The First Of The Few (1942)

Damn. Bang goes my smug moment! 😀

Daz,

Sorry but no, the Schneider bit is as ‘revised’ and refocussed as the rest of the film. For good resason from the film writer’s perspective as you do not want to detract from the main purpose of the film. Pity, I would have loved to have seen more footage of the aircraft.

The best bit by far is Waltons music, that was so good it was reused for Battle of Britain. Worst is Howard’s acting, cringe-makingly wet.

If that is the case why is U571 called U571 and not “Brave Americans capture a U-boat and its code machine in a made-up story that never happened“

I wonder if there was any outcry in Germany over the film U571?

The real U-571 was sunk by a Sunderland of 461 Squadron RAAF on 28th January 1944 west of Ireland. None of the crew of fifty-two survived although some were seen swimming in the sea before the aircraft departed.

Perhaps that’s what Dave means by adding a rider that the story is complete and utter fiction. Might detract a little from the film poster though. or perhaps they could just put ‘please don’t watch this if you are gullible.’

Regards,

kev35

Kevin,

None of the films you mention are based directly on factual events and as far as I’m aware none of them claim to be.

If that is the case why is U571 called U571 and not “Brave Americans capture a U-boat and its code machine in a made-up story that never happened“

And what is Pearl Harbor (sic) all about? A female night club singer?

Moggy

…flms like this jingoistic bit of fluff should be clearly prefaced when screened or released with a rider that states it is propaganda, fictional and not historically accurate.

A few years back some films, particularly on BBC2, used to have a short introducing programme, often hosted by an actor or film director, that gave some background information about the film, the writer, the director and also any information that helped put the film in its correct context. This was often done for low-budget horror or science fiction films (possibly the BBC was trying to head-off complaints about the poor quality of some of them) but it made the films all the more interesting to watch (sometimes) and I can see no reason why it couldn’t be done for ‘inaccurate’ films or films biased by propaganda.

Personally I find the attitude of films like ‘We Dive at Dawn’ and ‘Went the Day Well’ very interesting as a barometer of the times, even if it is somewhat artificial given the propaganda elements.

I’ve seen the film numerous times, and I cannot recall it ever stating that it is a “true” story…

Now, I’m not an expert on the Schneider Trophy racers etc, but some of that at least must be accurate??

Yes, banning the film entirely is a form of censorship which society will not tolerate.

I suggested this film should not be allowed to be screened any more to prevoke a reaction and some debate, and I have achieved my goal. People should think about the implications of making/watching a film that purports to be a true story when it is clearly nothing of the sort. I agree with KG51 that flms like this jingoistic bit of fluff should be clearly prefaced when screened or released with a rider that states it is propaganda, fictional and not historically accurate. That would solve a lot of problems, and allow the traditionalists to enjoy the last work of Trevor Howard and the great footage of genuine Battle of Britain pilots, with no ill efects that they think they’re learning Spitfire history.

That’s my opinion. Others will differ.

If you want to ban this film…then you would have to ban (clutching figure from the air :)) at least 95% of Hollywood historical feature films !!
Sure …it is inaccurate,but worth it to see the real RAF squadron pilots in the early sequences surely ??
The list of historically accurate movies will indeed be relatively short 😉

rgds baz

Right enough Baz. I don’t want them banned. I want them clearly marked “Fiction.”

😀

A Bridge Too Far?

I cannot remember the name of the individual (a well known Bomber Command pilot) but as historical advisor he walked-off the production of ‘A Bridge Too Far’ when he realised the character-assassination that the producers were perpetrating on General Browning, who he had known personally but was then dead and so unable to defend himself.

The list of historically accurate movies will indeed be relatively short 😉

rgds baz

Patton
A Bridge Too Far

Umm…

If you want to ban this film…then you would have to ban (clutching figure from the air :)) at least 95% of Hollywood historical feature films !!
Sure …it is inaccurate,but worth it to see the real RAF squadron pilots in the early sequences surely ??
The list of historically accurate movies will indeed be relatively short 😉

rgds baz

The point is that it should not be shown any more. or released on DVD, as it’s a load of nonsense. But the unintitated will watch it and take it for what it purports to be, and come away thinking it’s the true story. I don’t even think that as a work of fiction that it comes off as very impressive to be honest. There are far better films from those days.

It is good to hear that Britain is getting to see so many new documentaries and dramas over this period about the battle. Sadly, we’re not.

I agree with you Dave. The problem is the myths are perpetuated by people taking these kind of things at face value. Fine piece of propaganda though it is, I don’t even think it reflects the attitudes of the time. Far too much “stiff upper lip” and noble sacrifice for my liking.

That said I doubt showing Mitchell as he was would have put bums on seats or inspired a nation.

