Piece of Cake – finale

They were probably banking on the shot being so quick that most viewers wouldn’t see it – plus they needed a suitable “exploding fighter” shot to put in there.

I loved the brief shot of the ‘109 getting its wing blown off, though!

Is it my eyes or does Moggy’s Spit change into a Hurricane??

This is the still from the moment his plane blows up.

Also I noticed that white van man is travelling from right to left just before the credits roll up.

Wanted this DVD as I put it on my Crimbo list, still waiting. Might buy it myself now.

Brian.

Many years later i read a paperback version of P O C. and came to the immediate conclusion it had been heavily “borrowed ” from FP, but with spitfires substituting the hurricanes, and the situations “enhanced”.

No doubt by also sustituting the BOB for the French campaign it confused the situation,and i never found out how the legal issue was settled.

Erm.. you don’t seem to have read it very closely. PoC the book is all Hurricane. Spitfires were only used in the TV series for reasons of availability. Also the bulk of it is set in France, but it ‘extends’ on into the Battle.

I think the legal wrangle was not so much resolved as faded away on the death of W/C Ritchie.

Moggy

POC was just a poor substitute.

Pobjoy Pete

But also fiction (based on some fact), and therefore not exactly the same thing. 😉

P O C

I read “fighter pilot” decades ago, and was even lucky enough to meet Paul Richey approaching his car in westminster in the late sixties.He offered to autograph my copy,but i had lent it to someone,and then moved away.
Many years later i read a paperback version of P O C. and came to the immediate conclusion it had been heavily “borrowed ” from FP, but with spitfires substituting the hurricanes, and the situations “enhanced”.

No doubt by also sustituting the BOB for the French campaign it confused the situation,and i never found out how the legal issue was settled.

When i see the shots in modern films/tv series, whilst it is always great to see and hear the aircraft, they always seem to miss out on the “cowlings off ” situation,and therefore those merlin engines are hidden away.

The books on the making of films are usually much more interesting than the film themselves,and in the case of POC. it is not in the same league as FP.
The main connection with the flying side was that some of the returning pilots from the french campaign were involved with training new pilots that flew in the BOB.and therefore tended to be overlooked in later years.

NO 1 squadron did a good job (as did all the others) under difficult circumstances,and anyone reading the proper account,will get a good insight as to what really happened.

Smoke trails in the sky,A willingless to die,and,First light,(Barclay,Kingcome,and Wellum)
Are all quality accounts of the period after the fall of France,POC was just a poor substitute.

Pobjoy Pete

But be very wary of cheap imitations = [click]!!!

😀

If anyone’s interested, Amazon currently has the book about the making of the TV series, “How They Made A Piece of Cake”, for sale for very reasonable prices:

How They Made A Piece of Cake – Herbie Knott & Robert Eagle

Anyone wanting to obtain copy of the book can PM me, as I find myself with two.

Just noticed this thread, coincidently just started a new thread of Coventry airshow ’88 where i have posted two pics of ML417 and MH434 in which i believe are in Piece of Cake colours.

As to the multiple coverage, it would be nice

I thought there were multiple shots from the bridge stunt? I seem to recall a 1988-era edition of FP showing two shots of ‘434 under the bridge – from a different angle…. :confused:

Not sure I agree with you entirely there. There are films with huge effects budgets that still get it wrong. However, look at the low-budget stuff used in Dark Blue World, and you’d think they spent tons more on the making of the film than what they did. All a special effect really needs is to be done by someone who knows what the director wants and how to do it properly, and you’d be surprised what can be done on a smaller budget.

Films might have huge budgets, and large chunks of those budgets can go to visual effects but 9 times out of ten that money will be stretched as far as the Director and Producers can get out of the beleaguered effects teams.

Generally effects will look like effects if they are sign posted (ie. stuff that clearly can’t be real, dinosaurs, Transformers, kids on flying broomsticks etc), otherwise they are mostly invisible to the audience. Great examples of the latter can be seen in the latest 007 film going all the way back to Forrest Gump. Casino Royale is particularly good at hiding it has any effects in it at all due to the Director using restraint in how the effects are shown – no silly camera moves and OTT action that normally destroys the credibility.

Trust me when I say this, if some effects look bad you can blame the Director for lack of restraint, or the Producers for shallow pockets.

So safe enough to risk a precious Spitfire and pilot but too risky for the official photographer on the riverbank. Something not quite right there. 🙂

I don’t know, but to speculate, I suspect it has a lot to do with ownership and liability. If I ask you to volunteer to fly your Spitfire for a stunt, I may not risk my equipment, person or my employees (or contractors) at the same time, for liability, personal or insurance reasons.

As to the multiple coverage, it would be nice – however, remember they were making a general entertainment TV series, not a photo collection for enthusiasts. I suspect (but don’t know) that we were lucky to get the quality of work with Herbie’s photos, Robert Eagle and my friend Mike Jerram’s writing in the Boxtree book.

