It’s all gone very quiet.
I had a look on IMDB and they suggested a cast list, not accesible unless you pay for membership, sod that, I’m not giving out my card details for a site that I’m only likely to use for whatever you want to know on the spur of the moment anyway, accuse me of being mean if you like, but I don’t see what the advantages are.
Has anyone else looked at this and gleaned any information.
By: Arabella-Cox - 26th March 2008 at 14:02
Thing is, will Sean Connery appear unanounced, as he did in the naff Robin Hood movie, my son reckons he will, any takers.
He was certainly asked to reprise his role but the last I heard was that he had ruled it out. Sounds like a good cast though. Jim Broadbent’s a good choice to replace Denholm Elliot I think.
By: Pete Truman - 26th March 2008 at 13:55
not film related, but dambuster related anyhow. Could anyone tell me why reculver was used to test the first bouncing bombs? i can see that geographically the area would be perfect, but being so close to axis ocuppied europe, you would think that the area would be less secret than many other parts of the coast. I beleive some of the tests flights were flownout of manston, which at the time would have been the most frontline airfield. It all seems very risky, when you consider that one lucky luftwaffe fighter sweep could have destroyed the test plane, test bomb(S), observation equipment as well as possibly killing the people involved, including the designer and some of the RAFs most senior test pilots and officials. was it just not thought of as a risk, was a lot of testing done there? any ideas?
This question was thought of whilst walking by reculver!
Good point, there are a lot of beaches up north and away from any possible enemy action and prying eyes. One site I’m thinking off in particular is near Ravenglass on the Cumbrian coast, it was set up as a gunnery range, and still is, all the infrastructure was in place and even today the coast is quite off the beaten track. Presumably Reculver was easily accessible for the boffins and top brass from London.
By: Pete Truman - 26th March 2008 at 13:47
If you can’t get much out of IMDB with regard to the Dambusters film, while getting carried away as usual on that site, I noticed there’s a very nice short, but sweet clip on the new Indiana Jones movie, to be released in a couple of months. Don’t you just love those films, they are getting an airing on BBC4 at the moment, great, no bloody adverts.
As usual, it features a glimpse of a tasty plane, they never fail do they, Sandringhams, Zeppelins, wierd Luftwaffe flying wings, Tri-motors etc etc, in this case it looks to be a Dak, knowing Lucas, probably more, especially as this film is set in the 50’s.
The cast looks pretty cool too, Jim Broadbent replacing the late Denholm Elliot, good old dependable Ray Winstone, the gorgeous Kate Blanchett, all in all a good old typical swim with it and enjoy Hollywood blockbuster with no pretentions.
Thing is, will Sean Connery appear unanounced, as he did in the naff Robin Hood movie, my son reckons he will, any takers.
I apologise to myself for sabotaging my own thread.
By: Arabella-Cox - 26th March 2008 at 13:35
not film related, but dambuster related anyhow. Could anyone tell me why reculver was used to test the first bouncing bombs? i can see that geographically the area would be perfect, but being so close to axis ocuppied europe, you would think that the area would be less secret than many other parts of the coast. I beleive some of the tests flights were flownout of manston, which at the time would have been the most frontline airfield. It all seems very risky, when you consider that one lucky luftwaffe fighter sweep could have destroyed the test plane, test bomb(S), observation equipment as well as possibly killing the people involved, including the designer and some of the RAFs most senior test pilots and officials. was it just not thought of as a risk, was a lot of testing done there? any ideas?
This question was thought of whilst walking by reculver!
By: Arabella-Cox - 26th March 2008 at 13:06
Nah, I have not heard anything, i think their might be a few australian actors ( i think 😮 not sure:confused: :confused: :confused: ) which their probably would have been during the war, imsure 617 squadron had some aussies, controversy is of course over the name of the squadron leader Guy Gibson’s dog, i think they should keep it because it should be historically accurate.
Can’t wait to see it, when is it supposed to be out :confused: :confused:
Several Australian crew members took part in the raids, but exactly how many, and their roles, I can’t remember off the top of my head.
I agree that the dog’s name should stay. Although not acceptable now, the name is a historical fact and it wouldn’t be the first film to use the word if it’s appropriate for the time and plot.
I hope any remake is done well and accurately depicts what happened for a new audience as well as those who saw the first film. I was shocked to read that the testing facility at Teddington was demolished so recently. I’m going by memory here, but could it have been as recent as 1998?
By: DazDaMan - 26th March 2008 at 11:28
IMDB states 2010.
The Peter Jackson fan club board, “The *******s Have Landed“, hasn’t had anything new on the remake for a while.
By: Arabella-Cox - 26th March 2008 at 11:03
Nah, I have not heard anything, i think their might be a few australian actors ( i think 😮 not sure:confused: :confused: :confused: ) which their probably would have been during the war, imsure 617 squadron had some aussies, controversy is of course over the name of the squadron leader Guy Gibson’s dog, i think they should keep it because it should be historically accurate.
Can’t wait to see it, when is it supposed to be out :confused: :confused:
Sign In
March 26, 2008 at 10:54 am