New Bader film?

Not entirely correct that the Stuka was ‘withdrawn from the battle due to vulnerability and unsustainable losses.’ There is, in fact, no evidence that this was the case. Rather, they were ‘withdrawn’ for operational reasons more than anything else – despite what almost every book says on the subject. And by mid to late August the Luftwaffe was preparing to change the direction of its attacks away from airfields. More importantly, the Stuka units were being moved and concentrated up into the Pas de Calais for employment in Operation [I][I]Sealion. Thus, the drawn down in Stuka usage was more to with strategy and tactics than it was to do with losses.

I covered this in some detail in my book ‘Stuka Attack!’

As a point of interest, the RAF claimed 172 Stukas destroyed over Britain in 1940, with 63 probable, 16 shared and 56 damaged.

In total, to all causes, the Luftwaffe lost 101 Stukas up until the end of 1940 in the campaign against Britain. Damaged, to all causes: 84.

From memory, there were about 52 lost (to all causes) up until 18 August.

Sorry for the thread creep! Maybe somebody wants to start a Stuka thread?!

But 16th August must have been only days before the Stuka was finally withdrawn from the battle due to their vulnerability and unsustainable losses; whatever pounding Tangmere had suffered the Luftwaffe were unable, or unwilling, to continue using the Stuka against it and other airfields.

The irony, of course, was that Tangmere was still battered and bruised from its Stuka pounding on 16 August 1940. Rudel may well have noticed the evidence of the attack. He may well have not been aware that it was the result of Stukas. And I doubt that anyone told him!

Bader met Rudel at Tangmere in June 1945 when Rudel was brought there to be interviewed at The Fighter Leaders’ School. Bader actually attempted to get Rudel some help with his prosthetic leg at this time.

Thanks for the info. I was very curious. Oh to have been a ‘fly on the wall’.

I remember seeing a TV programme where a Battle-of-Britain pilot recounted meeting Rudel after the war; when the British pilot said how easy the Ju87 ‘Stuka’ was to shoot-down Rudel suggesting letting him show the British pilot how one should be flown!

The British pilot (wish I could remember his name) said he wished they could have let Rudel have his ‘Stuka’…

…with the assertion that…..”I’d have shot the ******* down!”

Andy,

Don’t be mysterious ! What happened at their meeting ?

Bader met Rudel at Tangmere in June 1945 when Rudel was brought there to be interviewed at The Fighter Leaders’ School. Bader actually attempted to get Rudel some help with his prosthetic leg at this time.

My favourite scene from ‘The Great Escape’ is the one between Donald Pleasance and James Garner:

Garner: “No, what are you doing here?”

Pleasance: “Oh, I’m the forger!”

Just before those lines are spoken Blythe tells of how, as a Photographic Interpreter taking a joyride on an operation, he was shot-down…

“…terrifying…”

…I’ve always thought those lines were particularly poignant…..perhaps understandably.

Yes, sorry, my mistake on the James Garner role, who does indeed have USA on his uniform patches.

Was curious to see the comments with regards James Coburn’s Aussie accent 🙂

Have had great fun digging into the background of some of the actors. Never knew Charles Bronson was a wartime air-gunner. Also Donald Pleasance was a POW after being shot down in a Lancaster ?

Funnily enough only yesterday we travelled on the Ravenglass and Eskdale railway, in a carriage donated/unveiled (can’t remember which) by Bader in June 1982. Living just up the road from his alma mater he’s quite hard to avoid round here.

Will that be in the film?

Adrian

Well no more James Garner,James Coburn or Steve McQueen as they are brown bread!

James Garner’s character in the Great Escape had USA flashes and a Eagle Squadron badge on the uniform, thus he was just right for the role (plus he had done the scrounger role in real life when he was in the US Army during the Korean War. In fact they could have had shed loads of Americans in the Great Escape movie as in real life the camp did have a lot of USAAF Officers in it when work started on the three tunnels and a number of Americans were involved in the escape organisation, though they were moved to another compound before the actual escape.

…which was going to be a film, Alex Kershaw contacting me before writing The Few for details regarding Keough, Tobin and Mamedorff. Between anoraks, veterans and Daily Mail readers the film – which was intended to star former Tomcat Pilot Tom Cruise (presumably as Shorty Keough) – got such a kicking it was embarrassing and no doubt contributed to its not being made. The Americans, you see, ony wanted to show how they won the war. Like they did with Battle of Britain when they made that…

I reckon most Australians would have had a problem with James Coburn’s accent!

Wasn’t James Garner supposed to be an American who had joined the RAF, posing as a Canadian, as several Americans did before the United States joined the war?

The way I read the article, was that it’s going to be a film about the escape, not a biopic of Bader. In that sense it can follow the Hollywood traditions of telling a good story for entertainment , rather than dwelling on any perceived bad character traits.

A good example would be The Great Escape. Did anyone object to that film when , off the top of my head, James garner played a Canadian; Charles Bronson played a Pole, and James Coburn played an Australian ?

I can certainly sympathise with that.

But presumably there is no money other than from Hollywood.

Large numbers of films are made without “Hollywood” money. Although I can understand the family’s reservations. Much would depend on the writer’s and director’s vision and what that would cost. And then the negotiation of a distribution deal which would return a profit for the producers.

First Light is a good example of a high quality film about an individual BoB pilot. But whether or not it would have succeeded as a feature film at the box office is another question.

The Last Enemy is a book that I treasure it has been with me for many years.

Perhaps a film about Group Captain Geoffrey Leonard Cheshire, Baron Cheshire VC, OM, DSO & Two Bars, DFC would be interesting to the general public as many have heard of his homes?

[QUOTE=DazDaMan;2217805 The Hillary family are/were reluctant to allow the story to be made into a film, lest it be “Hollywood-ised”.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]236748[/ATTACH][/QUOTE]

I can certainly sympathise with that.

But presumably there is no money other than from Hollywood.

You’d have to get the owners of the film rights on board first. And, like I said, they are/were quite reluctant.

As for candidates for a film around a single person I am sure there are many. Richard Hillary comes to mind which could also feature the incredible work of Archibald McIndoe and the controversial return to flying resulting in Hillary’s death and that of Wilfred Fison.

I have always thought The Last Enemy would, if done properly, make a fantastic adaptation. As you say it could highlight the revolutionary work of McIndoe.

Richard Hillary comes to mind which could also feature the incredible work of Archibald McIndoe and the controversial return to flying resulting in Hillary’s death and that of Wilfred Fison.

I asked David Ross, the author of the fantastic Hillary biography, about the prospect of a film based on Hillary’s The Last Enemy. He said, basically, “no way”. The Hillary family are/were reluctant to allow the story to be made into a film, lest it be “Hollywood-ised”.

However, there was a heavily fictionalised account that was a TV series back in about 1991….

[ATTACH=CONFIG]236748[/ATTACH]