The movie of Columbus's voyages to the Americas vastly differed from that of textual information written by Howard Zinn in A People's History of the United States.
Movies are made to be entertaining to its watchers, and will always contain information that its watchers want to see, even if the information may be inaccurate sometimes.
For many years people seemed to have always linked Columbus with acts of heorism and discovery. We know today the injustice and misery the Indians had suffered from Columbus's acts were wrong, yet Columbus is still viewed as a national hero.
Because of this, movie directors will continue to portray how Columbus was such a great hero - even if he in reality was not. As described by Zinn, Columbus had killed and enslaved over three million Indians, that's hardly what people would consider heroic.
The movie portrayed Columbus as a discoverer interested in the Americas solely because it offered new opportunties and freedom in a new land.
While Columbus may have indeed been interested in the Americas in such a way, he was interested much more in something else, something that would gain him instant wealth; gold. If it wasn't for gold Columbus would've never massacred and enslaved so many Indians, so many that he had completely wiped out many entire Indian tribes and settlements.
Why did the movie portray the heroic image so heavily on Columbus? It was simply what audience members had wanted to see. Surely the directors and writers could've easily modifed the movie so it would show both sides of the argument, but a movie is an entertainment medium afterall, and hardly viewed for its historical accuracy.