Was "Dambusters remake?" Now tired and pointless discussion of dog's name again.

Oddly no.

The basis for the modern Lab is the St. John’s Water dog, a now-extinct dog from Canadian maritime provinces.
Examples were taken to the UK where the type was developed by breeding them with other gun dogs and renamed Labrador.

And there are English and American variations of the breed. English labs have a boxier head, American labs are slightly larger.

So yes…to be a proper WWII-era Lab, it would have to be an Engish sub-variant.

look , if you can’t say nigger , you can’t exclude the canadians either as it is racist !!

I’m for it as long as the Labrador is English….

Canadian surely?

Moggy 🙂

Oddly, no.

The basis for the modern Lab is the St. John’s Water dog, a now-extinct dog from Canadian maritime provinces.
Examples were taken to the UK where the type was developed by breeding them with other gun dogs and renamed Labrador.

And there are English and American variations of the breed. English labs have a boxier head, American labs are slightly larger.

So yes…to be a proper WWII-era lab, it would have to be an English sub-variant.
One more thing the producers have to get correct…or they’ll feel the wrath of dog anoraks. 🙂

Was the Dambuster Raid and the Battle of Britain the only things the RAF did of note during WW2? I an beginning to think so as they are likely to be remade.

I know this is an Aircraft forum but if you want a remake try “Above Us the Waves”(Operatio Source) for starters.(only seadogs in that!)

now the serious answer , the most complicated missions with the larger than life charachters and kick **** machines is what sells as a movie in the numbers to make it worth the expenditure on it !!

there are lots of things that i could sit through but they have to sell at a proffit to a public that 99% of the time don’t realy know anything more the fore mentioned and to be honest wouldn’t even be cared nowadays

Was the Dambuster Raid and the Battle of Britain the only things the RAF did of note during WW2? !)

there was 633 squadron for their hat trick !!:D

Was the Dambuster Raid and the Battle of Britain the only things the RAF did of note during WW2? I an beginning to think so as they are likely to be remade.

I know this is an Aircraft forum but if you want a remake try “Above Us the Waves”(Operatio Source) for starters.(only seadogs in that!)

The circular bomb being dropped from a Mozzie was the ‘High ball’ anti ship bomb, wasn’t it? Worked on the same principal as the bigger ‘Upkeep’.

A well known bit of early test footage.

Yes, but to ‘test’ what exactly?

Does a (scale) Upkeep break if you drop it from 400 feet? :confused: Well, yes, of course it does! :rolleyes:

How come then I’m 32 and have seen it numerous times?

I’m sorry, nobody is interested in your opinion…..you don’t fit the demographic!

(And when I say ‘nobody’ I mean, of course, ‘nobody who produces and distributes films’!)

Generalisation? Much? 😉 How come then I’m 32 and have seen it numerous times? 😀 Anyway, B&W films are my bread and butter…*EDITED TO ADD* Dambusters was the first war film I ever watched – my Dad sat me down in front of it when I was about 9…I loved it and still do…

.

the youth of today can be increadibly cultural , i saw one the other day with a 33 rpm album ( aparently new songs are being released as the young uns are taking to vinyl again ) strange but true…

in seem to remember a recent b+w war film fared fairly well at the cinema schindlers list aparently made a few bob !!

Yes, although it wasn’t really the filmmakers fault, I cringe every time I see the Upkeep bombs in the original film. 😮

One thing that does interest me in the original is the scene when testing the bombs; a bomb breaks up after being dropped by a Mosquito (I think?). The bomb is dropped from a very high altitude (with the aircraft climbing) and the bomb shatters on impact with the sea; the thing is it looks like a real bomb-test (as do the other bomb failures). So what was going on there, as I’m sure it wasn’t shot specially for the film?

i should imagine no one minds releasing film of the failures , it’s the sucessful ones you keep secret !!

A well known bit of early test footage.

Spot on. Footage can be found in the archive of a well known museum.

It is also in B&W and so nobody under forty will watch it! (If you’ve seen the original more than twice or got it on DVD (or VHS!) then the remake isn’t for you anyway!)

Generalisation? Much? 😉 How come then I’m 32 and have seen it numerous times? 😀 Anyway, B&W films are my bread and butter…*EDITED TO ADD* Dambusters was the first war film I ever watched – my Dad sat me down in front of it when I was about 9…I loved it and still do…

Sir Peter Jackson is a filmmaker with a worldwide reputation and his films attract a predominately young audience; if the remake stirs the interest of just a small percentage of the audiences of his previous films it will have done a good job. Historic aviation, the aircraft preservation movement and museums desperately need young blood; history itself needs people who are interested in it and possibly most importantly the aircrew that gave everything need to be remembered long after we’re all dead…

Even though because I have the DVD and have watched the original many times the remake is apparently not for me 😉 I actually agree with all this. I have no problem with the idea of a remake, particularly if as you say it prompts an interest or a desire in young people viewing it to learn more. I will always love the original (my two favourite scenes are Wallis trying to secure the use of a Wellington in the trials and the final scene with Wallis and Gibson, the latter with his letters to write…) but I will most certainly give the remake a go…

So what was going on there, as I’m sure it wasn’t shot specially for the film?