But also remember in 2065 there will still be historians who will diligently search the truth and publish it whether film cd dvd or ?? you will no doubt have dedicated people who will research the correct clothing serial numbers etc just as the roman and civile war reenactors do today.
Those films while being propogander they had to be watchable and I feel that those old films often conveyed more than just the facts- attitudes beliefs and what was acceptable.

Kevin,

None of the films you mention are based directly on factual events and as far as I’m aware none of them claim to be. Whereas First of the Few/Spitfire alledges to be the true story, but is so loosely based on truth that it simply distorts history.

My opinion is that as time goes on and future generations become more and more removed from understanding the propaganda situation and the reasons why the film was so different from the truth, and also understanding the events and technology of the Second World War, that this can only confound confusion for the future populace as to what really happened as opposed to what the film says happened.

In fifty, sixty, seventy years time there will be no wartime Spitfire pilots left, nor their children, and very few of the current crop of historians who’ve been able to have personal contact with the WWII generation. The history will become more and more filtered and “revised”. Books are becoming more and more unpopular with the younger people who would rather research by hitting Youtube and looking at something thrown together by Discovery or History Channels. The way we learn has dramatically changed in the past ten years and as technology moves forward who knows how people will view books in fifty years time – they’ll probably be as unpopular to a teen in 2065 as the abacus is to us. But visual media through electronic technology is becoming wider and wider, and more popular with education. Films will probably still be watched then.

Hence the reason I think it’s time this film is laid to rest and a better, more accurate version made that puts the record straight. The same goes for several other factual films that have more fiction than reality.

I spend a fair bit of time trying to record history accurately while we still have the veterans to tell it first hand, and I know that you too have also done this. In my research I have found that many “respected” books by “respected” authors are full of rubbish due to poor research, and I seem to be forever trying to correct misconceptions when I can find a more reliable source and I try to always back up my findings from extra sources when I can to ensure I don’t have it wrong. I feel we as a society should embrace accuracy when it comes to history, and we don’t need more misconceptions being created for generation after generation at will by things like this film, to be frank.

For the record, I have no issues with fiction-based films when they are what they are. I thought U-571 was brilliant as an action adventure, its intended purpose, and I have never seen anyone connected with the film attempting to claim it to be a true story based on real events and people. So there’s no comparison. In fact they acknowledge the true heroes at the end, so what’s wrong with that? I will say that I much prefer Das Boot though.

Dave.

Quite honestly you sometimes baffle me. You are a proud and constant upholder of the heritage of both your country and mine. That film is part of that heritage. There is nothing wrong with it being shown on tv or released on DVD. It is a piece of its time, and a good one at that. Take it for what it is. You also have to remember the purpose of the film. It was to boost morale, something I suspect it did well. Compare that with the modern American film about the U-Boat and Enigma. That was made for no other purpose than to make money. It bore not even the slightest resemblance to the truth.

Perhaps Went The Day Well should never be released or aired again because it is a dated piece of fiction. Or Carve Her Name With Pride, Nine Men, One Of Our Aircraft Is Missing, The Way To The Stars…… The list goes on and on.

If one person watches any of those films (and countless others) today and is inspired to look deeper into the story then it will have served its purpose.

Regards,

kev35

The point is that it should not be shown any more. or released on DVD, as it’s a load of nonsense. But the unintitated will watch it and take it for what it purports to be, and come away thinking it’s the true story. I don’t even think that as a work of fiction that it comes off as very impressive to be honest. There are far better films from those days.

It is good to hear that Britain is getting to see so many new documentaries and dramas over this period about the battle. Sadly, we’re not.

I think it’s high time the real story was portrayed in a new version, without all the made up story, and with realistic characters. It makes a mockery of history as far as I’m concerned, and could be done better. I’m amazed with all the interest in the Spitfire even these days in Britain that it has not yet been done.

In all fairness, Dave, it was shot in 1942 as a piece of propaganda, with the official blessing of Winston Churchill, and as that it was VERY successful.

There’s so much written on the history and development of the Spitfire, that if you really want the real story, you just need to hit the library…

I think it’s high time the real story was portrayed in a new version, without all the made up story, and with realistic characters. It makes a mockery of history as far as I’m concerned, and could be done better. I’m amazed with all the interest in the Spitfire even these days in Britain that it has not yet been done.

There is indeed a programme on our TV in a week or 2, called the Real Battle of Britain. An add for it was on TV last night, after the showing of “First Light”. A well thought out documentary film based on the book of the same name by BoB’s youngest pilot Geoffrey Wellum. Plenty of good (Modern) Spit. footage shown.

This film was shown on BBC2 last Sunday@ 11:30 am.
I have seen it before but not for a long time. so I watched it. I loved it, I thought I heard them mention cancer but he was told he had eight months to live. It was a very sad film towards the end. I had tears in my eyes at the end and I am 65! You’d think I was past all that! The sadness for me was heightened by the hope for the future portrade in the film compared with the spin and financiers and the politicians we have to put up with today.