Dambusters film
Discussion
waynecyclist said:
From what I understand they rebuilt the dams within 10 weeks, was it really a success ?
As another poster has said, how do you define "success" in a war like that?The dams were indeed repaired relatively quickly, but there is an argument to say that was a period when concrete and labour was being used to repair dams in Germany, not beef up the Atlantic Wall in Normandy.
ash73 said:
Eric Mc said:
Telling the truth about it - even in the movies - should be a priority.
It's a movie not a documentary. Why die in a ditch over an irrelevant detail?The raid itself was mostly propaganda, seems entirely appropriate to spin it.
Europa1 said:
waynecyclist said:
From what I understand they rebuilt the dams within 10 weeks, was it really a success ?
As another poster has said, how do you define "success" in a war like that?The dams were indeed repaired relatively quickly, but there is an argument to say that was a period when concrete and labour was being used to repair dams in Germany, not beef up the Atlantic Wall in Normandy.
Edit. Goddamn spell checker
http://www.bismarck-class.dk/tirpitz/history/tirop...
Edited by jmorgan on Monday 5th March 13:01
Russian Troll Bot said:
Eric Mc said:
Russian Troll Bot said:
I was going to suggest that the best compromise would be to have the dog but not mention its name, just have characters say "here boy, where are you boy?" But that assumes his dog identified as male, so is just as bigoted.
It's not the dog that's the issue. It's the important code word used at the seminal point in the story - when the first dam is breached. That's why it should be included. If it was only about the dog it wouldn't really matter.There are a few asking why the accuracy of the name is so important when there are plenty of factual errors in the rest of the movie.
Required viewing for racists who sit through the whole film to hear the dogs name. Enabler for normalising bombing civilian infrastructure.
A war crime as far as I know.
There was talk of peter jackson doing a remake but that would have to have a fake storyline to justify the raid. Maybe in the future when people
are even stupider it will be possible. Then maybe a heroic film about dresden bombing.
A war crime as far as I know.
There was talk of peter jackson doing a remake but that would have to have a fake storyline to justify the raid. Maybe in the future when people
are even stupider it will be possible. Then maybe a heroic film about dresden bombing.
turbomoped said:
Required viewing for racists who sit through the whole film to hear the dogs name. Enabler for normalising bombing civilian infrastructure.
A war crime as far as I know.
There was talk of peter jackson doing a remake but that would have to have a fake storyline to justify the raid. Maybe in the future when people
are even stupider it will be possible. Then maybe a heroic film about dresden bombing.
Did people really give up their lives so you could post such drivel?A war crime as far as I know.
There was talk of peter jackson doing a remake but that would have to have a fake storyline to justify the raid. Maybe in the future when people
are even stupider it will be possible. Then maybe a heroic film about dresden bombing.
rscott said:
Russian Troll Bot said:
Eric Mc said:
Russian Troll Bot said:
I was going to suggest that the best compromise would be to have the dog but not mention its name, just have characters say "here boy, where are you boy?" But that assumes his dog identified as male, so is just as bigoted.
It's not the dog that's the issue. It's the important code word used at the seminal point in the story - when the first dam is breached. That's why it should be included. If it was only about the dog it wouldn't really matter.There are a few asking why the accuracy of the name is so important when there are plenty of factual errors in the rest of the movie.
Just to clear up a few points:
The original Revell Lancaster kit came out in 1964 and was indeed the Dambusters version. A 'conventional' version of it was released in 1966 containing two decal options, one the aircraft that stood at the gate of RAF Scampton for many years, the other in RCAF markings.
Both kits were re-issued over the years, the one I built (the DB version) was the same mouldings with a set of decals containing markings for three aircraft, and instructions to reflect this, dated, I believe, 1992.
Completely new kits for both versions appeared in about 2005. I'm sure someone can put me right as to exactly when (I have the kit in my stash but can't be bothered to dig it out right now.
According to recent research, none of the aircraft carried the ventral gun turret.
By the way, the official name for what everyone now calls the bouncing bomb was "Vickers Type 464 Skipping Mine."
The original Revell Lancaster kit came out in 1964 and was indeed the Dambusters version. A 'conventional' version of it was released in 1966 containing two decal options, one the aircraft that stood at the gate of RAF Scampton for many years, the other in RCAF markings.
Both kits were re-issued over the years, the one I built (the DB version) was the same mouldings with a set of decals containing markings for three aircraft, and instructions to reflect this, dated, I believe, 1992.
Completely new kits for both versions appeared in about 2005. I'm sure someone can put me right as to exactly when (I have the kit in my stash but can't be bothered to dig it out right now.
According to recent research, none of the aircraft carried the ventral gun turret.
By the way, the official name for what everyone now calls the bouncing bomb was "Vickers Type 464 Skipping Mine."
Russian Troll Bot said:
... not many WW2 films like to remind us of the fact the US Army was segregated ...
