NEW BATTLE OF BRITAIN FILM!!!

Cruise performed good in "Rain Man" and "Vanilla Sky" and very good in "Jerry Maguire", if you ask me.

Cheers,

 

And this is what Cruise is probably flying..




or did anybody tell him they did not have jets by then...

 

No ! I have obtained secret information as to the exact aircraft Cruise will be flying in the film ( check the 'history' section ) : -

http://www.p51.mustangsmustangs.com/survivors/p51/44-12840.shtml

 

Who suggested that they were? I just liked the idea of these two British 'gentlemen' doing The Alamo or Tarawa. Actually, I had a great idea, Michael Cain chasing Santa Anna across Texas, finally cornering him in a corner of the battle field, shooting him with his shotgun and dumping his body in a cart that rolls down a hill (so what if there werent any, we are making history here people). At this point he is hit in the back of the head by a musket ball, falls down to his knees muttering the immortal words 'dont fire those bloody balls at me'.

As for Life of Brian and the Holy Grail, well since both are based on myths they hardly count as historical films (I think you were trying to get at a point here) though I do recommend you watch the Monty Python where they show Hitler, Himmler and Hess running for an election in Sussex, living in a small hotel and giving speaches from a balcony. Their uniforms and kit are perfect (for that matter, look up the 'funniest joke in the world skit as well'). Oh then there is the old fave, 'sorry old chap, I dont understand your lingo' sketch....

'Bally jerry, dickey birded, smack into the old briney...' Now how comes that makes perfect sense to me, maybe I read too much bally Biggles as a nipper, anyhow, time to take a dekko at something some boffs gave me earlier and get down to hard tac over biccies and char, after that a rugger match before popping down to the kings head for a few swift halves, sound good?

Pip pip...

 

Stephan,
I can understand your frustration, especially considering the low character of Tom Cruise whom I have come to dismiss due to his outspoken political stances. However Cruise is one of the top draws in the film industry right now, if he liked a script about lint-picking some producer out there would make the movie.
That said I have to admit I would like to see this movie, as it seems that it's been a long time since there was a war movie (Let's not count "Pearl Harbor") about aviation. Any chance to see Hurricanes and Spitfires mixing it with the Luftwaffe and I'll be there. It just seems like there is a move away from historical films as they are inherently expensive.

BTW, one of my favorite movies is "Zulu", which stars Micheal Caine in one of his first films, along with Jack Hawkins and Stanley Baker. Surely there can be no greater display of British courage than this.

The Blue Max

[ 20. September 2003, 02:57 AM: Message edited by: Blue Max ]

 

To be honest I didn't dismiss Tom Cruise because of any political opinions he may have expressed, actually it was a 50% split between the fact he isn't a particularly good actor and (with all due respect) the fact he is American. I am objecting to the fact that we are undoubtedly going to see one of the 12 British pilots who volunteered for the RAF being portrayed as leading the bungling British to victory.

As for Zulu, a great film but its a shame about the inaccuracies. For example, the top of the wall around the fort was about 10 feet above the ground, it as almost impossible for the Zulus to get up and dead easy to defend. All the same, a marcelous feat of bravery.

 

I agree with Stefans view. To me--this would be as atrocious as having an American commanding the British ships that destroyed the Bismarck--or something to that tune.

 

How is the "Life of Brian" based on myth?

 

Yea Stephen, wanna explain that one?

 

The whole story is based around the story of Christ, which is as much of a myth as the stories of Robin Hood, King Arthur and the Trojan Wars. Choose to believe them, they may be true, at base though they are myths.

Apart from anything, I was just surprised that anyone considered Life of Brian to be a serious historical movie.

Carl, or alternativley having British soldiers commanding the Alamo, charging up Iwo Jima or defending Pearl Harbour...

 

I know ezactly what you mean Stefan and agree.

I also got a tidbit on that movie: Dark Blue Sky. Apparently the spoken language is Polish except when there are scenes to do with Germans and the British--spoken in their native tounges as well. Also, it must be somekind of ripoff from Battle of Britain--as I was told that many scenes from that movies were bled into this one.

 

Dont you mean dark blue world?

About the Czech Pilots in the RAF?


Tis a good one.

 

Hi CvM--nope--the title that was given to me was "Dark Blue Sky." Now granted--the person who gave me that title might have been mistaken.

 

I think CVM is right. Actually I haven't seen the film myself however I know a few people who have seen it and rather want to. I am only too happy to see Poles and Czechs getting credit for fighting in the Battle of Britain, particularly considering the troubles they faced should they be shot down and found by a British farmer

 

I guess the sarcasm was missed concerning "The Life of Brian".
Before I continue I think I need to preface by saying that I do not attend religious sevices, do not belong to any Church and am extremely sceptical when it comes to the mysticism of religion. That is as close to athiest as someone raised Roman Catholic can get, I think.
However, when it comes to comparing the Historical figure Jesus Christ to Robin Hood and King Aurther, cut me a break! Most credible Historians will tell you that Christ the man did exist and that person was crucified. Find me an Historian who will say that Robin Hood and King Aurther ever existed.
BTW, the Trojan Wars were fought between the Mycenaeans and the Trojans. They were fought because the Trojans from the city of Troy had a trade monopoly because they controlled the Dardanelles and the Bosporus straits. Homer just pulled a "Hollywood" on the people to make the Greeks look extra heroic. If he had had film and Tom Cruise I betcha he would have considered using him to play the brave Ulysses (even though he's not Greek!)

Later

 

There was an Earl of Locksley in Britain during the reign of King John, the Saxons were oppressed and there is evidance to suggest that there were outlaws similar to Robin Hood who were viewed as being crusaders for the people. As for King Arthur, the stories are about a Briton who fought against the early Saxon invaders, there were kings who did this and the stories of King Arthur are based around these characters. I am well aware that the Trojan wars did happen, I am also aware of the fact that the Greek myths around which Homer worked his epic have some basis in fact (i.e. the war happened). My point was simply that whilst a myth is (in theory) a purly ficticious narative, they tend to have some route in the history of e a people and tend to be based at least in part on events that actually occured. In this respect the Bible (which IMHO is for the most part fiction) is based on actual events but is really just a myth.

Actually, I do concede that myth was perhapse the wrong word to use, legend would have been far more appropriate. No, I didn't miss the sarcasm, just thought it rather patronising and worth a bash.

Actually, I rather like the comparison between Homer and this new film, it works well, however maybe a better comparison can be made to U571. I mean Homer takes actual historical events, re-arranges them slightly, introduces figures who never existed and thus creates a new history complete with heroes who are celebrated. This is soon accepted by people and so the mythical heroes are celebrated by the real heroes as people forget what actually happened and only remember the 'hollywood' version. thanks for that Mr Patterson. However, I doubt there would be a problem with Tom Cruise playing Ulysees despite not being Greek, as long as he was presented as being Greek (think Damian Lewis in Band of Brothers, not Greek but a bit of a reversed situation). If however Cruise played Ulysees and was presented as being American that would be a different matter.

So am I to understand that you disagree with my concerns about the perloining of our history?

 

I think CvM was right as well--I did a check at IMDB for DBS and found only the correct one mentioned as being also the only thing close enough to Dark Blue World.

 

Stefan,
I really do understand your concerns about how Hollywood can butcher history. I think the problem is that folks like us, with an understanding of history, tend to forget how superficial and ignorant of History the general public is. Sometomes I think that I/we could enjoy films about history without knowing that the facts are all screwed up. But then I wake up and realize that it is best to be as knowledgeable as one can about past events, even at the expense of not being able to enjoy most Hollywood productions.
The American public is sorely lacking in historical knowledge in general, even their own history. This, to me, is a sad state of affairs, especially since I am a professional educator ( 7th grade World Cultures).
BTW, I think it would be great if Spielberg would do a flick about the Trojan Wars. That would be awesome!

Later

 

Bang on, how often have I watched a WW2 movie and thought 'this would be a really good film if i didnt realise how inaccurate it is' or sat with my girlfriend and thought how blissful her ignorance of what happened allows her to enjoy the film. I remember a few years ago a friend of ours came to Britain from the US, he was a 10th grade (I think, anyway, he was teaching 15-16 year olds) history teacher, he was very impressed when he found out that my little brother (at the time aged about 10 or 11) had a better understanding of US history than many of his students. The sad thing was that my father had to explain that my brother was the exception rather than the rule.

I think the problem with ny modern (decent) film about the Trojan wars (the myths) would be that most people have no understanding of that kind of mythic story, no concept of the magnificence that Homer and his like were going for. I think another problem would be that after centuries of judeo-christian culture, people find it very hard to understand Greek deieties that were far more human than the gods of out society, if that makes sense.

 

(Booo! from AndyW]

Really Guys, I can't really understand that "historical accurance"-phobia. I don't give a s**t if the the Sd.Kfz. 182 (aka "Tiger II") in "Saving Ryan's Privates" is the 101% original tank who rolled there back then, back there or if the German Einsatzgruppen men in "Come and See" are wearing Wehrmacht uniforms iso Order/Sipo Police uniforms...the point is: is this a good flick or not! The M-47 "Patton"s rolling through the desert as German Pz-IV's are just crap because the italian movie as a whole is crap! The Bundeswehr MG-3 and the "Marder" with a ridiculous gun angle (shooting the sniper off the church tower) as used in SPR are still cool.

(Applause from AndyW)

I think we're completely screwed for the rest of our lives from teenage history school lessons.

Numibinas who fought against the Egyptians = Numibinas BAD, Egyptions GOOD, WTF, why?

Anchient Greek (oh-ho, democrats, weren't they? LOL!, so always GOOD whoever they ripped into pieces)

but

Romans
vs. Greek (WTF, not the Athens picture postcard democrats any more, so Romas GOOD vs. Greek BAD

Hannibal = Bad
vs. Romans = Good

while

Romans
vs. Gauls / Britons / Teutons (choose what's fitting to your countrie's convieniance) = BAD

So did my Germn history school book taught me that German barbarians stopped the Romans in thier attempt to make world a better place? F**k, no! We saved the darn Planet from Roman imperialism! FGuess same counts for the Brits. Reading the "official french history" of how the Romans occupied today's France is an interesting lecture !

Guess it's easier to teach history while staying nice and comfortably on the winning / national / "modern" side.

Anybody here read Monty's "A history of warfare"? I mean those really anchient stories are making it easy to be 100% neutral, but it's always the virtual "history teacher" in your mind telling you that the Assyrians were real SOB's

Anybody love the Mongolians out here?


Cheers,