New TV series about RAF in WW2

If the Guy Richie project does go into production, It will no doubt be ripped to shreds in terms its use of authentic equipment and historical accuracy, but at least it would have been made, which can only be good for anyone interested in this all consuming hobby of ours.

Hopefully young enthusiasts will be inspired by such productions, I was first inspired to get interested in aviation by the BBC tv series Wings, which today looks pretty awful in its quality of production, yet at the time I thought it was unmissable.

Having just watched Guy’s latest Sherlock adventure, ‘A game of Shadows’, he will no doubt carry over some of his trade mark slow motion, close up and handheld action to this this proposed battle of Britain drama.

I personally can’t wait to see the 303’s ripping through the fuselage of some CGI Emil. I can almost guarantee it won’t be anything like the Docudrama approach of BoB or involve as many real aircraft as PoC, but commercially it has to be successful and Richie will I’m sure deliver the goods.

Septic.

Thread creep C-Shell heroes’

I think the main interest from a film made in 1956 is how much original equipment and period locations are evident.
I suspect that at the time full details of the raid were still not in the public domain,but it did give a reasonable feeling of the effort required and the frail craft employed.
R f t Sky gave us some historic images of Kenley (as it was) even if they got the ‘teardrop’ canopies wrong.
The problem with POC was they had to pick up the ‘cuttings’ to try and make something out of it,and the ‘Friston’ bit no doubt took a fair bit of the budget to no avail.
In the end though i would rather see a good effort made with real equipment/locations than the arcade effect of CGI.
What we need is ‘Zulu’ with Hurricanes !!!! (at Kenley)

Of course i mean the quality of ‘Zulu’ before someone comes on to say they were not there.

Actually, both Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch were commercially and critically successful, as were the two Sherlock Holmes films Ritchie directed.

And, as I pointed out, he created a TV series based around his first feature film.

[/I][/B]??

Commercial success and critical success are quite different and I am ready to be corrected but I was not aware that any of his films have had anything other than mild approbation to negative criticism. The less said about the Lock,Stock TV series the better….:(

Reading between the lines (perhaps?) or maybe intrepreting “Sun speak” I am wondering if the words “…working on” = “In development”?

The piece (and discussion here) would rather have us believe it is all a done deal, but I wonder if the lack of any mention of a broadcaster is significant?

It reads to me as if this is an idea under development, but with no script, cast or commission – yet.

Odds.

I think that it’s blatantly obvious that a good track record matters. It certainly ups the odds of a successful outcome. Ritchie and Tarantino are great at what they do best… Speilberg has a proven adaptability, one can’t say that about Ritchie.
One must try and keep an open mind, but I’m always in trepidation at any new aviation titles. Memhis Belle was pretty good even if it diverged from the facts rather. Dark Blue World was almost good, but skimping on the locations spoilt it rather.
As an earlier poster mentioned, the aircrews were a pretty decent bunch of guys. The trouble is, that authors try and pad-out the weaknesses in their writing by sprinkling-in a bunch of flawed characters, ala ‘Bomber’. This then creates a very distorted impression, that is as lasting as it is accessable.
Like I said before, the truth makes for ripping yarns, without any need for frivolous embellishment. The key is thorough research. 🙂

Furthermore, a lot of film directors “guest direct” episodes of TV series these days – Tarantino (yuck!) has directed an episode of E.R., and wrote at least one episode of C.S.I..

Actually, both Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels and Snatch were commercially and critically successful, as were the two Sherlock Holmes films Ritchie directed.

And, as I pointed out, he created a TV series based around his first feature film.

You simply can’t base assumptions on the few movies Ritchie has made. I mean, would you assume Spielberg couldn’t make Schindler’s List if he’d just made Jaws, or Raiders, or Jurassic Park??

Look at someone like Steven Spielbergs resume’, are all his films the same genre?
Many, many film and TV directors can turn their talent and vision to many subjects.
Going by the way you see things only a director who specialised in war series could make it, with all the inherent bias that’s already there.

Not at all. It’s about talent. Ritchie has made a handfull of poor to average films all of similar types. I am no fan of Spielberg but to bracket them together is bizarre. I also made the point that this is not a film but a TV series, of which he has no experience.

Is this what Ray Winstone hinted about earlier this year????

It matters hugely. Firstly many directors have specific strengths for specific genres of film and if they stray they fail. Secondly the talent of the director himself. Thirdly it is a TV series, not something Ritchie has tried before, as far as I am aware, so he is an unknown quantity in that respect.

