

It would definitely be interesting to have a movie about her including her spiritual and political interests. (btw feminism is a type of rebellion against the status quo just like anarchism is)

Indiana Jones was a "historical" movie based around before WWII but most of it was fictional just like Aeronauts is.

reply

That doesn't matters, the future is female and you privileged white men WILL accept it.

reply

The past was also female, Queen Victoria and the British conquest. Margarette Thatcher and the damage she did. Madeline Albright and her saying deaths of innocent civilians was "worth it". Don't think women are any better just because of their genders.

reply

This doesn't surprise me. I found the movie mostly believable except the woman being in the balloon. But since all history books and films about the past are total bullshit, this doesn't bother me. We re-invent the truth in real time while it's happening now.

reply

Entertaining nonsense incorporating contemporary PC trends was judged to be more important than historical accuracy. I've come to have low expectations of movies these days.

reply

Did you get this upset watching The Great Escape (1963). I mean a lot of the cast was American and they implied that Americans were present during the escape. That should raise your ire as well. Or the casting of Angelina Jolie in A Mighty Heart (2007), of Jim Stugess in 21 (2008)? Did you get mad about those? Or is it just when they change a male character and replace with a male?

reply