Example collocations logo

Historical in sentence

2205 examples of Historical in a sentence

This Italian-Russian endeavor is a lost treasure and one of the great historical dramas.
This bittersweet romantic piece however, does not revolve around it, but keeps a balance between a sensitively depicted threesome of one beautiful woman, a restaurateur and a pianist-composer and the historical background which influenced it and eventually sealed its fate.
From MGM comes a big budget historical drama which tells a great story with the accuracy of real history, not common-knowledge history, or (God forbid) the trash they teach as history in public schools these days.
Certainly viewers who insist that their movies must be politically correct learning experiences or must have educational value like a two hour university lecture will abhor its lighthearted approach and historical inaccuracy.
I understand the historical inaccuracies (they are needed sometimes to make the story flow better) but some of them are grossly and unwisely used.
Lovers of historical romance and adventure films should be pleased...if they don't expect accurate history any more than would be present in a King Arthur or Robin Hood tale.
Mid-twentieth-century historical dramas are worth a look for the sumptuous sets and costumes Hollywood studios might provide, plus their big casts might draw in accomplished character actors.
I just was hoping for a more historical and serious film, but who knows, one day they will make it.
This is a very welcome addition to the historical documentation of the erotic lives of gay men.
The earliest sounds films tend to be weak, awkward, and more interesting for historical reasons other than entertaining.
Another bold frontier for the series (previously explored, but less interestingly, in Squire of Gothos) was crossed as Tomorrow is Yesterday established the show's sense of humor by - characteristically - poking fun at its own historical context.
The original series was never equaled in any of its worthy successors in making commentary - whether comedic or serious - on its own historical context.
But sometimes one might enjoy a bad movie when it is seen as a historical context--but this is not such a movie.
The settings were so beautiful: the environments, the historical portraying, the story, the clothing and, not the least to mention, the acting.
From the beginning we are pushed into the lives of these four, sometimes three, mostly two, teenagers that love nothing more in life than to talk about sex, getting married, past boyfriends, and historical moments in the past.
This was a huge flaw in historical accuracy.
This movie portrays a riveting historical account that tells the story of a visionary of his era who was wrongfully convicted of speaking his mind and not obeying military policy and procedure of the time.
I enjoy films depicting historical scenes or those in the fantasy setting (Lord of the Rings,etc.)and
I found confusing the mix of first person story telling and historical comment in the off-screen commentary.
I knew enough about medieval history for Crichton's historical howlers to ruin it for me.
In general these movies are dramas or comedies and very often they provide the viewer with historical informations of a certain time and area.
The film's historical basis allows the story to be told easily.
On the negative side (for fussy duds like me), we have the factual errors all-too-common in movies which mislead people on points of historical importance.
Based on the historical alliance between India's greatest Mughal emperor and a Rajput Hindu princess, Gowariker models his film on the Shakespearean mould of palace intrigue with its collection of warring power brokers, plotting princes, distant queen mothers, bitchy but loyal eunuchs, and concubines galore.
It's also something of a gamble: Gowariker has never treaded the historical epic in his earlier features, especially one about India's first attempt at religious pluralism.
I am really interested in the character created by Shakespeare and the historical Richard both.
As a non-Christian who nevertheless respects the historical figure of Jesus Christ and the beauty of his philosophy and teachings, I found this to be a powerful portrayal of much that I think is worthwhile about the Christ story.
I found the historical content and some of the dialogue pleasing, but it became ultimately pointless.
Historical novels often take liberties with history; its expected.
And historical screenplays based on historical novels?
BackNext