Strange coincidence, I was watching The Glenn Miller Story just last week, and in the marching scenes, the ranks are not segregated. And that film was made in 1954.Edited by Evangelion on Monday 5th March 11:48
rscott said:
There are adverts on Facebook for the showing of the remastered original and about 1/3 of the comments are along the lines of "I bet they've changed the dog's name" . There's none actually asking for it to be changed.
There are a few asking why the accuracy of the name is so important when there are plenty of factual errors in the rest of the movie.
A lot of the "errors" in the original are due to the fact that they weren't given access to so many aspects of the mission so they had to "make stuff up". And, of course, there were the usual movie maker tricks of simplifying storylines and imagining conversations that you get in all movies.There are a few asking why the accuracy of the name is so important when there are plenty of factual errors in the rest of the movie.
Evangelion said:
Strange coincidence, I was watching The Glenn Miller Story just last week, and in the marching scenes, the ranks are not segregated. And that film was made in 1954.
I was using the Scalemates production history so maybe they've got it wrong.Edited by Evangelion on Monday 5th March 11:48
All the new Lancaster kits are pretty nice.
The Revell one does seem to have an issue with lack of dihedral on the outer wings. It is good value for money though.
The Hasegawa one is very expensive to buy in the UK and has some canopy inaccuracies.
The Airfix one is very nice and is about half way in price between the Revell and Hasegawa kits. Airfix also do a Hercules powered MkII, which is nice.
Airfix's original Lancaster model dated from the early 1960s. They issued a new mould around 1980 which was good for the time. They also issued a version of that kit with a Grand Slam bomb. It's a bit dated now though.
Eric Mc said:
It can be. It's up to the people making the movie to decide how truthful they want to be. Some are better than others.
Yep, agreed Eric but the point here (I know you agree) is about altering an original piece of work. Makes me wonder why we don't cover these up in museums too - because they're "rude"!
Eric Mc said:
Exactly. People will get offended about what they want to get offended about.
I think it's an absolutely crying shame that this whole project has been completely derailed by fools and cretins who cannot take on board the need to be truthful, accurate, informative, honest and above all, respectful of the people involved in the mission (including those on the German side and how they coped in the aftermath) all because of an insane hangup over one word that MIGHT offend some people.
Nothing could be further from the truth! " this whole project has been completely derailed" - No it has not!I think it's an absolutely crying shame that this whole project has been completely derailed by fools and cretins who cannot take on board the need to be truthful, accurate, informative, honest and above all, respectful of the people involved in the mission (including those on the German side and how they coped in the aftermath) all because of an insane hangup over one word that MIGHT offend some people.
Personally I think there'd be only a few old, bigoted idiots who could possibly be offended by the name of the dog being changed by one letter, and it makes absolutely no difference to the film whatsoever. I think it's only people such as yourself who drag this on and on, giving this particular matter a degree of import which it doesn't deserve.
Maybe when people are researching the topic for themselves they'll find out why the name was changed and I think it will be completely understood.
As you have already said, the original film (which I too love) was heavily 'edited', plus there were other factors:
>>After the operation Barnes Wallis wrote, "I feel a blow has been struck at Germany from which she cannot recover for several years", but on closer inspection, Operation Chastise did not have the military effect that was at the time believed. By 27 June, full water output was restored, thanks to an emergency pumping scheme inaugurated the previous year, and the electricity grid was again producing power at full capacity.[citation needed] The raid proved to be costly in lives (more than half the lives lost belonging to Allied POWs and forced-labourers), but was no more than a minor inconvenience to the Ruhr's industrial output.[30] The value of the bombing can perhaps at best be seen as a boost to British morale.<<
>>He (Albert Speer) also expressed puzzlement at the raids: the disruption of temporarily having to shift 7,000 construction workers to the Möhne and Eder repairs was offset by the failure of the Allies to follow up with additional (conventional) raids during the dams' reconstruction, and that represented a major lost opportunity.[32] Barnes Wallis was also of this view; he revealed his deep frustration that Bomber Command never sent a high-level bombing force to hit the Mohne dam while repairs were being carried out. He argued that extreme precision would have been unnecessary and that even a few hits by conventional HE bombs would have prevented the rapid repair of the dam which was undertaken by the Germans.[33]<<
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Chastise#A...
IIRC the film didn't mention that some 1600 people on the ground were lost, half being prisoners and pows, and thanks to the RAF not bombing the site conventionally afterwards meant the dams were reinstated within weeks. Those are far more salient points than the bloody dogs name being changed by one letter!
ash73 said:
Eric Mc said:
It can be. It's up to the people making the movie to decide how truthful they want to be. Some are better than others.
If they filmed the raid using B17s I would agree, but nobody cares what the code word was and it's offensive, so of course they should change it.Gassing Station | TV, Film, Video Streaming & Radio | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff