Dave HomewoodThanks for bringing this old thread back Bruce because i had never seen it before. What a fantastic painting and a great idea. I know the Psychadelic Monster holds a lot of charm for a lot of people, I have seen it made by several modellers. But the paitning really encapsulates the spirit of the film too. Well done Paul.
Has anything further happened regarding a Dam Busters or 633 companion yet? May I sugest the filming of the Memphis Belle too, which also had a B-25 camera ship…
Dave HomewoodJust to add a little information about the Canberra WT346 that may be of interest. Today i located in a box of stuff a copy of Contact – The Newsletter of the RNZAF Museum Summer 1993.
Inside it announces the arrival of the Canberra at the museum and says:
“The Canberra arrived by sea from Englandduring Easter, thanks to very generous gestures by AFFCO New Zealand, P&O New Zealand, and the Lyttleton Port Company. A further grant towards transport costs has been provided by the Trust Bank Canterbury Community Trust. The aircraft is now in No. 3 hangar and restoration has begun with work on its Avon engines by No. 1 Repair Depot.
WT346 has suffered from its 12 years out in the English weather and requires corrosion removal as well as minor repair. However it has been a pleasant surprise to find that the cabin is complete and in excellent condition. The components, such as Mk 3CS ejection seat and radios, needed to put this aircraft into the configuration of the RNZAF’s B(I)12’s is being assembled. WT346 was actually built in the same production batch as NZ6101, the first RNZAF B(I)12, so the conversion needed is only the addition of equipment specified by the RNZAF.”
Dave HomewoodA few years ago on this forum somebody stated there was a move toi recover a No. 75 (NZ) Squadron Wellington that was underwater somewhere. Did anything come of this?
Dave HomewoodSo even if nothing else ever actually comes of the myth that the Stirling may still be somewhere in Russia, if the Russians has done any reverse engineering on these types that Cranswick details, there would quite possibly still be technical drawings that may no longer exist in the west. The Soviets have been known for filing away almost everything, so hopefully drawings have survived. I will await anything further on a Stirling or even Halifax being rolled out of a hangar there very patiently with a hint of scepticism.
Dave HomewoodBuffpuff, apologies – I misconstrued your point on entertainment, it wasn’t put very clearly.
I am doing a degree course, and I do use books. Lots and lots of them. I don’t have an “attitude towards” books as you preceive. My point simply was books are just as fallible to have errors as any other media. Full stop.
With a website I can place screeds of info on it. If a year after the website went up someone points out I have made an error, I can instantly correct it. You can’t do that with a book, can you? You can’t email the author and ask them to change something in every copy he or she has sold around the world. That is the point I was making. For that matter, you cannot ask a filmmaker to change something in their film either.
I use book, as i say, but I do find errors or conflicts of recording, and thus have realised that you cannot always believe what you read – just as you can’t believe everything on TV.
As it happens I’m lucky in my course that I do also rely heavily on audio-visual and new media as awell as books, because I am studying these fields.
Your points are well made. You can gain a lot of information from a well made film, your Simon Schama example being a good one. Some film makers do a good job, some do not. And making the film entertaining doesn’t mean it lessens the facts if done right.
So, sorry if I misconstrued anything you said and you anything I said. This thread that i degan a long time ago is well off track now so I’ll leave it at that.
Dave HomewoodBuffpuff, apologies – I misconstrued your point on entertainment, it wasn’t put very clearly.
I am doing a degree course, and I do use books. Lots and lots of them. I don’t have an “attitude towards” books as you preceive. My point simply was books are just as fallible to have errors as any other media. Full stop.
With a website I can place screeds of info on it. If a year after the website went up someone points out I have made an error, I can instantly correct it. You can’t do that with a book, can you? You can’t email the author and ask them to change something in every copy he or she has sold around the world. That is the point I was making. For that matter, you cannot ask a filmmaker to change something in their film either.
I use book, as i say, but I do find errors or conflicts of recording, and thus have realised that you cannot always believe what you read – just as you can’t believe everything on TV.
As it happens I’m lucky in my course that I do also rely heavily on audio-visual and new media as awell as books, because I am studying these fields.
Your points are well made. You can gain a lot of information from a well made film, your Simon Schama example being a good one. Some film makers do a good job, some do not. And making the film entertaining doesn’t mean it lessens the facts if done right.
So, sorry if I misconstrued anything you said and you anything I said. This thread that i degan a long time ago is well off track now so I’ll leave it at that.
Dave HomewoodDo NOT rely on a film for accuracy. If you want historical fact, read a book, watch a good documentary or visit a reputable web site.
