The Film industry employs script writers for entertainment in order to make money, I for one certainly do not confuse it with fact. Sapper, the way you've expressed yourself it seems that you have a poor opinion of the rest of us - who apparently are incapable of telling the difference between 'history' and a film, or 'history' and opinion. Some of us had our interest in WW2 piqued by pulp fiction and blockbuster films, and were later quite able to sort the wheat from the chaff. Measuring an entire nation's authors by the Holywood yardstick is a little unfair. I'd rather read a bad book than none at all. At least it creates debate. I'd be interested in which authors you particularly find so offensive in their opinions and why. As you yourself have said before - sources please? I go along with what my father once said when asked about A Bridge Too Far ... "It's only a film." But then he would know, his platoon having been on the backs of the leading 2IG tanks on 17 Sept 44. And I have Cornelius Ryan and his wife to thank for recording the thoughts of Dad's best mate, his platoon commander and his CO, when no-one else bothered. Great post Diane. I concur. The American movie industry is an entertainment business. American investors fund American movies for primarily American audiences and that leads to only one outcome and that is not preserving historical accuracy or balance. It may be aggravating at times but it is what it is. U.S. movies are not motivated by any particular malice, just money. It's simply unrealistic and somewhat unfair for those from the Commonwealth to look to Hollywood for validation or recognition. That was the preserve of John Wayne and Gregory Peck. It's not an American thing, it's a business deal.