First of all, what are some of the possible reasons that a filmmaker would select one version of the history of his/her own country - or someone else's - over another? How would this reflect how the filmmaker wanted that country's history to be portrayed and perceived?
Also, what responsibilities do filmmakers have when telling a story about a historic event? What responsibility does the audience have with regards to questioning the film's accuracy, and how should they go about doing so?
Speaking of accuracy, how can we know if any of the history (or more appropriately, historiography) we know is any more accurate than the work of a filmmaker telling a fictionalized account? What makes a source trustworthy? (This is one reason why it's important to cite your sources in your academic papers, including your analyses for this course - not only does it prove you're not stealing someone else's ideas, but also I want you to think about your sources for your discussions. Are they objective, or might they have an agenda or bias of their own?