taffy2jeffmorgan Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) I found recently a report from the British Sunday express [ May 2013 ] in which it said that the remake of " The Dam Busters " with Peter Jackson directing, Tom Hollander [Guy Gibson] Colin Firth [barnes Wallis] could be released in 2016, but I suggest that we don't hold our breath ? One detractor pointed out that Tom Hollander was to old to play Gibson who was only 24 at the time of the raid ? One other point to ponder in this political correct age is will they stick to the historical script, If you remember the call sign to be radioed back if a dam was destroyed was "N****r" and also sometime back i did read that Steven Fry was to write the screen play, and if anyone insists on the truth it will be him! Cheers. JM. Nope........... Not happening. Edited January 10, 2014 by Bearcat
II./JG27_Rich Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 Steven Fry is great. Like me a HUGE Wagner fan 1
Bearcat Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 Look just to be clear here .... this subject has come up on multiple boards at multiple times over the years. Do yourself a favor.. use some stars or asterisks or something if you intend to post in the full historic context of this incident .. Yeah it was the dog.. yeah it is historical but you know what .. for a lot of men, far too many it was the last thing they heard before the rope choked the life out of them.. or the knife cut off their testicles or the flames charred their flesh ... so please use discretion. The discussion of this film .. the dog.. the codeword.. even the picture of the dog's grave ... the whole nine yards can be had here .. but if you are going to post actual text be smart or be gone. 4
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 Really sad that the story of ingenuity, heroism and sacrifice is being overshadowed by a controversial 'word', even sadder when that word had a completely different history outside of the United States.
Feathered_IV Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 Lord of the Rings is currently on television as I type this. Such ponderous and lightweight storytelling. It actually makes me really nervous about the direction of DB.
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) Oh for god's sake no......no....no...no. DAMBUSTERS!!! this thread is about the dambusters. Milo please delete your last, wrong debate and it's an even worse message. Edited January 10, 2014 by DD_bongodriver
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 Oh well, raaaid has got all excited now and wants more attention
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 one of the keys to making jokes is to actually make it funny, not entirely sure where raaaid was going with that one.
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) Check what? what exactly are we supposed to find by googling dam bastards? the movie you link to is actually called 'inglorious bastards' https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=damn+bastards&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=xerPUpyvIOfJ0QXFsIFg&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=944#q=inglorious+bastards&tbm=isch Edited January 10, 2014 by DD_bongodriver
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) damn bastardshttps://www.google.co.uk/search?q=damn+bastards&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=P_XPUtVIxPvSBZezgYAB&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=944 Looks like a whole lot of nothing to me, nothing relevant anyway, what am I missing here? what is the significance of 'damn bastards'? 'hamster gun' did not disappointhttps://www.google.co.uk/search?q=damn+bastards&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ei=P_XPUtVIxPvSBZezgYAB&ved=0CAcQ_AUoAQ&biw=1920&bih=944#q=hamster+gun&tbm=isch Edited January 10, 2014 by DD_bongodriver
FlatSpinMan Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 This thread is supposedly, and legitimately, about the possible remake of the Dambusters movie. Confine comments to the topic, please.
6./ZG26_Emil Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 I wouldn't be surprised if Ben Affleck manages to shoehorn his way in to it...then we'll have to suffer his 'hammer down' balls to the wall flying skillz again
Feathered_IV Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 He'll probably be in the second movie, Fellowship of the Upkeep. The first film in the trilogy will be about Barnes Wallis. The third one is where they tirra lira fiddle dee doo and skip the bomb into Mordor, or the Dam or whatever.
ST_ami7b5 Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 Just reading the book "Dambusters - The Forging of a Legend". Got it as a Christmas present.
Sternjaeger Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 more than the use of the right code words, I wonder whether they'd bother to depict the aftermath of the attack and the fact that the whole operation was in fact pointless.
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 more than the use of the right code words, I wonder whether they'd bother to depict the aftermath of the attack and the fact that the whole operation was in fact pointless. not so much pointless but more unsatisfactory in its nett result just about as pointless as the Doolittle raid, nothing pointless at trying to strike at the industrial capability of your enemy and gain a bit of morale, no matter how much of a failed attempt the raid was the real point of the story was the sacrifice made by some extremely courageous young men. 2
Sternjaeger Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) well, the death of hundreds of innocent civilians and the loss of RAF aircrew to hit a dam was quite a high price to pay, especially considering that it was repaired quite quickly and that the flooding caused by the attack caused problems to the Allied advance into Europe. So yes, pointless is probably wrong, it's more of a propaganda stunt that turned into a complete disaster. What leaves me puzzled is that despite knowing the whole story now, the thing is still SO celebrated nowadays, and one wonders if we can still afford to look just at the brave, valiant RAF aircrew who took part to it, and not remember the innocent people who perished for the sake of a foolish mission.. Edited January 10, 2014 by Sternjaeger
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) well, the death of hundreds of innocent civilians War is pointless... loss of RAF aircrew to hit a dam was quite a high price to pay War is hell....... especially considering that it was repaired quite quickly and that the flooding caused by the attack caused problems to the Allied advance into Europe. So the effects were felt for 2 years after the raid, seems somewhat contradictory. So yes, pointless is probably wrong, it's more of a propaganda stunt that turned into a complete disaster. really don't see where propaganda comes in to it, was the allied invasion of Normandy a propaganda stunt too? or is it only British operations that enjoy your choice of labelling? What leaves me puzzled is that the thing is still SO celebrated nowadays Lest we forget, it doesn't matter as you are Italian anyway but in this country we will never forget the sacrifices we made. Edited January 10, 2014 by DD_bongodriver 1
Sternjaeger Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) To be honest I'm expecting more of an educated approach from you mate the old stuffy propaganda tosh... http://media.aerosociety.com/aerospace-insight/2013/05/17/dambusters-debated/8134/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/10047447/Dambusters-raid-survivors-The-memory-will-never-leave-us.html http://www.standard.co.uk/news/im-glad-our-mission-failed-says-dambusters-veteran-6831006.html I always thought that we should remember the men, not the missions.. I will skip on the "you're Italian" comment... Edited January 10, 2014 by Sternjaeger
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) To be honest I'm expecting more of an educated approach from you mate the old stuffy propaganda tosh... http://media.aerosociety.com/aerospace-insight/2013/05/17/dambusters-debated/8134/ http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/world-war-two/10047447/Dambusters-raid-survivors-The-memory-will-never-leave-us.html http://www.standard.co.uk/news/im-glad-our-mission-failed-says-dambusters-veteran-6831006.html I always thought that we should remember the men, not the missions.. I will skip on the "you're Italian" comment... No offence mate but you were the one who mentioned 'propaganda', I see no propaganda in a raid involving conventional machines and men embarking on a highly dangerous mission of which the 'primary' aim was to inflict damage to the industrial infrastructure of the enemy, now if we were to talk about indiscriminate flying bombs and ICBM's then it's a different story........no? But we do remember the men......I really don't see your confusion, the men who flew on the Dambuster raids must be remembered for their involvement in that raid, or do you just expect to see them mashed in with a generic remembrance? Edited January 10, 2014 by DD_bongodriver
Sternjaeger Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 read through the first link and you'll know what I'm talking about. It was propaganda/retaliation just like the Doolittle Raid.
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 read through the first link and you'll know what I'm talking about. It was propaganda/retaliation just like the Doolittle Raid. a significant quote from that article.. Both Bomber Command and the USAAF 8th Air Force attacked the morale of the German population. But Nazi Germany was not a democracy and so was not open to public opinion changing state policy. Area bombing definitely reduced German output and especially efficiency as it forced the dispersion of much of the industry. Who was being propagandised?
Sternjaeger Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) all countries made heavy use of propaganda in equal measure. Look, don't try and start to deconstruct my point with nit-picking, it's obvious that it's not that I don't understand because I'm Italian, since there are a lot of Brits that share my thoughts. Remembrance of fallen soldiers should be done in equal measure, without specifying whether they were bomber command, fighter command, ground soldiers, sailors etc… they all did their part as far as I am concerned. Edited January 10, 2014 by Sternjaeger
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 but it's only a problem in the case of the dambusters? help me out here Stern, unless you are living in a parallel universe with an alternate version of the UK and we have found an interdimensional portal on flight sim forums, the UK I live in does not commemorate the Dambusters raid in any form of 'yay we killed 1500 German civillians' but rather a more sombre affair remembering the dark times mid 20th century that called on extreme acts of valour from lots of young men and women and quite rightly.
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 they all did their part as far as I am concerned They did, and some went the extra mile, others made the ultimate sacrifice, even within the armed forces themselves they respect that and are key in recognising the special cases, doing so takes absolutely nothing away from the others who did their part.
Sternjaeger Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 my point is that what we celebrate as "the bravery of a few RAF airmen" corresponds to the unnecessary death of hundreds of innocent civilians, don't you see it? Would you be impressed if Germany celebrated the "Valiant bomber crews that relentlessly bombed London at night, risking their lives and flying in terribly difficult conditions"? Those surely were as good as the Bomber Command crews that made a hellfire of Dresden and other German cities.. 1
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 my point is that what we celebrate as "the bravery of a few RAF airmen" corresponds to the unnecessary death of hundreds of innocent civilians, don't you see it? Well your perverse interpretation is the problem, we celebrate the bravery of those few airmen as a reminder of the bravery of those few airmen, the deaths involved are in no way belittled or ignored....don't you see.....no I guess not.
Sternjaeger Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) yeah, with lancasters buzzing dams, very tasteful… ..talking of perverted interpretations.. Edited January 10, 2014 by Sternjaeger
BraveSirRobin Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 Would you be impressed if Germany celebrated the "Valiant bomber crews that relentlessly bombed London at night, risking their lives and flying in terribly difficult conditions"? Those surely were as good as the Bomber Command crews that made a hellfire of Dresden and other German cities.. Had Germany won the war I'm pretty sure they would have done exactly that. The fact that they lost the war, and slaughtered civilians on a scale that makes Dresden, Hiroshima, and Nagasaki look insignificant in comparison, I'd say that celebrating the people responsible for that slaughter would not be met with approval by the countries that finally stopped them..
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 Would you be impressed if Germany celebrated the "Valiant bomber crews that relentlessly bombed London at night, risking their lives and flying in terribly difficult conditions"? Those surely were as good as the Bomber Command crews that made a hellfire of Dresden and other German cities.. Not offended in the slightest, all very brave men, not so much valiant but certainly brave and worthy of being honoured. I'd like to know what you would have done if you were the one who had to decide how Britain did things during the war.............ignore that, I have an idea and I don't want to know. yeah, with lancasters buzzing dams, very tasteful… didn't I spy a picture of you in WWII re-enactment gear? the Dambusters raid involved Lancasters and some dams, we have a Lancaster and we have a dam.....what's the problem?
Sternjaeger Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 (edited) Not offended in the slightest, all very brave men, not so much valiant but certainly brave and worthy of being honoured. I'd like to know what you would have done if you were the one who had to decide how Britain did things during the war.............ignore that, I have an idea and I don't want to know. didn't I spy a picture of you in WWII re-enactment gear? the Dambusters raid involved Lancasters and some dams, we have a Lancaster and we have a dam.....what's the problem? as valiant as each other, since they did exactly the same thing (bombing civilian targets at night), the difference is that one side was parting for the wrong guy. First of all allow me to reiterate that your racist humour is really out of place (and yes it is, don't even try and deny it). Having said that, it's not about doing things differently, but the key element is to remember things with sobriety. If instead of buzzing a dam with a Lancaster there was a British delegation bringing flowers or having a similar ceremony also in the areas affected by the attack, it would have been a much more appropriate remembrance. The example of me wearing a 101st uniform is what I mean exactly: if you look at the picture again, I have no guns with me, it was a charitable event we organise every year for cancer research and a wartime attire was requested, so we wore uniforms, but without being all "toy war" about it, like many others like doing. Edited January 10, 2014 by Sternjaeger
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 No it's not racist, there I denied it, what is going to happen to me now?
Sternjaeger Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 well something already happened: for what is worth, you've lost my respect. I'm out of this conversation.
DD_bongodriver Posted January 10, 2014 Posted January 10, 2014 oh, so you'd respect me more if I claimed to be racist?
Recommended Posts