Come and See.

[ahalpert]

I don't know the history and I haven't seen the movie, but I think it's important to be aware of propaganda goals. I watched Triumph of the Will in numerous film history classes but we were all obviously aware of the historical background of Hitler. But generally, people can be swayed by propaganda and that's why it's made. Schindler's List was at least rooted in truth as far as I know, although they may have whitewashed his character as Hollywood typically does.

 

[DLD]

Again, to be clear, when I watch a narrative film, I am never under the delusion that I'm watching something that is historically very accurate...

But there's a limit on a "creative license", isn't there? You wouldn't want to see the Imperial Japanese Navy attack Pearl Harbor using parachute jumping Godzillas? A film "based on historical events" has to keep its historical context. In that regard, Soviet films don't measure up, with Shepit;ko "The Ascent" being the sole exception.

I linked to the "Liberation" series on the Soviet films thread. It's supposed to be "realistic" but it's not. It has redeeming qualities but it's not a historically accurate depiction. "Come and See" is likewise a film that ignores the ugly underside of the guerilla operations on the occupied territories.

Older Hollywood films such as "Midway" (1976) and "The Longest Day" (1962) may have lacked the grit of "Saving Private Ryan" (1998) and "Stalingrad" (1993) but their narrative was pretty accurate. "Come and See" never had accuracy as its intent. It was not possible under the regime of that era and the director never planned it to be so anyway.