Posted on 01/26/2015 11:05:56 AM PST by PJ-Comix
Okay, it wasn't quite as bad as "Sam Adams: Vampire Hunter" but it was close. I am referring to the History channel's series "The Sons of Liberty" in which the real life Sam Adams, who was a middle-aged portly guy by the time of the opening scene in 1765, comes off as a young athletic urban ninja hopping up to the rooftops of Boston to evade arrest by British troops. And that was just one of the many laughable inaccuracies of the History channel's presentation of the era leading up to the American Revolution.
Although one can easily get the sense that history was often left by the wayside just by watching it, several websites have pointed out the numerous historical inaccuracies of the series. Journal of the American Revolution is among those sites listing the many, many inaccuracies of this series. For the sake of brevity, we shall only look at the glaring errors of only the first episode:
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Middle-age during those days was 25 to 30.
Dang. I had been looking forward to this.
Not quite, if one could avoid childhood illness and infection the average life expectancy of most eras was in the late 60s to early 70s
I looked forward to the series but couldn’t make it through the first hour.
It was history simplified for the sheeple.
I still can’t get over the fact that it’s an 18th. century drama overlaid with 20th. century rock-and-roll music from The Rolling Stones, a BRITISH band.
What the.......?
You just need to think of this like Vikings, another History Channel series that plays fast and loose with the facts. I watch Vikings for entertainment, not education.
On the bright side, history teachers will be able to tell who didn’t do the reading when students start quoting from the series.
One Sam Adams from the 1700’s had more intestinal fortitude than all of the people from newsbusters.com could ever possibly muster. And he would probably kick all of their asses without much effort.
Yeah - I changed channels in about 20 minutes...
Watched about 12-15 minutes and then bailed out. Feckin’ soap opera.
I guess we’ll see if this works in the ratings. As you said, you have a modern action theme, rock music and a teen pin-up boy, Prince Caspian, as Sam Adams. Its a novel concept but, apart from the costumes, it isn’t history.
I thought Abraham Lincoln was the vampire hunter?
After watching the first installment, my wife and I both commented it was a great show despite the many and odd historical inaccuracies throughout.
Still a good romp.
I found it a safe assumption that if its on the History Channel, it’s not history.
I enjoyed it and I’m looking forward to tonight’s episode.
Bailed when one actor said, “Bullshit!” Didn’t think that term was in use then.
Ha! I would definitely have been one of those students if this was shown in my youth. (BTW, I actually liked it. The clothes and set seemed on target. The acting was ok. I think the Rolling Stones music was only in the commercial.)
Sam Adams from 1765 would have had more energy since he would not have been wasting it trying to escape the British for an arrest warrant that was never issued.
So it was as bad as I thought it would be.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.