Dad's Army remake.

[Vocal Minority]

Zod said:

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy.

By what definition is that an action film?! (He is very good as Alleline though)

[Halmyre]

Vocal Minority said:

Zod said:

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy.

By what definition is that an action film?! (He is very good as Alleline though)

I couldn't take to him as Alleline, too many memories of Michael Aldridge I suppose. But then, I never was convinced by Ian Richardson as Bill Haydon.

[Vocal Minority]

When I read the book, to me, he slots in slightly better. That said, Alec Guinness NAILED Smiley - and Gary Oldman wasn't really there.

[Morningside]

Some early photos.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2801529/ho...

Shame its being filmed in Yorkshire not North Norfolk.

[anonymous-user]

Further proof that they're not playing the characters, they're playing the actors who played the characters originally.

[Mutley]

Crossflow Kid said:

Further proof that they're not playing the characters, they're playing the actors who played the characters originally.

Personally I would wait until i had seen the film before making such a bold statement.

Knowing how ingrained this is to the British conciousness, could the producers have thought that they should/could try to fill the roles with actors who have a resemblence to the originals?

[anonymous-user]

Mutley said:

Crossflow Kid said:

Further proof that they're not playing the characters, they're playing the actors who played the characters originally.

Personally I would wait until i had seen the film before making such a bold statement.

Knowing how ingrained this is to the British conciousness, could the producers have thought that they should/could try to fill the roles with actors who have a resemblence to the originals?

And that's my point. Mainwaring is Arthur Lowe to most people so trying to make the new lead look like a dead ringer for him immediately makes me think they're simply trying to do a carbon copy on the assumption it was funny then so it must be funny now. And that never, ever works.
When, for example, Bond or Dr Who moves on, do they try to simply copy the old version, literally?
No, they recognise that the character(s) have to adapt to each actor's interpretation.
What's happening here is they're making a 2014 film about a 1960s/70s sitcom about the Home Guard of WW2.

[snuffy]

From the BBC today:



If that does not look like actors playing actors I don't know what does.

[Kitchski]

It's going to be terrible.

[RichB]

snuffy said:

From the BBC today:



If that does not look like actors playing actors I don't know what does.

They're certainly not as good as the Goodwood players who enact the Dad's Army display at the Revival.

[confused_buyer]

Wasn't there a fair old overlap between the actors and characters in the original anyway? I bet if you listed lines of Sgt Wilson and real life quotes of John Le Mesurier it would be hard to tell which was which so, to be fair to the current lot, if they play the characters right there will always be something of the original actor in them.

Gary Oldman basically played Alec Guiness playing George Smiley in TTSS and got away with it.

[heebeegeetee]

I'm rather expecting, hoping even, that this is indeed about actors playing actors, otherwise its a film about the Home Guard and not about Dad's Army.

I think the programme Dad's Army was such a wonderful thing in it's own right that it is in itself something worth making a film about, with a bit of poetic licence of course.

[Vocal Minority]

confused_buyer said:

Wasn't there a fair old overlap between the actors and characters in the original anyway?

It was either Croft or Perry who said, by the end you couldn't tell where Arthur Lowe stopped and Mainwaring started.

[confused_buyer]

Vocal Minority said:

It was either Croft or Perry who said, by the end you couldn't tell where Arthur Lowe stopped and Mainwaring started.

We didn't get to find out what Wilson's last words were in the show before he went to the platoon in the sky but I bet if we had they'd have almost certainly been "it's all been rather lovely".



Incidentally, I did see one of the stage shows from a few years back where the actors basically played the previous actors playing the part and expected it to be a disaster. It wasn't much to my surprise. Of course, they were using original scripts so whether this films is awful or not will probably depend entirely on whether the script is any good.

[Watchman]

This popped up in my FB feed today. Whilst I love the original series (all of them), I'll give this a shot too because it does look as though they are trying to do it justice.

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/12/dads-ar...

[Eric Mc]

Caught a very brief glimpse on "The One Show" last night and to be absolutely frank, it looked OK. I'll be willing to give it a try.

[marshalla]

snuffy said:

From the BBC today:

Tut, tut. Pte. Godfrey carrying a rifle ? Surely not.

[KTF]

Official trailer here if you want a few minutes of torture: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nig2SQk6jx4

[Halb]

marshalla said:

Tut, tut. Pte. Godfrey carrying a rifle ? Surely not.

The episode where the team found out about Godfrey's First World War service makes me well up, every time. Likewise the episode where the crew mutiny against Mainwaring, and genuinely tell him to 'do one,'
Those two episodes are about as perfect as you can get of mixing pathos and humour and coming up with a golden result. I can watch them over and over.

[confused_buyer]

First thing which really annoys me is "1944...on the brink of defeat".

Umm, actually, we were not on the brink of defeat in 1944. We were in 1941, maybe 1942, but not 1944.