Should there be a modern remake of The Longest Day?

Wrong button pushed here.

 

Yes, I've read in depth about the feelings about the British vets as you say, in imdb, other articles and stories about the movie. It was just a movie, based on a true story, not a factual documentary. Hell, the true story the movie was based on wasn't even accurate. If you want to learn something, crack open a history book. If you want to be entertained, watch a movie. Just about everything British vets, historians and writers said about the movie boiled down to this "there the Yanks go again, making a movie about winning the war all by themselves". The story was focused on a small unit, composed of US Rangers, an interpreter from the US 29th ID, and a mixed bag of paratroopers from the 101st Abn, in a fictional town, in a fictional battle. Again, not a lot of other Allied nations had troops assigned to the few units represented in the movie, based on a true story, that wasn't accurately portrayed. Those Hollyweird Bastards! Imagine that! And an American made movie appealing to the American national pride, and outright American jingoism, made with U$D, aimed at American audiences too, to make U$ dollars too! Dang! Again, not every American made movie about something that took place in WW2 has to include every nationality that composed the Allied Forces. Movies, their just for entertainment and expensive trips to the concession stand.

This is what SPR was based on:

Niland brothers - Wikipedia

Also mentioned in the movie was the incident involving the Sullivan brothers, 5 of them going down with their ship, the USS Juneau in the South Pacific. What was mentioned about the policy instituted after their loss was inaccurate as well.

I thought that when the Tom Hanks and Ted Danson's characters were bashing Monty and the British effort at Caen was uncalled for, but I didn't jump up and storm out of the movie. I know that they were in a tough fight since I've read much about the campaign, but again, this was a movie, not a factual boring documentary. In the Australian made movie Gallipoli, a similar crack was made about the British troops having brewing up tea on the beach as the Australian troops were getting slaughtered by Johnny Turk as they were going over the top in support of the British landings. Again, another uncalled for line, but I stayed in and watched the movie. I thought that it was still pretty good.

Read on please:

In the great epic movie, The Battle of Britain there was no mention of American made and supplied superior avgas that gave the RAF an undeniable edge over the Luftwaffe was never mentioned. Not saying that the Spitfires and brave and able British pilots weren't capable of doing their job, but there's always a need for that extra "edge" in combat, whether it's better made gas, an extra bullet, or maybe some rocks to throw if it came down to it. I'm sure the brave men of the RAF didn't protest about having to use American avgas. There were also American pilots in the RAF at the time (before the Eagle Squadrons were formed), flying fighters and bombers and they were not portrayed either. They were mentioned at the end credits along with pilots from other nations, I'll give the movie makers credit for that.

In the equally great movie, Sink the Bismark, no mention was made of the USN pilot, flying the US supplied Catalina flying boat (training RN pilots and crew) that spotted the Bismark after it split off from the Prinz Eugen. RN torpedo bombers were dispatched to the seal the doom of the Bismark shortly thereafter.

And in any of the movies about the Battle of El Alamein there was no mention of US supplied and crewed M3 Lee tanks (Grants in British service). The American crews landed with the tanks and were just supposed to brief the British tankers on how to operate them, but many stayed with their tanks and drove them into battle.

Lots of Americans were in the Canadian Forces, both the Army and RCAF as well, but none were mentioned in any of the Dunkirk or Dieppe movies that I've seen.

The commander of 633 Squadron was an American in the movie 633 Squadron, but it was based on a novel, which was based on several actions of other RAF units and raids. George Lucas was inspired by the final attack scene, and he incorporated the sequence in his first Star Wars movie, the trench assault on the Death Star was destroyed, before it was re-christened Star Wars Episode IV: A New Hope. Just wanted to throw that one into the discussion. I like trivia.

I'm sure that there are others, I haven't seen every British made movie about WW2. No doubt few made mention of Americans that were actually in the incident portrayed on the silver screen.

 

And they're just movies.

 

The will be an airborne version of Saving Private Ryan as Tom Hanks has teamed with war movie legend Dale Dye as Executive Producer on 'No Better Place to Die', a film that will detail the US airborne assault on D-Day in the same hard-hitting fashion as Saving Private Ryan did for the beach landings in Normandy.