A well known bit of early test footage.

It would be unreasonable to be overly criticality about a remake without giving it a chance to be made, let alone watching it, but the original is so indelibly etched in the minds of a certain generation that any pretender would have to be pretty damn good.

If it actually appears I’ll give it look see, but it has a hell of reputation to live up to.

The problem is that the original has almost become something of a lumbering legend.
Personally I think it’s the most woodenly acted war film I’ve seen (close to BoB), it’s just not for a modern audience, partly for the reasons you mention, aswel as awful special effects and necesarily limited technology to shoot the film.
The only redeeming feature is the use of real aircraft, which sadly a remake won’t be able to muster.

There is a whole new audience now that would embrace a new film, and the story is such that it deserves to be realised in a well made film and played in modern cinemas to a wide audience.
Certainly the right names are behind the current/future production, so it should be of good quality, but sadly without real aircraft.

The original stands alone by being a quaint movie of its era, but a new one would bring to life the story not only with better technology, but perhaps with better hindsight of the actual events surrounding the operation.

Think Private Ryan and the 1950s G.I. films, there is no comparison.

but there is also the flip side that it was so close to the real event many things were still kept secret

Yes, although it wasn’t really the filmmakers fault, I cringe every time I see the Upkeep bombs in the original film. 😮

One thing that does interest me in the original is the scene when testing the bombs; a bomb breaks up after being dropped by a Mosquito (I think?). The bomb is dropped from a very high altitude (with the aircraft climbing) and the bomb shatters on impact with the sea; the thing is it looks like a real bomb-test (as do the other bomb failures). So what was going on there, as I’m sure it wasn’t shot specially for the film?

I’m for it as long as the Labrador is English….

Canadian surely?

Moggy 🙂

If it actually appears I’ll give it look see, but it has a hell of reputation to live up to.

There’s no reason why it won’t. Peter Jackson is an aircraft enthusiast; he has his own collection of WW1 aircraft operating with the Vintage Aviator and also in the Aviation Heritage Centre in Blenheim, which is going to expand beyond WW1 stuff. He’ll do a good job; he’s into detail. Anyone seen the new Tintin film? The aeroplane is a Bellanca and in one scene Tintin pulls out a manual in a leather folder, the name “Bellanca” can be seen embossed in the traditional style for less than a second. (If I can remember from my childhood the float plane from the comic ‘The Secret of the Unicorn’ was an Arado Ar 196)

He’s not stupid. He knows what’s going to be riding on such a remake. remember, he did the LOTR films very successfully, which is no mean feat. The expectation that he was to do them accurately and in keeping with the books was huge – far greater than for this particular film.

I guess we have to wait and see, but have faith, Gentlemen; Mr Jackson won’t disappoint. I never got to see it when it was parked outside at Masterton, but I’ve been reliably informed the mock-up he had built of a Lanc is very well done, so much so, you can’t tell it’s not the real thing. Rumour has it he’s building (built?) a Wellington and Mozzie for the film, too.

I’m for it as long as the Labrador is English….

That’s a valid point I think, and not just to do with the acting; the screenwriters, editors, SPX departments and directors of the immediate post-war era must have contained many who had recent combat experience.

Interestingly, Richard Todd, who plays Guy Gibson in the original, had some very relevant military experience but, rather ironically, given the comments about not wanting ‘extra’ American actors in any remake, while looking this up I discovered that…

…Todd is Irish (by birthplace and family). :diablo:

but there is also the flip side that it was so close to the real event many things were still kept secret

There are clearly two audiences for this story.

Firstly, there is the enthusiast, who is looking for something as historically accurate and authentic as possible. I’m not familiar with the original film, but from reading the posts in this thread, it seems to tick all of the boxes.

Secondly, there is the general cinema goer / film watcher, who is just looking for a couple of hours entertainment, and maybe as a consequence, some aspects of the true story may be overlooked, and other liberties taken with the story to make a good film.

If the eventual film ends up being the latter, we shouldn’t be too critical of it. What should matter to us as a community with an interest in aircraft is that the film is a sucess, and gets good reviews and audiences.

While we may not get a 100% historically accurate film, it will hopefully see a general public that views both the war and the military as being increasingly distant and irrelevant to them leaving the cinema knowing a little more than they did before they went in and hopefully it will trigger some of them to learn some more about the raid in particular and aircraft in general.

If it does this, we should welcome the film, rather than criticise it for any inaccuracies.

What this thread needs is a Dr 😀

Casting aside for a moment the naming of the Labrador….:rolleyes:

The original was a fine fine film, totally of the era, which unfortunately includes the rather special effects. A new film will be full of every conceivable CGI effect known to microsoft.

Now, what you must now ask yourselves is this-

vinyl or digital?

😉

It would be unreasonable to be overly criticality about a remake without giving it a chance to be made, let alone watching it, but the original is so indelibly etched in the minds of a certain generation that any pretender would have to be pretty damn good.

If it actually appears I’ll give it look see, but it has a hell of reputation to live up to.