This kind of "for the drama" variance is very common. Look at archaeologists reaction to Coogans film about Richard III which went to court.
Films, even documentary, don't always get it right and often don't even try because "based on" admits a lot of change.
People often don't understand history. "The KGB regiments shot deserters in ww2 Stalingrad" since the KGB was formed in 1954, that's a serious mis-statement of history. Should we be surprised the role of soviet structural agencies is misunderstood by an american dramatisation? (This kgb comment is a generalisation for illustration not a dig at anything in the doco)
Confusing the KGB with the NKVD (different names used at different times for essentially the same organization) is a totally inconsequential mistake and it is disingenuous to pretend it has any significance.
You kind of make my point because any one of the things complained of could be said to be inconsequential but the sum total strongly suggests more fiction than fact.
"Enemy at the gates" comes to mind. That whole "pick up the gun of your dead comrade" scene..
Films, even documentary, don't always get it right and often don't even try because "based on" admits a lot of change.
People often don't understand history. "The KGB regiments shot deserters in ww2 Stalingrad" since the KGB was formed in 1954, that's a serious mis-statement of history. Should we be surprised the role of soviet structural agencies is misunderstood by an american dramatisation? (This kgb comment is a generalisation for illustration not a dig at anything in the doco)
Still. It's a pretty egregious list.