|
||||||||
Dam Busters waiting for the first complaint! |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|
|
#76 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2016
Posts: 626
|
Quote:
I saw the version with the name removed, I nearly choked on my own spit. To me its sacrosanct, the film itself is almost as important a piece of history of its time as the real events were. But I'm especially biased as I am/was related to Richard Todd.
If any non black person had made such a comment the "snowflakes" (love that description/name) would be screaming blue murder |
|
|
|
|
Please sign in or register to remove this advertisement.
|
|
|
#77 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 9,209
|
Quote:
I think you don't know what you are talking about. It is the Daily Mail that likes to get outraged because a bare arse was shown on the BBC at 21.05.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#78 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Feb 2010
Posts: 3,464
|
Quote:
It was going to be renamed Digger in a proposed remake of the film, but that still hasn't happened.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...shire-13727908 |
|
|
|
|
|
#79 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,439
|
Quote:
I was referring to the people who can;t abide the name of the dog being changed.. as evidence in this very thread
![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#80 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,439
|
Quote:
Trevor MacDonald interviewed Morgan Freeman a few years back. During that interview he told Morgan that there was a n****r in the White House to which Morgan asked "What is he doing there"
If any non black person had made such a comment the "snowflakes" (love that description/name) would be screaming blue murder |
|
|
|
|
|
#81 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: By the Skeleton Tree.
Posts: 56,608
|
So nobody censored the dog's name.
That's awesome. Anyone pissed off about any of the other stuff they changed while making the actual movie? There's a fair bit listed here. Does anyone care about that? No, not really. Because that's how films work, especially films adapted from books based on real life. And because it would be utterly insane to give a shit about details like that when telling a story which never claimed to be a documentary. Why does anyone give so much of a shit about the name of a dog that belonged to one of the guys, when nobody's that bothered about any of the rest of the changes they made? OP, are you happy or sad that you never got your moment? |
|
|
|
|
|
#82 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 4,474
|
I think "snowflake" is forum word of the year this year. Someone is always ranting about them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#83 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: The Pit of Despair
Posts: 50,183
|
Quote:
I think "snowflake" is forum word of the year this year. Someone is always ranting about them.
![]() Who is worse? The snowflake or the snowflake moaning about them?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#84 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: In a jar, on a shelf
Posts: 31,678
|
Quote:
Bloody Stephen Fry !
|
|
|
|
|
|
#85 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 4,979
|
Quote:
Well, some people would (rightly) have complained I guess. But "snowflakes" wouldn't be the right word for them.
Urban dictionary. Oxford English. |
|
|
|
|
|
#86 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: in yo' mamma
Posts: 19,358
|
Quote:
Are you irked by the various innacuracies in the film?
Aren't/weren't virtually all war films slightly or great inaccurate to some degree, compromised by everything from limited production values, to the need to preserve various "urban myths" regarding their heroes...and none more so "massaged" than Gibson in the film...to the need to cram long stories into90 or 120 minutes? No, not irked because where the inaccuracies show, I know better. But can still appreciate the film all of a piece for what it is. |
|
|
|
|
|
#87 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 2,058
|
That Mr Hitler got a really bad wrap in films as well. Should we not censor and redo films to call him Malcolm instead?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#88 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Midlands, UK
Posts: 4,964
|
So someone's outraged at the lack of outrage? Must be a first.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#89 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 28,525
|
A part of the problem with the film is that it's become the 'truth'. Way more people have seen it than have read 'Enemy coast ahead' or the authorised 617 squadron book. Or heard it from a family member, though he wasn't old enough to be on the dams raid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#90 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: The Mysterious East
Posts: 5,825
|
Quote:
So nobody censored the dog's name.