This upcoming film is already five years in making.

 

If you want to watch anything about the American airborne assault during the war,Band of Brothers is absolutely unbelievable viewing.I've watched the box set twice and will definately watch it again....i almost felt emotionally involved with characters and the interviews with surviving soldiers made it even more hard hitting.
After watching this,i can't see how anything else can come close.

 

No one really cares about movies such as Inglorious Basterds, U577 and Pearl Harbour which were movies made with few pretensions to historic accuracy. However, The Longest Day, Bridge too Far, Dambusters, Dunkirk, Battle of Britain and Saving Private Ryan claimed to be historically accurate in their setting and in the former three examples used historic characters.

Joe Mcarthy isn't individually portrayed in Dambusters. Other non Brits were portrayed so it wasn't pure nationalism. There can't have been more than one or two Americans out of the 150+ men who flew. The SPR complaint is that

It is stretching the point to claim that the Battle of Britain did not give enough credit to Americans. #1 American pilots are mentioned in the credits - which is about right. 11 American pilots flew in the Battle of Britain - about a third of the number of Belgians and an eighth of the number of Czechs. #2 The British purchased 100 octane fuel on the open market from a company using a French chemists discovery. During the Battle of Britain, the US neutrality acts were still in force. By and large the US did not play a major role in the Battle of Britain.

Glad to see a mention of 633 Squadron. It does indeed have a American pilot as hero - (and a Sikh - one of the few depictions of BAME servicemen in WW2). The film was also dedicated to the airmen of all nations who flew the Mosquito.

OTOH Saving Private Ryan, which is claimed to have the authentic depiction of a beach landing was part of an Allied operation in which British sailors played a significant role on Omaha Beach. Visitors to Normandy think SPR is real and not just a fictionalisation.

Incidentally, the first allied soldiers to die on Omaha beach were in British uniform. Few visit their graves, which is a pity, because the story is very good and include a man who it is claimed is the original for James Bond. Story here http://www.theobservationpost.com/blog/?p=1172

 

Have long thought a 'Band of desert tommies' was long overdue filming, but yeah, Tobruk would be spot on for a modern treatment. Diggers, Tommies, Indians, etc., Proper 'last redoubt' feeling. Faintly surprised it hasn't been done by any modern filmmakers.

Dieppe... Again, good call as a story, but could we stand the dreary re-opening of traditional internet rows?
Dieppe, Sealion, Market Garden, Dresden. Top four circular internet WW2 arguments...
(I only don't mention pearl harbor conspiracies as i don't want to set you off.)

 

You mean you haven’t seen ‘The Rats of Tobruk’?
‘

 

I would love more Aviation centered movies, but with fewer and fewer warbirds, and the expense to fly them for long periods of time, few people would take the risk. A remake of 633rd Squadron would be glorious in my opinion, or a movie on the raid on Ploiesti, or virtually any movie centered around aerial warfare during the war.

 

The Problem is there would have be a sh@# ton of CGI, there is only one flyable B-24 in the world, and finding a good desert location along with a factory setting while flying at less than 500 feet is a tall task. But there is the potential to do an animated movie, animated movies aren't just for kids, and I think in many ways they have potential for movie ideas like that.......am I the only one who shares that sentiment?

 

I love the modern Pixar type animated films, but have some issues with trying this on a WWII subject. It has been tried on serious subjects in the past with less than stellar results and I recall one made in Japan dealing with the end of the war that was widely hailed in Japan but largely ignored elsewhere. (Grave of the Fireflies). Critics said it was great and I myself saw it, but it just did not make a dent on the market and flops don't inspire new projects.

 

I'm not thinking Pixar as much simply because of gore and that, but maybe something more reminiscent of Dreamworks El Dorado, or Disney's Atlantis. They still can be visually stunning, but they wouldn't be as potentially gory and vivid as a Pixar film per say.

 

Warbirds aren’t getting fewer...