That reminds me;
I must watch Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer again soon.
Scriptwriter Stephen Fry has announced he's successfully tackled the thorny problem of just what to call Guy Gibson's dog in Peter Jackson's upcoming remake of The Dam Busters. The mutt will be rebranded "Digger", Fry announced to the BBC, because "there is no question in America that you could ever have a dog called the N-word …
I must watch Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer again soon.
If Merv/Jim think this is going to be the biggest inaccuracy by the time the movie hits the big screen I suggest the bring a beer along to the cinema to cry into.....
Perhap the best solution is to get a black actor to play Guy, because then it would, of course, be ok for him to have a dog called N*gger...
...this guy is called Paddy. That is clearly an insult to the Irish, can you change it name to Partick or Steve.
The post is required, and must contain letters.
But you can't let the facts get in the way of political correctness
Wouldn't that be politically incorrect on account of being offensive to about 80,000 Scots?
I'm called Steve, and I dislike people not called Steve being known by my given name.
Partick is a place in Glasgow
My name is Colin and I feel offended and marginalised that my name won't be used in the film and has not even appeared in this this thread (until now).
You'll be in the film, they'll just call you Co-lynne not Coll-lin
Interesting that curator of the RAF museum thinks that they should not only 'sod political correctness' (yeah, arguable) but also 'sod human rights'. Hmm. Bit of a dinosaur perhaps?
It *is* a shame the name needs to be changed, but I think that as a society we're just not grown-up enough to deal with it and for it to be taken entirely in the historical context, and thus be a total non-issue. Instead, as soon as the remake was announced, the first question everyone asked was about the dog's name. Plus, given that America, which is probably going to be the biggest audience for the film, has such a bad and recent history with *that* word, I'd say it's the... least-bad option.
"sod human rights"
Even in the context of this debate, who says something like that?? And then he goes on to say that they have "over 9000" visitors? That's classic 4chan. Is that just a coincidence?
Only if the leading actors are American, complete with accents, baddy Germans all speak in proper English and the whole thing is dressed up as an American adventure in which England was, reluctantly, allowed to provide the aerodrome.
Come on, it's a British-based story, no Yanks involved. They won't watch it. If the actors talk English, the Americans will not even understand it.
1. If they use English actors they won't understand the words.
2. The 100,000 Orcs battling each other will ruin the film.
3. The Americans don't watch movies where they don't win.
"There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please.
And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences."
Pity everyone want's the right but not the duty.
*One of the few septics I can tolerate.
"Come on, it's a British-based story, no Yanks involved."
There were a number of American aircrew involved in the Dams raid, particularly Joe McCarthy - born and raised in Long Island, New York.
if they do it all with English actors (even making the concession of accented English in place of speaking actual German), it'll be described as 'Pretentious' in the Yank press.
regarding yanks not following English English ;)
In the lovable series "Jeeves and Wooster" - when they are Stateside, there are a LOT of British actors speaking with American accents. These bits are a bit painful to watch, not because they get the accent wrong (they're really not far off from our gold standard: the news anchor), but because they speeeeak sooooo slooooowly. I imagine this was to help the ears of those not quite accustomed to such an accent - I think accommodations are made both ways.
And anyway - surely no one would dare label a Harry Potter film as "pretentious"!
I think it was probably a reference to the yuman rights of people who kill children in road accidents, whilst having criminal records, people we're unable to deport; a reference to muslim clerics who stir up violent jihad and are wanted for terrorist offences in their home countries, people we cannot deport because they might suffer harm in their home countries.
That's yuman rights. We had the real thing before the EU legislation, from which we ought to derogate, so that we can rephrase our perspective before taking the legislation on again, meaning we can tell them to piss off when it comes to the sort of silly, dangerous exception that I have mentioned.
Let's face it, whichever way they jumped on this issue, they were damned.
As an earlier poster mentioned, let's just be thankful that this isn't a complete whitewash of history like "U571".
With Peter Jackson directing, and Steven Fry writing (say what you like about his grasp of science, he's quite a witty writer) it might be worth watching, whatever they call the dog.
Damn right, which is why they shoudln't ever bother with a remake.
Shouldn;t that be "Dam right", ho ho
...is called Digger. He's a Jack Russell, and enjoys digging. He'll be chuffed when I tell him. Either that or lie on my feet growling to get attention.
Sorry, utterly irrelevant comment (so it should fit in well)..
If they had (correctly) called him Nigger then every future discussion and review of the film would be full apologetic nonsense.
The dog would have become bigger than the film.
I just hope the rest of it works out.
...a Wag dogging the Tale.
The dog's name is NIGGER. Wouldn't this be better to use this name, as it shows it used in a GOOD light.
I know a woman called Gay, but she is hetrosexual, however when she passes away we shall change her name to Fay, just so we don't offend anyone
Sounds a bit like Fey, a word somethimes used as code instead of Gay ....
Can't they just fix the dodgy special effects in the original and leave it at that? 5 minutes into a film, you forget you're watching black-and-white or colour anyway.
Actually, last time I saw the original one Sunday afternoon, I noticed Nigger had suddenly become "Boy"... A bit of cut and paste of the audio track by the PC police.
I can't remember what the code word had changed to, but it obviously ruined the whole relevance.
In the film version of The Wall they have clips of the Dambusters in it playing on the TV Pink is watching, the part where NIgger's name is mentioned by the actors in the film, is left in and clearly audible.
"Actually, last time I saw the original one Sunday afternoon, I noticed Nigger had suddenly become "Boy"... "
I think you'll find that in the original cut Gibson often calls his dog "boy" when speaking directly to him, as many people do with their pets.
Indeed, and that's where they got the audio for the cut... But they pasted it into every other occurrence of the dog's name.
That's ITV on a Sunday afternoon for you.
617 Sqn members (and their guests) can still keep up the tradition of pissing on Nigger's grave. Much more convenient than crossing the hangar to the bogs.
This is hardly fresh news, it was discussed at some length on Radio 5 Live when Stephen Fry went on to Kermode and Mayo's Film Reviews on June 3rd.
Somebody just catching up with their podcasts?
the word is really offensive in this context to black people or being changed by people who think it is?
They already do different languages for different regions so why not have them say Lassie in the American releases if they get so worked up by it and leave the rest of the world as it was.
I find myself in the Daily Mail camp...disturbing.
The dog's name was the dog's name, in future films about the Roman empire should we remove all hints of gladiatorial combat because it isn't poltically correct? What about a movie set in Southern Pre-civil war America and remove all teh black slaves from the picture and replace them with well-treated and paid workers of diverse ethnic origin (Including white people to be balanced).
History is history, it isn't all roses and violets and if you cannot judge it based on the historical context then you are a drooling muppet.
I fear that comment includes a large portion of the world. Which is a bit sad, really.
Any time now someone is going to be arrested for shouting racial abuse at a person of African descent, with the N word replaced by the D word. He will be found guilty of being a twat and rightly so. This film will then be remembered for adding racial overtones to the word Digger, rather like many autocensors added certain overtones to a town just north of Lincoln.
Folks, this not about transferring history to the screen, this is about transferring money to the studios. Any diversion of the cash flow, however minor, to public penance for a dog's name is that much pure loss.
As an antipodean I've noticed an awful lot of English 'historical' dramas set in the 1900s, 1800s 1700s etc that have a carefully selected set of South Asian and Carribean characters.
Now considering that most UK citizens with South Asia and the Carribean origins only arrived since the 50s I have to ask is this PC gone a step too far?
Your UK history is being rewritten in terms of 21st century demographics. Aren't you in the least bit worried?
Pretty much told us about it.. One day, we're going to have to remind our political classes that 1984 was actually a warning, rather than a "How To" manual.
Please note that a film company is in no way the government, it is a private concern primarily interested in profit.
There were a fair number of those strange looking swarthy types knocking around the place, part of the "Empire Dividend".
THey tended to get absorbed into the main population until such times as there were larger, somewhat distinct populations as in the big fits of immigration from the late 19th Century on, Irish, Italians, Eastern Europeans, West Indian, Asian etc
I liked the fact that the black actor's union (can't remember the actual name of it) in America tried to call Clint Eastwood racist for not having any black actors in his film. His response? There were no black soldiers in the battle, so there's no black actors in the film. One guy who's more than happy to let historical accuracy stay ahead of political correctness...
Surely the mail is still upset about the Damnbusters raids succeeding given Rothmeres' personal freindship with Hitler and Mussolini.
Or has we forgotten this ....
"I urge all British young men and women to study closely the progress of the Nazi regime in Germany. They must not be misled by the misrepresentations of its opponents. The most spiteful distracters of the Nazis are to be found in precisely the same sections of the British public and press as are most vehement in their praises of the Soviet regime in Russia. They have started a clamorous campaign of denunciation against what they call "Nazi atrocities" which, as anyone who visits Germany quickly discovers for himself, consists merely of a few isolated acts of violence such as are inevitable among a nation half as big again as ours, but which have been generalized, multiplied and exaggerated to give the impression that Nazi rule is a bloodthirsty tyranny."
I'm sorry, but this has a great amount of historical significance and should not be replaced because of modern day sensitivities. There are plenty of films which use the word to set the tone of 60's America, and the fact the US are embarresed by their history should not mean that the Nigger word be dropped.
The US, Peter Jackson et al can go and boil their heads. And that includes Stephen Fry.
...of a dog's name.
I suppose they should have left it, forget that far fewer people would actually get to see the film, perhaps it wouldn't even break even.