Look at someone like Steven Spielbergs resume’, are all his films the same genre?
Many, many film and TV directors can turn their talent and vision to many subjects.
Going by the way you see things only a director who specialised in war series could make it, with all the inherent bias that’s already there.

Ritchie created and produced Lock, Stock…, a TV series based on a small film he did about London criminals.

A good director can turn his hand to almost anything. To say Ritchie wouldn’t be able to pull this off is hardly giving him credit. I mean, after all, he did Sherlock Holmes, which was a big step away from his usual fare….

I really can’t see what the issue is with Guy Ritchie directing this series. Who cares what he’s done before?
Just about any director out there has a variety of projects in their back catalogue.

It matters hugely. Firstly many directors have specific strengths for specific genres of film and if they stray they fail. Secondly the talent of the director himself. Thirdly it is a TV series, not something Ritchie has tried before, as far as I am aware, so he is an unknown quantity in that respect.

I wonder if as we get further away from the war period if films will tend to get less realistic.

I’m currently watching ‘The Cockleshell Heroes’ made 1956.
I doubt anything new could be less realistic–it’s awful.

Sad because the attack on shipping in Bordeaux harbour was remarkable, if only partially sucessful.

My WW2 veteran father would be way too non PC for today’s audiences.
His pronounments on the ‘way things are today’ are often not repeatable.
A lot of common sense attached though.
Andy

I’m sure I’m not alone when I say this, but I’ve met a fair few aircrew from WW2 many admittably in their old age – some in extreme old age – rather than in their pomp, but cinema and telly never quite captures their demeanour.

A centre-right political viewpoint usually but not always, a quiet determination – levened often enough with a sense of humour, a certain difficulty even in old age to remember the stress without a lot of emotion – but a determination to cope and most certainly not to give in.

Many of my generation grew up with these veterans, I had several teachers at school and technical college not to mention blokes on the workshop floor who flew or flew in fighters and bombers and they were very much the same. Ordinary men who matured before their time and showed it, but who were not transfigured into mentally tortured parodies such are shown on the screen.

As I said earlier, I don’t like WW2 dramas, too much Freud and Jung and not enough insight into real people.

Regards

I really can’t see what the issue is with Guy Ritchie directing this series. Who cares what he’s done before?
Just about any director out there has a variety of projects in their back catalogue.

I wonder if as we get further away from the war period if films will tend to get less realistic.

Not necessarily because of the passing away of veterans and the loss of technical details (by the general public, not anoraks)..but rathar the perception that there is no need to get it right. To the puiblic it will be “just old history”…the same way we don’t really care if they get the details correct about the Middle Ages.

BTW: The younger readers outthere are probably too young to remember the criticism PoC received from some veterans when first broadcast in the late 80s.

Narrow.

I agree wholeheartedly with Max’. No one can take anything away from the folks involved with the Battle of France, BoB etc, but there is a disproportionate emphasis, that even those involved at the time were uncomfortable with. That of course, is only the war. The vast majority of what is now over one-hundred years of ‘Aviation History’ did not occur during the last war. Sure, a lot happened – and it was a crucial period, but, it’s rather like TV coverage of a cup-final only showing the cam’ focussed on the goalkeeper…. or like footie fans talking about ‘when we won the world cup’.

Not that any of this will deter those behind this I’m sure.

The article in the Sun makes reference to ‘Band of Brothers’ – actually, a good example of getting things right, – just to show that it can be done well. Speilberg was of course also behind ‘Finding Private Ryan’. I cannot, on the face of it, see anything it Ritchies back-catalogue that would suggest him for this project, other than that he might like flying. Well, it’s a start. 🙂

whilst i understand that some don’t want another BoB program, don’t take it out on the Few Mr Blue Max!

I am keen to see any program/series that raises the profile of any allied aviators.

I would love to see something on Coastal Command – not a chance

I am not taking it out on the “FEW” ie pilots of the Battle Of Britain, far from it. More on those that cannot see past it or before it. Why keep on telling the same old stories when there are many more just as deserving out there.

I don’t normally read ‘The Sun’ because it’s owned by Murdoch–and it’s sh*te, but I spent five minutes of my life searching their site for this and cannot see it.
Could someone post a link–please..?
I’d like to read it for myself.

Voila!

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/showbiz/bizarre/4711154/guy-ritchie-to-film-world-war-two-tv-drama.html

The problem with making a film, or TV series about aerial combat is that it is ultimately a very boring thing.
What you need is a good story to go with it. Dambusters works because the story is pretty engrossing regardless of the action.
Battle of Britain. 16 episodes of a lot of stressed tired pilots waiting around all day then scrambling for 10 minutes of combat where a few get killed.