War films; which need to be remade?
-
nowhereman-4 — 16 years ago(May 01, 2009 10:36 PM)
Lambrettaguy (and tgoc),
I realize these posts are more than a couple of years old now, but I just wanted to say how much I enjoyed them. You gentlemen's knowledge is impressive, to say the least!
I do have one minor correction, regarding "The Great Escape". You state:
I seem to recall James Garner in Great Escape wearing Canada titles on his RAF uniform, same as Cliff Robertson in 633 Squadron, Americans portraying Canadians in the RAF.
For all I know, you are correct about Hendley's insignia (but, see below). However, the character Hendley is definitely American. IIRC, this is stated more than once; plus, we see the only three Americans in camp - Hendley, Hilts, and Goff - leading the Independence Day celebration. There is also this, from IMDb's "Goofs" section on "The Great Escape":
Incorrectly regarded as goofs: Hendley wears USA flashes on his uniform. This shows that he is an American serving in the RAF and is a member of the Famous "Eagle" squadrons, three squadrons composed of Americans who joined the RAF. This also means that Hendley was shot down before 1944, since the squadrons were re-absorbed by the USAAF at that time.
Sorry to nitpick such a marvelously written post.
All the situations you describe have the potential for excellent portrayals on the silver screen. "Culloden", especially, if handled correctly. Whether or not any such films would find a large audience is another matter - but then, I suppose that's true of any film endeavor.
In regards to historical accuracy - I give a damn about it (and I certainly give a damn about history!), but not to the point of obsession. If a group of soldiers is shown carrying a model of rifle that was, in reality, introduced three years later, that in no way detracts from the movie, for me. "Gods And Generals" is a good example. All the uniforms, flags, equipment, and ordnance are rendered completely accurately, in meticulous detail - but that still doesn't make it a good film. And this is from an avid student of the American Civil War (about which there is still a serious dearth of good movies). On this matter, I tend to subscribe to Roger Ebert's view, expressed in his review of "Gods And Generals" - historical accuracy is an attribute, not a virtue. It shouldn't be the be-all end-all of moviemaking. You can still have a beautiful, affecting film, even if a few caps are the wrong color.
I have long been fascinated by your native Scotland. I don't really know why - my people were German and English. I guess it started with a boyhood obsession with Nessie! For someone over 45 years of age, I am embarrassingly poorly travelled, but I
have
managed to make it to Scotland, twice. On the first trip in 2000, I visited the field at Culloden (but sadly, arrived after the visitors center had closed). Four years later, I stopped in the Scottish National War Memorial at Edinburgh Castle. Magnificent! Unfortunately, interior photography was forbidden, and the gift shop had no good books on the Memorial. I need to find one on the web, somewhere.
Thanks again to you and tgoc, for all your wonderful contributions! -
Hancock_the_Superb — 16 years ago(May 21, 2009 03:19 PM)
I don't particularly like Pearl Harbor, but neither can I claim to be a fan of Battle of Britain or Tora! Tora! Tora! - both represent bloated epic filmmaking at its worst. I did love A Bridge Too Far though.
"If you cant say something good about someone, sit right here by me." -
tgoc — 19 years ago(January 31, 2007 07:46 PM)
Dear Ethelred, the ill-advised, or badly-counselled,
I can't say that I agree with you about the "Dam Busters". The great appeal of that film was its intricasy, not its scale. I don't see how CGI could improve on those scenes where they were trying to perfect the bomb. And after all, the mission itself only involved some 18 aircraft, so again an epic, army-of-millions scale is hardly needed.
But as I've said , I think that much could be done with the Battle of Waterloo. I mean a good film-maker like the man who did "Lord of the Rings" could bring out the importance of the event itself, the major personalities, the weight of numbers involved, the extreme violence of it all, and the many sub-plots that the facts make available, and could make of it a very fine film.
Yours,
TGOC
" Next to a battle lost, the greatest misery is a battle gained." -
tgoc — 19 years ago(February 16, 2007 12:40 AM)
Dear Ethelred,
If you are interested in a war film that really would benefit from CGI, I suggest that you get your hands on a copy of Len Deighton's "Bomber." Why that has not already been made into a film I cannot imagine.
