I believe today is Ray Hanna’s funeral, and I thought it might be fitting to reporduce these wonderful words, first written by Pilot Officer John Gillespie Magee jr., RCAF, to his parents before his death at the age of 19.

HIGH FLIGHT

Oh! I have slipped the surly bonds of earth
And danced the skies on laughter-silvered wings;
Sunward I’ve climbed, and joined the tumbling mirth
Of sun-split clouds – and done a hundred things
You have not dreamed of – wheeled and soared and swung
High in the sunlit silence. Hov’ring there
I’ve chased the shouting wind along, and flung
My eager craft through footless halls of air.

Up, up the long delirious, burning blue,
I’ve topped the windswept heights with easy grace
Where never lark or even eagle flew –
And, while with silent lifting mind I’ve trod
The high untresspassed sanctity of space,
Put out my hand and touched the face of God.

Regarding casting for the film, I think that in the original, though very good, Richard Todd was way too old for the part. The actor 35 was in 1954 (and looking older) whilst Gibson was 25, and looked youthful with it, when he did the dams raid.

However, I doubt anyone could have been cast better than Sir Michael Redgrave to play Barnes Wallis. He was very good in the role and very much like the real man.

I think for the remake it will be hard to beat Redgrave. One suggestion I could think of is James Fox.

As for Gibson, I don’t know who could play the part but I hope they select someone younger (or younger looking) than Todd was. A 25 year old please.

I note some optimism that the proposed film might get Just Jane into the air. I doubt this seriously. You’d have more luck in the warbird world downunder I reckon – Aussie has two completely restored Lancasters and a Lincoln kitset, don’t they? Bring them across to NZ where we have the directors, cgi artists, another Lancaster (albeit tucked away), lots of lakes with big dams, and nice scenerey that looks like Europe. We’ll make it. hehe

I agree a different topic from the dams raid would be good (as well as if not instead). I’d love to see an early war raid with Wellingtons. What about the thousand bomber raids, or the infamous Nuremberg raid where all those RAF bombers were lost. There are so many stories. I’d prefer to see Stirlings, Halifaxes and Wellingtons recreated in cgi (done well) than Lancs too, a bit of variety.

As for the motion capture idea, good thinking. How about using a Shackleton, there are a few still flying.

Moggy said

Models can do everything a real aircraft does except look like a real aircraft.

No – in my experience they also cannot sound like an aeroplane. Most sound like annoying Mosquitoes in your ear at night.

Well this has slid off topic nicely…

If you don’t want your financially troubled airlines culled off, don’t sell them to the richer opposition. Simple. The bigger players like Air New Zealand and Qantas are always killing smaller competitors. That’s how they remain the big fish in the little Tasman Sea.

Why is the Mel Gibson story being branded a hoax? Did the newspaper come out and admit they made it all up?

According to a very good documentary on Hollywood filmmaking I’ve seen, two-thirds of all films that go into pre-production never actually make it onto the cinema screen due to many reasons and complications. This is probably just one of them. If a producer or director buys the rights to a book, and has every intention of putting it on screen, the publicity machine will be used to try to create interest and get backing. If none is shown, it is often quietly shelved.

Peter Jackson has admitted he was working on King Kong in 1996, but the film was shelved because Universal Pictures pulled out. Then he managed to gain the rights to the Lord of the Rings books after many years of trying, so he did that. Suddeny backers wanted King Kong made again!

The film Titanic was shut down in production twice due to problems and it’s considered a miracle it was completed. Nothing is smooth and easy in making films, especially when you’re using other people’s money. Look at the trouble they had getting Battle of Britain into production, that nearly didn’t happen too.

I see no problem with a remake so long as it is done accurately and made better than the original, which, let’s face it, has fairly basic special effects that stck out much worse than any cgi does, and has stilted, dull acting. Plus it’s in black and white making it outdated for the modern world (great as it is).

