Bridge too far aeroplanes

Yes, too true we’d have cured the problem in about two weeks flat:)

Yup,
Streight foot n’ mouth removal. Pity HM gov’t didn’t use us for the last outbreak! :p

Originally posted by VoyTech
Wouldn’t tell that in front of 16 Sqn veterans (hello to Jimmy Taylor!) who flew photo-reconnaissace missions in FR.IXs. There are quite a few photos of these Mk IX, still with their cannon (they were armed on sorties sometimes, I think), being operated by this dedicated PR unit. 16 Sqn actually distinugished itself during ‘Market-Garden’, so the only thing inaccurate about MH434 in the scene is that she should have been painted pink, as no. 16’s Mk IXs were!

Thanks to your good self and others for pointing out my error of judgement. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, you can be sure that if you open your mouth and put your foot in it on this forum it won’t take long for someone to put you straight

Well, I learn something new, and I do know the film rather well! I’d always had my doubts about the Dohun charecter, but I stand corrected and I misremembered – of course Katie Ter Horst was indeed a real person!

However, Olivier’s charecter is an amalgum(?!) of several episodes, and served to charecterise the Dutch civillians as did the teenage boy and his father, rather than being specific people.

As regards the lack of Hollywood errors, that’s because it was a primarilly European production with a major US input – D1ckie Attenborough director, wasn’t likely to get the Brits to ham it up (well, not that way Dahling)

Little known fact – apart from the crack troop of ‘Atenboroughs Irregulars’ (army trained extras to act as the soldiers) a lot of the squaddies were Dutch – who, this being Holland in the 70s were most upset at having to cut their hair to a wartime length – rather treasuring their locks and wearing hairnets in their Dutch Army tanks!

Cheers

Originally posted by JDK

And apart from the Sargent and young officer rescue, and Liv Ulman and Olivier’s charecter, almost everything else included is true. Some story!

Cheers

If you are talking about the James Caan character that pulls the pistol on the surgeon, that is true. The officer in question was Captain Legrand Johnson of 502nd PIR , 101st Airborne. and the Sergeant was Charles Dohun.

I believe “Legs” Johnson is still alive. He was 22 at the time and Dohun was 31.

And now that I look again, the Ulman character is based on Kate ter Horst who along with husband Jan made thier home available to British wounded at one point having over 300 casualties in their home. The Olivier character is based on someone too, but I can’t find the name at the moment.

Dan

I always thought the snatch towing technique was developed as a means of recovering downed gliders from their drop zones. Obviously, for snatching pick ups, they would be almost completely empty except for a pilot.

I think it was just too dodgy for it to be used as a day to day method of towing off gliders – even empty ones.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JDK
Connery as Urquhart, Fox as Horrocks, Dirk Bogarde as Boy Browning and Hopkins as Frost all were cited as being very like the real charecters

I take back what I said then about the accents. I did know that many British officers spoke that way, but I had wrongfully assumed that this was another case of Hollywood getting the British actors to ham it up a bit.

JDK wrote:
And apart from the Sargent and young officer rescue, and Liv Ulman and Olivier’s charecter, almost everything else included is true. Some story!

I just watched the ‘making of’ documentary on disc 2, and according to that, the story of the Sergeant saving the officer IS true. It’s just no-one believed it. Apparently the US critics slated the film for making up a lot in the content. In this documentary they insist, and demonstrate, that the film was in fact telling the truth and through!. As usual, the critics were talking through a hole in their rrrrr’s

JDK wrote:
Er Gliders – actually, never snatch towed.

Well, you learn something every day – and it was only recently that I had read that they were snatch towed – having always thought previously they were towed as in the film. The article I read had photos of a Dakota snatching a glider – it looked very precarious. No wonder they DIDN’T use it in action.

cheers
Dave

Originally posted by Dave Homewood

What has happened to the Harvards now, anyone know? Were they faithfully restored to T6’s, or did they get scrapped?

