In an interview, British historian Dominic Sandbrook remarked about contemporary portrayals of the Victorian age: “And that is of course, you know, that's contemporary writing. It's writing about the 21st century disguised as historiography, which in a sense all history is, totally.”
This observation finds a clear parallel in other forms of cultural production. At a teacher’s conference in Berlin, Spanish filmmaker Daniel Trueba made a similar point: He claimed that there are no truly historical films. Every film, he suggested, is ultimately a reflection of the time in which it is made. Even when a story takes place decades or centuries earlier, the ideas, values and aesthetic of the filmmakers’ own era shape what audiences see on screen.
Taken together, these perspectives touch on a long-standing debate in cultural studies and film history. Cinema is often treated as a window into the past, but it can more accurately be seen as a mirror of the present. Fashion, settings, and historical events may appear to have been faithfully reconstructed, yet the underlying worldview tends to belong less to the period depicted than to the moment of production.
One of the most visible ways this phenomenon appears in film is through presentism.
What is Presentism?
Presentism refers to the practice of interpreting or reconstructing the past primarily through contemporary values and assumptions rather than allowing historical periods to appear fully on their own terms. In cinema, it is both common and, in many cases, deliberate as filmmakers often adapt the past in ways that make stories resonate emotionally and morally with modern audiences.
Typical Signs of Presentism in Cinema
A film tends toward presentism when it shows several recognizable patterns:
-
Modern moral clarity for historical
characters
Characters appear to have attitudes that are in line with contemporary ethical standards. -
Depictions of widespread
tolerance
Social openness or inclusivity may be portrayed as common even when historical evidence suggests otherwise. -
Symbolic diversity in historically
homogeneous settings
Casting or character backgrounds may reflect modern demographic expectations rather than past realities. -
Softening everyday
prejudice
Biases that were routine in the past may be minimised or largely absent.
A Case Study: Belfast (2021)
Belfast, written and directed by Kenneth Branagh, provides an interesting example of this phenomenon.
The film received widespread critical praise for its performances, emotional storytelling, and beautiful black-and-white cinematography. It is also a deeply personal project. Branagh grew up in Belfast and relied on his own childhood memories for depicting the beginning of the conflict known as The Troubles in 1969. Branagh has emphasized that the film is not intended to be a faithful potrayal oft he past but rather a child’s recollection of an era.
Importantly, the film does not falsify the major historical developments of the period. Sectarian conflict between Protestant and Catholic communities is clearly shown, and the atmosphere of uncertainty and violence is central to the story.
However, there are also incidents where Belfast clearly engages in presentism. For example, several scenes suggest a more diverse social environment than historical evidence would indicate, such as a classroom that appears somewhat ethnically mixed and a cross-cultural friendship.
In reality, Northern Ireland in the late 1960s was overwhelmingly homogeneous. In 1969, the non-white population of Belfast was extremely small—estimated at well below 0.1 percent. Commonwealth immigration, including migrants from South Asia, did not become even moderately visible in Northern Ireland until the 1970s and later.
As a result, scenes featuring a visibly diverse classroom or a non-white teacher are unlikely to reflect the demographic realities of Belfast primary schools in 1969. They are more plausibly understood as choices that resonate with modern filmmaking ideas rather than strict historical representation.
Similarly, a close friendship between an elderly local grandmother and a Pakistani immigrant would have been highly unusual in the everyday social networks of working-class Belfast at the time.
In addition, the central family in Belfast is portrayed as instinctively anti-sectarian and broadly tolerant. Characters repeatedly distance themselves from the escalating religious divisions in their neighborhood. However, historically, by the end of 1969 the early stages of The Troubles had already begun to shape everyday thinking. Fear, rumour, and allegiance to one’s community increasingly influenced how people moved through their neighbourhoods, where they shopped, and whom they trusted. Although neutrality may not have been impossible, it was becoming more difficult to maintain.
Even minor details can reveal how contemporary perspectives shape historical storytelling. For instance, the film’s reference to biological detergent as a consumer choice raises questions about historical accuracy. It is unclear whether such products were available in 1969, and environmental considerations were unlikely to have significantly influenced the purchasing decisions of working-class families in Belfast at the time. This detail therefore appears to project later consumer values onto the past, reflecting modern concerns more than the everyday realities of the period.
These small anachronisms rarely affect the narrative itself, but they highlight how modern assumptions can become part of depictions of the past.
The Rationale Behind Presentism
Presentism in film rarely results from ignorance. More often, it reflects broader cultural dynamics. For much of film history, minority groups were either absent from historical narratives or portrayed in a stereotypical way. Historical dramas frequently centred almost exclusively on majority experiences.
In recent decades, filmmakers have sought to correct this imbalance by increasing actors‘ diversity to avoid exclusion through omission and ensuring that audiences from diverse backgrounds can see themselves in historical stories.
At the same time, filmmaking operates within a broader network of expectations and incentives. No director is legally required to promote diversity in historical settings, yet strong informal pressures shape creative decisions. Funding bodies frequently emphasise inclusive storytelling, studios must consider global audience expectations, and critics and cultural commentators critically assess diversity aspects. In addition, awards also value diversity as major institutions such as the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences—which presents the Academy Awards—have introduced inclusion standards that, while not dictating artistic choices, still influence industry practices and priorities.
As a result, contemporary casting often reflects an “inclusive by default” approach. Directors are not forced to adopt it, but doing so is in line with prevailing cultural values and helps forestall certain forms of criticism.
In the case of Belfast, Kenneth Branagh likely did not depend on diverse casting to meet awards criteria. However, incorporating such choices situates the film within current social expectations, broadens audience identification and reduces the likelihood of criticism for exclusion.
None of this necessarily diminishes the artistic or emotional impact of films like Belfast. However, Trueba’s observation remains relevant. Historical films seldom reconstruct the past exactly as it was; instead, they reveal how the present influences the way history is remembered, often reshaping the past to reflect contemporary concerns. While this can help these films resonate with today's audiences, it also risks distorting historical accuracy. Sociological truth is often lost when presentism is applied. Even when events are correct, the depiction can feel wrong if it misrepresents who would realistically be present, what people interacted and what behaviours or beliefs were considered normal at the time. Viewers should therefore remain critically aware of how current values shape the way history is portrayed.
Exploring Presentism in Teaching
In this context, the suggestions of Alan S. Marcus and his co-authors in Teaching History with Films offer a useful perspective. They argue that historical films can serve as tools for engaging with contemporary issues, suggesting that these films inevitably reflect the concerns of their own time. From this viewpoint, presentism is not simply a distortion of the past, but also a way through which filmmakers make history meaningful to present audiences.
Historical films can therefore provide an opportunity to reflect on our own values and assumptions. By observing how the past is reframed, audiences can become more conscious of the moral frameworks, values, and sensitivities of the present. In this sense, historical films do not simply represent history; they also reveal how contemporary society understands itself.
Presentism Checklist for Historical Films
Characters & Values
☐ Do characters think and act like modern people?
☐ Are they unusually “progressive” for their time?
Dialogue
☐ Does the language sound too modern?
☐ Do characters use today’s ideas or terms?
Society & Behavior
☐ Is the society shown more equal or fairer than it really was?
☐ Do people behave with modern attitudes?
History & Accuracy
☐ Are difficult parts of history (violence, inequality) left out or softened?
☐ Is the past simplified to make it easier to understand?
Story & Message
☐ Does the film push a modern message onto the past?
☐ Does it feel like a lesson for today?
Kommentar schreiben