Computer generated imagery has progressed and advanced incredibly in the past couple of years, to the point you don’t realsie you’re watching it if it’s done right.

The Mosquito footage mentioned does prove that wonders can be done, seemingly by one bloke in his spare time too. Imagine what a commercial enterprise like ILM or Weta Workshop can do. The Lancasters could be made realistically and slotted into the footage seemlessly these days by computers, without putting crews and cameramen at risk, or old aircraft for that matter. And I’d wager if done by the right crew, you’ll think it’s real. Plus a multitude of camera angles could be achieved that would be too dangerous to shoot in reality.

Who cares that the original is such a “classic”, any new film will not make the old one obsolete – is that what so many of you are worried about? Do you also diss the multitude of documentaries about the raids because they’re a different angle of looking at the event than the original film is?

Any remake will be showing another angle of the true story, and these days real emotions rather than British stiff upper lip nonsense can be portrayed. Sure, many pilots and crews then were stiff upper lip Brits, but they must have had a human side too.

The fact that Frost states he wants to show the bomb’s development differently interests me. After all it was all guesswork in the original “classic” as it was all still secret. So the original can hardly be used to compare to any remake for accuracy.

I too would prefer different films about different Bomber Command stories, The Dam Busters was but one mission and has been down to death in print and film. But if it is to be remade, I say goodo!

I understand that Forst has a healthy respect for history and telling the truth so will no doubt get it right. You should all be thanking him and rejoicing that he may be highlighting the work of Bomber Command to a whole new younger audience that would never watch the “old boring” b&w film. I’ll bet many of you were inspired to read up on Bomber Command by the original film, the same may happen for the next generation with this film. That can only be good to help people study and understand the history.

The other thing for the die-hard stick in the muds over this issue, if you’re against it, no-one’s forcing you to watch it. Just ignore it.

Now…

King Kong? King Kong? Does that celebrated Kiwi have no imagination of his own? He can make a good visual film, can he make his own? LOR was just a CGI test in the end, lost the book early on IMHO….

What? Are you having a pop at Peter Jackson for bringing a classic book to the big screen and doing it right? What for? A huge amount of dramatic films are based on books mate! Almost all directors use books to make films from.

Yes, it’s been filmed previously. The first one is outdated by generations and can easily be improved on. The second version was total crap. Jackson was inspired to become a film maker after watching the original King Kong, and has always dreamed about remaking it and making it better. He’s done that now. I congratulate him. I’ve never bothered watching all the original, it’s just too old and outdated. I will watch this one though, which is apparently much closer to the book than any previous attempt. Just to see the Helldivers reborn is fantastic!

As for LOTR, No-one had ever successfully made Lord of the Rings into a feature film, except for a mediocre child’s cartoon. You begrudge the man for doing a fantastic job of adaptation, making three superbly stunning films, and making many millions of people happy to see the books come to life? (including Tolkien’s own family?)

I don’t see your logic I’m afraid.

Jackson lacks imagination you reckon? Well, have you ever bothered to watch any of his films? Not just the LOTR films which are superb (and I’m not a fantasy fan), but his previous ones? He has more imagination in his little finger than any of us could hope for, he’s a visionary and he writes his own scripts as well as adapting books. He was said to be one of the greatest directors ever by Martin Scorsese for his film Heavenly Creatures (also based on a book, so you won’t like it!).

Have you bothered to watch his original ideas like his films Forgotten Silver? Or Bad Taste? Meet The Feebles? The Fighteners? Brain Dead? Or his incredibly innovative direction of the 2004 Warbirds Over Wanaka airshow?

If you have actually watched these, do you really think he lacks imagination? Why? If you haven’t seen them, I suggest you need to do a little more research before spouting off rubbish about a reknowned and respected film maker.

Of all the directors curently around, his love of aviation and superb skill with film would make Jackson the ideal man to pull off a remake of The Dam Busters, but he probably won’t be involved. So there’s no need to diss him so out of hand in this thread.