The Harvards are still flying on a regular bases with the ‘Stichting KLu Historische Vlucht’ (Royal Netherlands AF Historic Flight Association) out of Gilze Rijen. I don’t know if all of them still do because they’ve had a number of different Harvards and still operate 6 of em now.

They also fly:

1 Auster Mk.3
5 Super Cups
1 DH Beaver
1 Ryan STM trainer
1 Stinson Sentinel
1 Beech 18
4 Fokker S.11’s
1 DH Tigermoth
Pride of the fleet, 1 Spitfire Mk.9
and last (and definetely least!) a Cessna 172 for training purposes.

Recently they received a Fokker 27 which they will get to airworthy condition for displaying purposes as well.

Hi Dave,
Couple of things – actually, lots of the British officers DID sound like that – check out www.britishpathe.com to see (and more critically hear) what the real thing sounded like. Connery as Urquhart, Fox as Horrocks, Dirk Bogarde as Boy Browning and Hopkins as Frost all were cited as being very like the real charecters – Bogarde actually served under Browning in the war and knew him quite well – the above actors and subjects all met (on set) and it wasn’t just publicity puff. The sitting waiting for infantry and having a brew up did happen – not that the Guards were cowards, it was the right thing to do, but…

And apart from the Sargent and young officer rescue, and Liv Ulman and Olivier’s charecter, almost everything else included is true. Some story!

Er Gliders – actually, never snatch towed. They were all done as a tow off the runway (see any documentry of Rhine, Arnheim and D-Day for the ‘real thing’ photos.) The snatch tow was something the publicists loved, and went on about, but as far as I know was never used in action – certainly not in major numbers. (Awaits for correction… Money on MikeJ in first…)

The other reason they couldn’t remake Bridge of BoB is they couldn’t assemble as large a star cast. That was a real major scoring point for both movies, as familiar actors alowed for a lot more charecters on screen, without confusion in the public. After all, you won’t mistake Connery for anyone else!

Cheers

After reading this thread I got the film out from the video store yesterday and watched it for the first time in at least ten years last night. Wow, it was really good for its day. A few iffy bits, like how every British officer was “ffaw ffaw what what old boy” and every American was gung ho and didn’t believe the Brits had a single clue because all they did was drink tea. But these stigmas of old war films aside, the action was great, as were the sets, and man, those flying sequences were great. The massed take off of C47’s was almost as good as in Memphis Belle, and the parachute drop was so reminiscent of Band of Brothers, but more special when you realise each chute was real, not cgi (not that you can tewll in BofBr.

I have to say, and may be slated for it, but I could help think that Anthony Hopkins did an amazingly good impression of Terry Thomas. I think it was his moustache.

And there were a lot of familiar faces there from TV – as well as big stars. Sean Connery put in a good performance.

A great pity the Spitfire wasn’t used more – Arnhem had much more air cover than depicted. At least there was a lot of accurate German equipment in there, and my goodness, all those Shermans and other Allied vehicles were stunning to see. All in all a very good film, despite the Harvards.

What has happened to the Harvards now, anyone know? Were they faithfully restored to T6’s, or did they get scrapped? And yes, those Horsa gliders were brilliant too. I do have a query though – towed from the ground? I’ve read that the C47’s got airborne, and then snagged the glider toe ropes while airborne. Did they not do that every time?

Cheers
Dave

And the original book by Cornelius Ryan is pretty good too.

One of my fave movies.

Actually the Harvards were a sensible option, as they appeared verry briefly in the film, and were downplayed as specific types – however they were painted and repainted as Typhoons and then as P-47s – and a brain cell is shouting in the back as Fw190s as well, but I don’t believe that…

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again – CGI is vastly overrated for credibiolity compared to the real thing. in 5, 10 years, current state of the art is going to look like Muffin the Mule.