Yours,
TGOC -
rglasby — 17 years ago(September 19, 2008 12:31 PM)
David Putnam tried to get the money together to make a movie about an RAF bomber mission - unfortunately he couldn't get enough backing
So he changed it to a USAAF bomber mission, got the backing and made "Memphis Belle" -
tgoc — 16 years ago(May 08, 2009 09:47 PM)
Dear Rags:
Well, there you are. A film of "Bomber" would (or could) have been good. "M.B." was another matter entirely: good of its kind, but a different kind, in my often wrong opinion.
But many thanks for your response.
TGOC -
mumpymorte — 16 years ago(April 04, 2009 05:16 AM)
"Culloden" for sure.
Peter Watkins' docudrama is quite commendable, but I always yearned for a big budget retelling of this harrowing and tragic tale. A problem from the "Hollywood" film making point of view would be a lack of sympathetic major characters on either side of the conflict; Prince Charles was an ass, plain and simple, and "Stinking Billy" Cumberland was an ignorant butcher. I would hate to see Bonnie Prince Charlie romanticized yet again. That silly film with David Niven was quite enough, thank you.
Perhaps one of the "minor" characters, especially on the Jacobite side, could be the focus of such a film. The story itself is certainly prime material for a cracking good piece of cinema.
I'm led to understand that the short film made for the Culloden Battlefield visitor's center is very good indeed. But I've only seen a tiny trailer, the only way to see the whole thing, so far as I know, is to travel to Culloden itself, and as wonderful as that would be, it is an impossibility for me. -
nowhereman-4 — 16 years ago(May 01, 2009 10:49 PM)
mumpymorte -
I think your idea for a big budget depiction of the Culloden story is spot on. I like your idea of focusing on one of the Jacobean lesser lights - perhaps even an ordinary soldier that managed to survive the battle, and brutal aftermath. Maybe the film could begin with the "battle" - "slaughter" might be more appropriate - and then cover a number of years after, showing how effectively and harshly the old Highland way of life was strangled to death. Perhaps end with the emigration of the old soldier and his family.
One question: what is the title of the Niven film of which you speak?
I made it to Culloden in 2000, but unfortunately, I arrived after the visitors' center had closed. So, I haven't seen that short, either. Doesn't look like I'll make it back over anytime soon, either. -
david_colbourne — 16 years ago(August 27, 2009 01:32 PM)
The Niven film is called "Bonnie Prince Charlie", made in 1948 with Niven as the bonnie prince. If I remember rightly it doesn't have that much in common with actual events! Niven didn't appear to rate it too highly, either, judging by his account in his autobiography, it appears to have been an uncomfortable experience.
There is another film about Culloden, "Chasing the Deer", 1994, starring Brian Blessed and Iain Cuthbertson. Little known, but very good, I've got a copy on video, well worth a look if you can track it down. -
Hancock_the_Superb — 16 years ago(May 21, 2009 03:16 PM)
I'd like to see a newer film on the Boxer Rebellion. 55 Days at Peking isn't bad for what it is, but we know so much more about the Rebellion in 2009 compared to 1963 that a remake in the right hands would probably be an improvement. Certainly the simplistic "world unites to smite a common enemy" theme of the original could be turned into something far more interesting and complex - "world powers forced to grudgingly cooperate with one another, each trying to protect their own turf and prestige."
"If you cant say something good about someone, sit right here by me." -
tgoc — 16 years ago(June 05, 2009 09:55 PM)
Dear Superbus:
Why are the Britons so modest? Why no films about the Napoleonic war, the Crimea ( apart from that one piece of nonsense) the Mutiny? Why should films about the Boer War be made only by delusional Australians? For that matter, we could do with a few films about the many British victories in the American insurrection. Is The Patriot to be accepted as any kind of truth.
Yours,
TGOC -
Hancock_the_Superb — 14 years ago(June 25, 2011 05:53 PM)
I think Terry Brighton's recent Hell Riders could make a good film or miniseries, if done right. Maybe even Flashman at the Charge if you're not too concerned with strict historicity.
I disagree about the film not being expensive though - procuring and creating period clothing/weapons/sets, let alone raising thousands of extras, let alone CGI and other effects, would probably cost tens of millions of dollars.
I do think the Crimean War deserves a better treatment than it's gotten. I like the Errol Flynn Charge of the Light Brigade, but that has as much to do with the Crimean War as Raiders of the Lost Ark does with the Holocaust. The '68 film is too bogged down with shrill anti-war posturing; if it weren't for some performances (especially Trevor Howard) and the brilliant animated scenes it would be a waste of time.
"Lola, I love you, you selfish bitch!" -
tgoc-41-30447 — 14 years ago(July 13, 2011 05:17 PM)
Dear Superbus:
I hope that this finds you well.
You are quite right that the Charge of the Light Brigade has never been properly treated in any film. On the page, of course, Cecil Woodham-Smith has given the event an illuminating treatment.
I happen to be a fan of the late George MacDonald Fraser's "Flashman" books, and surely many of them would make good films I mean sex and violence seldom disappoint. In addition to that, as you will know if you have read any of his books, Fraser took great pains to be historically accurate. (In fact, I think of Fraser as a modern version of G.A. Henty who, as you probably know,wrote many books about the best episodes in British history). The extremely talented Kenneth Branagh might do well in the eponymous role of Flashman in Fraser's
books.
Speaking of Mr Branagh, did you ever happen to see a film about the Wansee Conference, in Nazi Germany, in which Branagh played Heidrich? It was a harrowing film, and he was brilliant making the hows and details of the Final Solution seem so plausible. I think that it was a stage play before being filmed.
I hope that you are prospering,
Yours ever,
TGOC -
Hancock_the_Superb — 14 years ago(August 20, 2011 07:16 AM)
I recently purchased a 1962 Time Life version of The Reason Why for pocket change (less than a dollar minus shipping). Very handsomely illustrated and in surprisingly good shape for a 50 year old book.
I previously read The Reason Why last March and found it a fascinating book. Woodham-Smith is a really engaging, incisive historical writer in the Barbara Tuchman/Bruce Catton tradition. As mentioned, I also enjoyed Terry Brighton's more recent Hell Riders. The books complement each other, with Woodham-Smith's focus on the commanders and Brighton's grunt's-eye view of the Charge.
I'd be intrigued by a Flashman movie but skeptical that they could pull it off - Royal Flash should stand as a warning. You'd need a good Flashman (Rufus Sewel would be my choice), a director who gets the character (which Richard Lester manifestly did not), figure out a way to convey his dual nature (narration perhaps?) and a big enough budget for locations and battles. Frankly though, I'm skeptical there's much of any audience for it anyway, aesthetic concerns aside.
I have not yet seen Conspiracy (the Branagh film). I don't know if it was play but my understanding is it's an almost shot-for-shot remake of a German TV film called The Wannsee Conference.
Thank you for the friendly and informative post.
"I shall tread uncommon wary and keep my pepperbox handy." -
tgoc-41-30447 — 14 years ago(August 31, 2011 03:35 PM)
Dear Hancock:
Many thanks for your response.
It interested me that you whom I regard as a professional historian mentioned Barbara Tuchman, one of my most esteemed historians I have read most of her books more than once. And as for Woodham-Smith well, I used to teach English Composition, and often used her account of the Charge of the Light Brigade as an object lesson about the need for clarity in giving orders. And, as you say, her books are a credit to the historian's profession.
As for the Flashman idea, you are , I think, quite right. A film or films would require a director and an actor who grasped MacDonald Fraser's intent. It would be a challenge to present Flashman the self-confessed coward as the hero that he obviously was intended to be seen to be. I may have said this to you before, but Fraser's books and I love them have always seemed to me to be G.A. Henty updated. You may be right in thinking that there is a diminished audience, these days, for the times and glories that Fraser celebrates. Again, I may have asked this before, but if you have not read Fraser's" Quartered Safe Out Here" his memoir of service in Burma in 1945 well, it is a fine book.
I hope that you are getting on well with your researches. It might amuse you to learn that I recently read Tacitus' "Annals of Imperial Rome" and found it quite a page-turner.
Be well.
Yours ever
TGOC
Could always have done the Augsburg daylight raid, I suppose.