tonyh29 Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 27 minutes ago, mjmooney said: Change the name in the film? No, absolutely not. Remove the name from the gravestone? Yeah, good idea. If you change one , I kinda think you have to change the other ? From the film perspective historical accuracy should come into play , but that said most films based on true events use a heck of a lot of artistic licence anyway , so it would be an easy change to make .... so dunno , for me , maybe the opposite , film yes , grave No .... The RAF have acknowledged it's not of its time , but that was the dogs name at the end of the day , maybe a sign to that effect on the grave would have been sufficient ? Have to be honest , until today, I didn't even know the dog had a grave at RAF Scampton Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 17, 2020 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2020 48 minutes ago, stuart_75 said: I look forward to the next ten pages of this thread discussing the Dambusters dog gravestone change.... I remember in 1985 going to Scampton and seeing the plaque, and thinking "strewth, they have plaque with that word on it in open view - that's, er, a bit surprising." IIRC it was right in front of the SHQ building - not in public view, but in open view to all the RAF personnel on the base. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisp65 Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 I think we can all relax about the film remake. I’ve seen the mapping out of the storyline and the Hollywood execs have dealt with the whole dog name thing quite cleverly to be fair. Basically ‘Chuck’ the rebellious anti establishment American leader of the Damnbusters has been recruited on to this secret mission with his pet / soulmate, a white horse called Freedom Crusader. Yes, he has trouble at home with a complicated love interest, but this one last mission, in a secret invisible plane, just has to be done... 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Stevo985 Posted July 17, 2020 VT Supporter Popular Post Share Posted July 17, 2020 It really doesn't matter does it? 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 17, 2020 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2020 1 hour ago, mjmooney said: Change the name in the film? No, absolutely not. Remove the name from the gravestone? Yeah, good idea. Why not change the name in any new film? I mean it's not a documentary. But I wouldn't go back to the original and overdub it with (say) "Nigel" - even though no one could ever imagine a "Nigel" having any racist undertones about him, at all, could they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post tom_avfc Posted July 17, 2020 Popular Post Share Posted July 17, 2020 7 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: It really doesn't matter does it? This. Its another example of something which is turning the conversation away from the real issues. It seems to be almost every week now that one of these stories comes out and everyone can spend a few days debating the merits of names in a film rather than actually address the serious issues around racism in this country and elsewhere. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bickster Posted July 17, 2020 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2020 1 minute ago, tom_avfc said: This. Its another example of something which is turning the conversation away from the real issues. It seems to be almost every week now that one of these stories comes out and everyone can spend a few days debating the merits of names in a film rather than actually address the serious issues around racism in this country and elsewhere. This to the power of this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chindie Posted July 17, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted July 17, 2020 19 minutes ago, Stevo985 said: It really doesn't matter does it? This to infinity. The name of the dog doesn't matter. A film isn't making an historic record of something. It's telling the story. And the story doesn't need the minutiae of every single detail to be correct, especially when the detail is ultimately insignificant. The story features a dog. It's name isn't really important. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 17, 2020 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2020 7 minutes ago, tom_avfc said: This. Its another example of something which is turning the conversation away from the real issues. It seems to be almost every week now that one of these stories comes out and everyone can spend a few days debating the merits of names in a film rather than actually address the serious issues around racism in this country and elsewhere. It's possible to do both. I mean the clearly most important thing is equality. If an organisation or individual takes a step to remove a piece of "bad" memorabilia/statue/plaque - that's a tiny part of recognising past inequalities. If that's not talked about, not explained, then it makes it awfully easy for the racists or potential racists to be persuaded that these steps, rather than being little corrections are somehow an attack on white people or them (the racists) or their "heritage and history". How do you educate people and help them to be better humans if you don't talk to them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AVFC_Hitz Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 31 minutes ago, blandy said: Why not change the name in any new film? I mean it's not a documentary. But I wouldn't go back to the original and overdub it with (say) "Nigel" - even though no one could ever imagine a "Nigel" having any racist undertones about him, at all, could they? I see you're already making plans... 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 (edited) Someone raises a subject on a forum , an online discussion site , people then reply to the post and then we get told it really doesn't matter, and we shouldn't be discussing it as it's detracting from the real issue it's not the "Real issue" but it is still relevant to the general topic of racism , the fact the RAF have acknowledged it after 73 years is something , surely ? Edited July 17, 2020 by tonyh29 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 17, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted July 17, 2020 On 17/07/2020 at 11:50, tonyh29 said: Someone raises a subject on a forum , an online discussion site , people then reply to the post and then we get told it really doesn't matter, and we shouldn't be discussing it as it's detracting from the real issue it's not the "Real issue" but it is still relevant to the general topic of racism , the fact the RAF have acknowledged it after 73 years is something , surely ? My opinion is it really doesn’t matter. That’s as valid as anyone else’s opinion isn’t it? It’s part of the discussion, not the end of it. If you think it does matter then discuss it. Don’t moan that I’m saying it doesn’t matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LondonLax Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 