A lot of trouble was taken to make the film as accurate as possible a superb effort. William Goldman’s paperback on the making is good, as is the previously mentioned After the Battle (the Special that covers the real battle as well is the one to get.) One of the Ian Allen mags had an article by the guy responsible for assembling the Dak fleet. Most of the vehicles were from the Tony Oliver collection – later to appear in (just about every war movie you’ve heard of…)

Cheers

Pink Spit!

Originally posted by mike currill
I did notice that MH434 playing the recce spit in the early scenes had her cannon and thought no they can’t honestly expect anyone with more than half a brain cell to be lieve that is a recce aircraft.

Wouldn’t tell that in front of 16 Sqn veterans (hello to Jimmy Taylor!) who flew photo-reconnaissace missions in FR.IXs. There are quite a few photos of these Mk IX, still with their cannon (they were armed on sorties sometimes, I think), being operated by this dedicated PR unit. 16 Sqn actually distinugished itself during ‘Market-Garden’, so the only thing inaccurate about MH434 in the scene is that she should have been painted pink, as no. 16’s Mk IXs were!

Love this film. Can’t go without saying a stern “Johnny!”, played by Anthony Hopkins.

Speaking of CGI, Bridge Too Far shows up Band of Brothers for Daks. Former is real, latter is CGI. Which one looks better? Bridge Too Far of course! 😎

One of my friends,Leopold HEIMES,air gunner during the BoB at 235 Sqn,was a pilot of C 47 during the film.He told me that he was obliged to make evasive manoeuver during a mass parachute launching.It was because a paratrooper (Mackenzie )was to light.You see his manoeuver on the movie.He was also the pilot of the Dak exploding in flame,behind an embankment.

I loved the film from the very beginning – went to see it three times in the cinema on first release. It portrays soldiers (both German and Allied) in a very true light, in my opinion.

The mocked up Harvards look a bit dodgy but what else could they jave done in 1977? Certainly no real Typhoons they could have used and CGI was not a realistic proposition back then (it did exist but in fairly crude form).

Unsurpassed, in my opinion, for realism until “Band of Brothers”.

Originally posted by mike currill
Vaguely being the operative word. Vaguely as in harvards and typhoons are both aircraft. That’s as close as it gets. Crazy – I’ve seen that film 3 or 4 times now and never noticed that though I did notice that MH434 playing the recce spit in the early scenes had her cannon and thought no they can’t honestly expect anyone with more than half a brain cell to be lieve that is a recce aircraft.

MH434 doesn’t have her cannon fitted in the movie. Besides, she could have been playing a Spit flying an armed recce…

ABTF is quite underrated as a war film, in my opinion. Might have to give it a watch tonight 😀

I thought some of you might find this of interest, as it is related to A Bridge Too Far. The following quote comes from Phil Tonge, a contributor to The Mausoleum Club forum (the best forum about old British television anywhere)

“As for Secret Army, I was waiting for someone else to mention it so I could get the following anecdote off my chest.
In the episode of SA set around the time of Operation Market Garden (the battle for Arnhem etc.) there are some very expensive battle scenes way out of the reach of a BBC budget.
Their origin? The BBC’s Film 77 crew had been invited to do a set report on ****ie Atenborough’s A Bridge Too Far. BBC crew sets up to see the filming of a major stunt/battle sequence (recreation of the SS recon unit’s abortive attempt to take the British held end of Arnhem bridge). BBC crew take position as close to action as possible. Takes lots and lots of film without movie crew noticing. BBC **** off. Footage turns up in Secret Army.
Inventive and cheeky. “

Originally posted by Robbo
The article says that they were supposed to look vaguely like typhoons

Rob

Vaguely being the operative word. Vaguely as in harvards and typhoons are both aircraft. That’s as close as it gets. Crazy – I’ve seen that film 3 or 4 times now and never noticed that though I did notice that MH434 playing the recce spit in the early scenes had her cannon and thought no they can’t honestly expect anyone with more than half a brain cell to be lieve that is a recce aircraft.