That's awesome. Anyone pissed off about any of the other stuff they changed while making the actual movie? There's a fair bit listed here. Does anyone care about that? No, not really. Because that's how films work, especially films adapted from books based on real life. And because it would be utterly insane to give a shit about details like that when telling a story which never claimed to be a documentary. Why does anyone give so much of a shit about the name of a dog that belonged to one of the guys, when nobody's that bothered about any of the rest of the changes they made? OP, are you happy or sad that you never got your moment? It's a while since I read the book, but my recollection is that the dog didn't get a huge mention in that,nexcept for a note in passing that the squadron personnel used to get him drunk on beer. And, of course, his death, which (again by my recollection) takes up a sentence or two, along the lines that "Gibson was told that his dog had been run over and killed by a driver who hadn't bothered to stop, and wondered whether it was some sort of omen". That was then expanded in the film, to foreshadow the losses that would be suffered during the raid and to convey to the audience a sense of comradeship. As for what Gibson was wondering... who knows? He was long dead by the time the book was written, and ( as with many aspects of the operation that were still classified) Paul Brickhill would have "filled in the gaps". And I've seen a couple of alternative versions of how the dog met his fate. One states that, far from being a hit-and-run by an unknown driver, the dog was run over by a local doctor who swerved in an unsuccessful attempt to avoid him, crashing and sustaining injuries in the process. Another version has the dog being run over, within the confines of the station, by an RAF vehicle. So, even considering only matters that directly involve the dog... there are plenty of "changes to history" already, plus a liberal dose of speculation. (Needless to say, there is a conspiracy theory, according to which the Germans had learned of Operation Chastise and the dog was killed by a German agent to destroy the squadron's morale.) |
|
|
|
|
|
#91 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: The Mysterious East
Posts: 5,825
|
Quote:
A part of the problem with the film is that it's become the 'truth'. Way more people have seen it than have read 'Enemy coast ahead' or the authorised 617 squadron book. Or heard it from a family member, though he wasn't old enough to be on the dams raid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#92 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: in yo' mamma
Posts: 19,358
|
Quote:
A part of the problem with the film is that it's become the 'truth'. Way more people have seen it than have read 'Enemy coast ahead' or the authorised 617 squadron book. Or heard it from a family member, though he wasn't old enough to be on the dams raid.
In 2-3 hours they wanted then...and still want..."packaged" history, and if that means major compromises and running fast and loose with the facts, so be it.They may come away from the multiplex these days and head straight onto social media to complain about the historical inaccuracies of whatever period piece they've just seen - but the thing is, they've paid their money already to the studio-owned cinema chains And if its a rollicking good piece of entertainment...then it'll do well in DVD and view-on-demand sales. Often these days far better than initial cinema takings. It's all about money, and was even then too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#93 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Devon
Posts: 12,838
|
There is a dichotomy between the technical brilliance of Barnes Wallis and his inventions and the human cost.
56 men died from the crews, that night, and many civilians in the flooding. Lives just snapped out. Very sobering and would be big news today. Happened every day of WWII. Later Tallboy and Grand Slam bombs, also by Barnes Wallis, were totally necessary but also killed many. He must have been affected by his work. |
|
|
|
|
|
#94 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: The Hawthorns
Posts: 2,502
|
Quote:
one of the cats in Hyde park cemetery
![]() https://londoninsight.files.wordpres...0/1b2q9426.jpg I must say though, 'Bogie' is a brilliant name for your pet ![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
#95 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 19,046
|
Quote:
Begins with an N.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#96 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 1,403
|
Quote:
I think you don't know what you are talking about. It is the Daily Mail that likes to get outraged because a bare arse was shown on the BBC at 21.05.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#97 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 25,439
|
Quote:
Obviously it's not describing snowflakes from snow so it depends which dictionary definition of the word you prefer. Both bear close similarities.
Urban dictionary. Oxford English. |
|
|
|
|
|
#98 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: dole office.
Posts: 35,074
|
changing historical fact to fit current beliefs is a bizarre and pointless thing to do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#99 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 28,525
|
Quote:
And that's where it all dovetails into the public perception of events years, sometimes decades earlier that were heavily censored at the time. Nor did...do...the vast majority of viewers actually WANT total historical accuracy....as for the most part it's crushingly boring
In 2-3 hours they wanted then...and still want..."packaged" history, and if that means major compromises and running fast and loose with the facts, so be it.They may come away from the multiplex these days and head straight onto social media to complain about the historical inaccuracies of whatever period piece they've just seen - but the thing is, they've paid their money already to the studio-owned cinema chains And if its a rollicking good piece of entertainment...then it'll do well in DVD and view-on-demand sales. Often these days far better than initial cinema takings. It's all about money, and was even then too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#100 |
|
Forum Member
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Mamas Pizza, BD10 Parmo Shop!
Posts: 4,648
|
Quote:
Trevor MacDonald interviewed Morgan Freeman a few years back. During that interview he told Morgan that there was a n****r in the White House to which Morgan asked "What is he doing there"
If any non black person had made such a comment the "snowflakes" (love that description/name) would be screaming blue murder https://youtu.be/7WV77jPFshU?t=278 |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 03:38.