Oh man, this thread is getting so meta 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 On 17/07/2020 at 13:15, Stevo985 said: My opinion is it really doesn’t matter. That’s as valid as anyone else’s opinion isn’t it? It’s part of the discussion, not the end of it. If you think it does matter then discuss it. Don’t moan that I’m saying it doesn’t matter. to paraphrase you from the other day , Don't flatter yourself that my post was about you ... if it had been specific to you I'd have quoted you My post was an observation that people on a forum don't want to discuss something , it wasn't a moan , indeed if you had finished reading my post before replying to it , you'd have seen this sentence ... it's not the "Real issue" but it is still relevant to the general topic of racism , the fact the RAF have acknowledged it after 73 years is something , surely ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 17, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted July 17, 2020 (edited) 9 minutes ago, tonyh29 said: to paraphrase you from the other day , Don't flatter yourself that my post was about you ... if it had been specific to you I'd have quoted you My post was an observation that people on a forum don't want to discuss something , it wasn't a moan , indeed if you had finished reading my post before replying to it , you'd have seen this sentence ... it's not the "Real issue" but it is still relevant to the general topic of racism , the fact the RAF have acknowledged it after 73 years is something , surely ? Interestingly, Blandy said pretty much the same thing , just using more words ..I'll let the viewers draw their own conclusions there You referred to my post using the exact wording of it I don't think i can be blamed for thinking you were referring to me. If you weren't then fair enough but it's a bit weird to moan about the exact wording used in my post and then claim you weren't talking about that post. I read your whole post, thanks. You don't have to make the false accusation that I'm so eager to jump on your posts that I can't even bring myself to read them all before I hit the quote button. It read as a moan that someone had said this doesn't really matter after you'd been discussing it (even though that wasn't what my post meant, which I'd have explained given a chance). I'm not sure how else it was meant to be taken? Blandy didn't specifically refer to my post, accidentally or intentionally. He quoted somebody else and replied specifically to them. Edited July 17, 2020 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blandy Posted July 17, 2020 Moderator Share Posted July 17, 2020 1 minute ago, Stevo985 said: Blandy didn't specifically refer to my post, accidentally or intentionally. He quoted somebody else and replied specifically to them. I don't know if it's just me - but when I quote someone and reply, it's not my intention to reply to "them" as an individual, but rather to respond to the words they wrote for anyone /everyone to read. So this post isn't specifically addressing that nice @Stevo985, it's just taking something he said and adding a little bit to the conversation (or not). I often don't really look who wrote a comment, my replies are almost never personal, or personally directed. 2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ml1dch Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 It's a bit weird that politicians on both sides of the aisle aren't shouting a bit more about this sort of thing at the moment. 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andym Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 4 hours ago, blandy said: I remember in 1985 going to Scampton and seeing the plaque, and thinking "strewth, they have plaque with that word on it in open view - that's, er, a bit surprising." IIRC it was right in front of the SHQ building - not in public view, but in open view to all the RAF personnel on the base. I did the tour of the museum at Scampton a few years ago. When we got to the grave, the tour guide said 'for obvious reasons i'm not going to say it, but it's on the plaque as it was the dogs name'. A quick google search suggests they have removed the name in the last few weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stevo985 Posted July 17, 2020 VT Supporter Share Posted July 17, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, blandy said: I don't know if it's just me - but when I quote someone and reply, it's not my intention to reply to "them" as an individual, but rather to respond to the words they wrote for anyone /everyone to read. So this post isn't specifically addressing that nice @Stevo985, it's just taking something he said and adding a little bit to the conversation (or not). I often don't really look who wrote a comment, my replies are almost never personal, or personally directed. Well yes I agree. But Tony was asking why I replied to him and not you, when you were making the same point as he was. My answer is because Tony's post was (seemingly) specifically referring to my post, and moaning about it imo, whereas yours wasn't. And his was personal, not for the first time. Edited July 17, 2020 by Stevo985 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted July 17, 2020 Share Posted July 17, 2020 (edited) 1 hour ago, Stevo985 said: You referred to my post using the exact wording of it I don't think i can be blamed for thinking you were referring to me. If you weren't then fair enough but it's a bit weird to moan about the exact wording used in my post and then claim you weren't talking about that post. I read your whole post, thanks. You don't have to make the false accusation that I'm so eager to jump on your posts that I can't even bring myself to read them all before I hit the quote button. It read as a moan that someone had said this doesn't really matter after you'd been discussing it (even though that wasn't what my post meant, which I'd have explained given a chance). I'm not sure how else it was meant to be taken? Blandy didn't specifically refer to my post, accidentally or intentionally. He quoted somebody else and replied specifically to them. I removed my last line , I decided it wasn't relevant and a bit crap but you were in before the edit however, that nice mr Blandy has actually already said what I would have said (just with better grammar) regarding intentions and replies , so ... erm wot he said . It was very much an open post based on the 5 or 6 posts that followed my original comment ,I used the phrases people were using . i.e "real issues" as well I don't think there was anything wrong with my post , as i say it was an observation with a question that the RAF making an acknowledgment was quite a statement ,but hey , message boards can often get cloudy , misunderstandings can happen , hopefully that's a line drawn under this one .. Edit- You were in with another post before I got a chance to hit post on this one , but, far as I'm concerned the matter is resolved , if you are in agreement Edited July 17, 2020 by tonyh29 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts