I generally expect filmmakers to make mistakes in commercial films where logic is the last thing to consider. But when you are making a historical film you need to be very thoughtful of what you are showing-
Milkha Singh Singing “Nanha Munna Rahi Hun” in late 1950’s when the film Son of India was released in 1962 which has this song. So Milkha Singh went in the future to sing the song. Also Milkha Singh is shown haing an eight pack abs. No video or photo of Milkha Singh will corroborate this. Abs was not the body ideal of the 20th century as it is in 21st century. Also Milkha Singh was never really winning the race in the 1960 Rome Olympics. The whole story of him slowing down due to partition horror was fiction. Milkha Singh himself admitted that it was a tactical error for him to slow down. But he didn't lost by a split second. He lost by a margin of 0.1 second.
Similarly, Gadar shows the young Sakina singing “Key Sera Sera” in 1940’s when the song was composed in that particular version in 1956. Not to mention the mess it made of the original Boota Singh story converting a tragic story into a mass masala action saga.
The worst injustice done to a historical or biopic film is perhaps Marykom which invents fake stories that never happened in real life. Mary Kom never fought in the underground boxing ring to save her cow. In fact her cow and calf was sold to sponsor her sports training. Also she was initially admitted for athletics but the trials were far away and the authorities there asked her if she would like to join boxing as they were starting with boxing training at tha time..she didn't meet her future husband in Manipur but rather in Delhi where he was studying in Delhi University and he helped her get her passport after a third stole her bags on train. Fourthly, she didn't had any child undergoing operation during her World Championship fight. Infact it happened during Asian games but their sponsors gave her the ticket to return back to India soon after her game before the operation started. So all that drama shown in the film never happened . Most importantly, Marykom’s father was the biggest aupprter of her sports and he was the one who got her admitted to sports authority of India for better training. It is an insult to show him like that. It shows how Marykom could allow armtwisting narratives for money which is highly unfortunate.
And then there are blatant PR exercises in the garb of biopic movies which are made with the sole purpose of whitewashing the image of the people involved. And the honourable mention goes to Azhar which invents fake scorecards and game scenarios which never existed to justify Azharuddin in the match fixing scandal and putting blame on other players.
Sanju was another film which Hirani made to whitewash the image of his friend Sanjay Dutt. Imagine glorifying a man who was a d””g addict, womaniser, involved in the possession of illegal arms and yet is celebrated like a hero!! It takes guts to make a movie like this (sarcasm invented)
Even Rustom shamelessly manipulates the story of a naval officer k**ling the love of his wife to an act of patriotism. The original Nanavati case had no such angle and eventually he did get punished for his crime as the court set aside the verdict of the jury which out of emotional appeal of a soldier declared him innocent. Also as far as I know, you are not allowed to wear your uniform while standing in a civil trial. Rustom doesn't takes cinematic liberties, it twists the tale to justify the nationalist image of Akshay Kumar and our heroes can never be wrong.
Our Akshay Kumar similarly made a historical blunder of a film Kesari 2 which is based on a case that never happened. Even while claiming that the film was based on Shanakran Nair’s life the film invents a case and invents new characters. Firstly there was no trail in court for Jallianwala Bagh. Shanakran Nair faced a case by Michael O Dwyer the governer of Punjab during Jallianwala Bagh because Shanakran Nair accused him of gross injustices committed during the mass**re in his book Gandhi and Anarchy. Now this case was fought in 1924 in London. Brigadier General Dyer was not involved in this case at all as shown in the film. Shanakran Nair was 67 years old at that time and he didn't fight the case himself. All the counsels shown in the film are fake. The characters of Madhavan and Ananya Pandey didn't exist in real life. They had the shameless audacity to change the surnames of our revolutionaries like Khudiram Bose to Singh (why?) Shanakran Nair lost the case and had to pay a hefty fine. So the film is a wish fulfilment fiction to provide cinematic justice to one of the greatest tragedies of Indian history.
Similarly, the characters of Airlift were changed to make Akshay Kumar the saviour. In real life multiple men were involved in the rescue mission during the Gulf War but those characters were merged into one Akshay Kumar. The Ministry of External Affairs criticised the film for its misrepresentation of events negating the major role played by the government officials in the airlift process and making it about one person.
Finally the film Maharaj starring Junaid Khan totally misrepresents the Maharaja libel case by inventing fake characters like the lover of Karsandas (that too two heroines). The Maharaja libel case was not about the s**ual practices exercised by the Pushtmarg sect but rather a case filed against the inflammatory articles written by Karsandas against the sector calling it heretical and corrupt. No girl committed su**ide and Karsandas had no such fiance. In fact he was a married man during this time. Also no women have testimony in the court regarding this case because the case was not about their explo**ation. Eventually the case closed with court criticising Karsandas for using a private matter to create sensation but also offered him compensation of 11000. So it was a mixed result not what is shown in the film.