A film, unless a documentary based one such as the Munich 1972 documentary One Day in September voiced I think by Micheal Douglas, or a fact based film such as the Micheal More film such as Bowling for Columbine is for entertainment, not a history lesson.
And even fact based documentaries can contain what others see as glaring errors.
Oh dear. I can’t believe this old thread has been dredged up yet again.
Buffpuff, what makes you think that books are more historically correct than a film? I have seldom found a history book that does not have conflicting information compared with another on the subject. At least with a website any error can be fixed, and in that respect, they are superior to books.
And by the way, Bowling For Columbine was not made for entertainment!! Crikey. Sure it had some bits in it that were light-hearted but they also were highly charged with an important message. The message was an extremely serious issue. The facts presented were as real as any other documentary. It stirred up debate and made some people stop and think about the issues.
Michael Moore has proven himself to be one of the best documentary makers of our age because more people know what his films are about, and the issues behind them, than any other filmmaker attempting social change or thought.
How did he get to be so good? He approaches very serious subjects such as poverty, job lay-offs, gun toting nutters, criminal or incompetent presidents, etc from a different angle and makes it a lot more in your face. He does not make up the facts, he merely presents them differently. A lot of what he’s presented had already been written or presented on film or literature before.
Entertainment? No – a refreshing approach that keeps the viewer engaged!
History Lesson? Absolutley, but obviously lost on you.
Dave HomewoodDo NOT rely on a film for accuracy. If you want historical fact, read a book, watch a good documentary or visit a reputable web site.
A film, unless a documentary based one such as the Munich 1972 documentary One Day in September voiced I think by Micheal Douglas, or a fact based film such as the Micheal More film such as Bowling for Columbine is for entertainment, not a history lesson.
And even fact based documentaries can contain what others see as glaring errors.
Oh dear. I can’t believe this old thread has been dredged up yet again.
Buffpuff, what makes you think that books are more historically correct than a film? I have seldom found a history book that does not have conflicting information compared with another on the subject. At least with a website any error can be fixed, and in that respect, they are superior to books.
And by the way, Bowling For Columbine was not made for entertainment!! Crikey. Sure it had some bits in it that were light-hearted but they also were highly charged with an important message. The message was an extremely serious issue. The facts presented were as real as any other documentary. It stirred up debate and made some people stop and think about the issues.
Michael Moore has proven himself to be one of the best documentary makers of our age because more people know what his films are about, and the issues behind them, than any other filmmaker attempting social change or thought.
How did he get to be so good? He approaches very serious subjects such as poverty, job lay-offs, gun toting nutters, criminal or incompetent presidents, etc from a different angle and makes it a lot more in your face. He does not make up the facts, he merely presents them differently. A lot of what he’s presented had already been written or presented on film or literature before.
Entertainment? No – a refreshing approach that keeps the viewer engaged!
History Lesson? Absolutley, but obviously lost on you.
Dave HomewoodIt looks like a Cessna Agwagon or Piper Pawnee
Dave HomewoodGreat photos Peter. I like that genuine He111 very much.
Dave HomewoodThanks. I was always under the impression there was only one intact. Cool.
Dave HomewoodI haven’t seen it since I was about 17. I had mixed feelings then, great aircraft but the stories seemed so crap – overblown typically American rubbish is what we all thought. Plus really bad editing of stock footage.
However I’d love to have the opportunity to see it again some day and judge again with a more mature eye.
I know Pappy Boyington was a real pilot. But I wonder, was any storyline in this series ever actually based on real events? It just seemed so Gung Ho and far fetched.
Were the other characters real too? Was the reason for the squadron true too, all the guys no-one else wanted?
I’d also like to know, was Boyington (and any other pilots portrayed if they were real) still alive when this show was made? If so, what did he/they think of it? Were they happy? What did other veterans and veterans groups think I wonder?
Dave HomewoodIs that the same York that was rolled out at Duxford very recently? Or are there two Avro Yorks extant?
I’m not adverse to museums hanging aircraft, when it’s donw well with a mezzanine floor you can get more angles on it than if it were on the floor. However seeing these planes stung up in the rafters like some kid’s balsa gliders stored in the garage, they look simply bloody stupid! It’s an interesting building, grant you, but really impractical for this sort of thing by the look of these photos. Why didn’t they build the shed with square walls and allow space aloft to hang them properly?
Dave HomewoodI wonder, has anyone ever read the wartime Australian comic in the same vane called Hurricane Hawk?
Dave HomewoodThanks Vern. It’s been decades since I saw it.
There was also a CASA 2.111 (Heinkel 111) in Red Dwarf!
Sign In