Reviewing my notes, Boxtree were caught out by the book’s success, and it sold out very quickly. Being A TV tie in, and a series never repeated on UK TV, a reprint’s never looked likely. Would be nice though.

DCK, CGI’s ‘perfectibility’ remains an admirable goal, but it won’t (IMHO) ever be ‘perfect’. I note that most films that have trumpeted the use of CGI have dated very badly. CGI, like models, mirrors and smoke are just tools. If that’s what’s important to you about the entertainment, it’s missing on a more fundamental basis.

Neither PoC the book or the series were ‘about’ flying the aircraft or the battles but a close hard look at the social group, actions and real behaviour of a bunch of fighter pilots – a critical point in terms of the subject. The Spitfires were still just props.

As to ‘special effects’, we recently watched ‘Only Angels have Wings’ (1939 , Hawks). There was some of the worst model work I’ve ever seen in it (quite remarkable) and there was also a couple of breathtaking bits of superb flying by one of the best (Paul Mantz). A Ford Trimotor in a spin is something to film and too see. You can obsess about the shows shortcomings or enjoy the peaks of achievement. Whine or praise. Your call. 😉

Cheers,

IIRC, after discussion with Herbie Knott (I thought it was on the forum here, but it seems not) he wasn’t allowed on the riverbank, for safety, so yes, the photo was shot with a wide angle lens, tripod and remote (cable, I think) release.

Priorities?

So safe enough to risk a precious Spitfire and pilot but too risky for the official photographer on the riverbank. Something not quite right there. 🙂

This was only ever going to be a one shot chance. I am surprised it was not covered by at least three other camera/photographer combinations as back up. A photographer standing adjacent to the movie crew for a start.

Mark

Wasn’t there some controversy at the time about it showing the BoB pilots in a poor light ?

The controversy was largely driven by the supporters of W/C Paul Richey DFC whose book Fighter Pilot, published anonymously during the war, has many similarities to the Robinson book. Accusations of plagiarism were rife, as were claims that it showed up the fighter boys in France 1940 in a bad light.

Reading both of them I can’t believe that, either consciously or unconsciously, the early book didn’t influence the later one. On the other hand PoC is a damn good story and, as fiction, doesn’t make me think any of the less of W/C Richey’s comrades.

Moggy

Ironically you’d get a whole bunch of people on here complaining about the use of CGI.

Yes, if theyre done poorly. They sometimes are.

But then again, choose. Piece of cake should have been packed with action but instead it’s basically just Spits taking off and landing. The only huge scenes are the battle at Hells Corner and the bridge scene which are amazing. If they had the money and the know-how to add CGI or more good out-takes from the BoB they would have done so. They did but it was pretty cheap. They show the same Heinkel scenes lots of times for example and I’ve said enough about the explosions already. They only work if you have a tendency to be in denial about how bad they are or a good imagination!

The rest are basically non existant because it wasnt possible. They did as much they could with Dark Blue World 10 years later but that too was almost a near miss due to the hopeless scenery of the airfield. Anyone could see it wasnt in England. If the Piece of Cake producers had our technology at hand they would have embraced it and used it. But it had to be used good. They would have done their best with it and it would have been satisfactory. Probably maybe? 🙂

The CGI effects are still not 100% perfect. It will be. Give it another 10-15 years and it will be pretty damn perfect. They did great with Dark Blue World and this was in 2000 wasnt it? And they usually used out takes and not complete CGI. This, still, works best due to the CGI not being good enough yet.

Great book, loved it. Never really saw the series. Wasn’t there some controversy at the time about it showing the BoB pilots in a poor light ?

You’ll find special effects artists would agree entirely.

Old fashioned practical effects and modern CGI are used when doing it for real isn’t possible – usually due to lack of money. And poor special effects is almost always due to lack of money.

Not sure I agree with you entirely there. There are films with huge effects budgets that still get it wrong. However, look at the low-budget stuff used in Dark Blue World, and you’d think they spent tons more on the making of the film than what they did. All a special effect really needs is to be done by someone who knows what the director wants and how to do it properly, and you’d be surprised what can be done on a smaller budget.

Well, for a start, they’d need to find pilots to replace Mark and Ray Hanna, Reg Hallam, John Watts and Hoof Proudfoot. I’d rather have their flying than any new CGI.

Special Effects are just that – old or new, and often not special because they aren’t top quality either new or old.

Regards,

You’ll find special effects artists would agree entirely.

Old fashioned practical effects and modern CGI are used when doing it for real isn’t possible – usually due to lack of money. And poor special effects is almost always due to lack of money.

If this thread continues I am going to have to say what I really think about the rest of the series!

JDK you are right, “How They Made A Piece Of Cake” is an excellent book, and well worth seeking out.

Steve

Imagine what they could have done with this series today.

Well, for a start, they’d need to find pilots to replace Mark and Ray Hanna, Reg Hallam, John Watts and Hoof Proudfoot. I’d rather have their flying than any new CGI.

Special Effects are just that – old or new, and often not special because they aren’t top quality either new or old.

Regards,