Jump to content
Free downloads from TNA ×
The Great War (1914-1918) Forum

Remembered Today:

BBC1 - Paxman: Britain's Great War


spof

Recommended Posts

It seems ridiculous to be worrying over the name, the title is chosen because it's what people identify with and it "scans" better. The "UK's Great War" or "Great Britain and Northern Ireland's Great War" doesn't have the same resonance.

I also note the Paul Read has worked on the series and I have great faith in Paul's input. I'm really looking forward to the programme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Paxo went to the funeral of Captain Pritchard H.A.C in Arras last year. (please see threads on this forum)

I think the funeral features in episode 4 of the Paxo opus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

so episode one is over, I thought it quite informative.......I for one am looking forward to episode two.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Likewise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much, much better than I expected. Very sensitively handled. And Paxo not his usual arrogant self.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some interesting points but rather unambitious. Some bizarre camera shots such as on a railway bridge where he walks off after a piece to camera and fades out of existence. This baffled me. What was it supposed to mean. Piece to camera from in one London Park or another. Why - seemed to just be using the crew out and about for the sheer hell of it - surely they could have walked a few hundred yards and found a more meaningful background.

His low key rather under-played description of the crowds outside Buckingham Palace in early August 1914 didn't seem to tally with my recollection of contemporary accounts.

Given that this series is a flagship centenary show and has cost a shed load of our money, its all a bit lazy and rather routine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't overly impressed by it and thought it a bit too jumpy in the way the topics moved around. I don't think I'll watch the next episodes.

Craig

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fairly mediocre - gives flavour of opening moves 1914-15 to those who might not have made any in depth study - except marching British infantry seen in some shots wore or carried steel helmets not issued until 1916.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think we've done well to get through six post-programme posts before anyone mentioned a "technical error".

Usually there's a such a storm of complaint, about wrong uniforms or weaponry, that the discussion about the actual programme gets lost.

I enjoyed the programme. Thought it was done well but, then, I'm increasingly interested in the home front. The overview and depth of the programme certainly felt right for the likely audience. I also think that the marker was laid down several times that this would be "total war", so I'll be interested to see how that runs in the remaining programmes. .

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always like Paxman's history programmes. Populist enough to be interesting to a wide audience but rigorous enough to not be sloppy history. Thoroughly looking forward to the rest of the series. The TV war is off to a good start!

David

Link to comment
Share on other sites

John,

You make the relevant point with your reference to 'audience'. This was not for the learned members of this forum to shoot down inaccuracies. It is for interested parties who do not perhaps know a huge amount.

Overall a good effort, me thinks.

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Until about 3 years ago I knew little about the Great War ,and I think many people today know little about the subject,other than trench warfare. They would have not known about parts of the programme such as the bombardment of Hartlepool , the Scouts coast watching etc .Also I found the article in the Times ,regarding the first defeat interesting.Also peace rallies,and MPs in tears all new to me.Pleased to see the Special Constabulary mentioned.

Look forward to the next programme. Will they mention VAD nurses and the RND my special interests,I wonder?

No fan of Paxman but yes the programme was educational.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it weak in that reasons behind actions weren't explained. For example, the Scarborough naval raid was shocking enough in causing numerous civilian casualties, but he didn't explain the purpose behind it - to cause a division of the British fleet by provoking public opinion to push for creation of a rapid response group based closer than Scapa - and thus improve the High Seas Fleet's prospect of defeating the RN in detail, and lifting the blockade.

Regards,

MikB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... Some bizarre camera shots such as on a railway bridge where he walks off after a piece to camera and fades out of existence. This baffled me. What was it supposed to mean. Piece to camera from in one London Park or another. Why - seemed to just be using the crew out and about for the sheer hell of it - surely they could have walked a few hundred yards and found a more meaningful background.

Not as bad as the BBC4 programme an hour before about Alfred the Great. To be fair, I only watched a bit of it, but there was over-long coverage of modern shopping- and town -centres close to a religious building associated with the king. Must be a bit difficult adding variety to pieces-to-camera and "talking heads"

Fairly mediocre - gives flavour of opening moves 1914-15 to those who might not have made any in depth study - except marching British infantry seen in some shots wore or carried steel helmets not issued until 1916.

Again, it must be challenging accurately to match contemporary film footage to the events being described (especially when some the dates attributed by the archives are wrong). I did wonder whether a couple of clips were filmed in 1914 or later. And just as I was thinking that "fresh" footage was being featured, along the trench comes that familiar soldier carrying a wounded comrade and looking indignantly at the cameraman. (We've discussed him - and whom he might have been - a couple of times over the years.)

Generally I was impressed and I'm looking forward to the rest of the series.

Moonraker

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was watchable, I agree it flitted about a bit but I guess a world war is a big subject to cover in detail and

in a limited time slot. I thought he was a bit negative on his coverage of Mons and the retreat, I know wars are not won by retreats

but no mention of Le Cateau or The Marne but the alarmist newspaper article( Col Reppington?)was included.

Overall if it inspires people who know nothing of the war to take an interest and maybe read a book or three it can't be a bad thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that the level was pitched well for the first of the BBC's offerings, we must remember that this aimed at people who only think of the Great War in terms of Blackadder. And to be able to see the interview with the 105 yr old [Violet Muers] who witnessed the Hartlepool shelling, certainly helped bring the programme to life.

Paul

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty much as I would have expected. Two glaring omissions for me, though. No mention that the French and Germans had fought larger battles than the British ever would until two or three years later, well before Mons. And no mention of the Royal Navy, Britain's key weapon. A bit odd, even if this programme is trying to slant towards home and people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I enjoyed it.

As a series, it is aimed at a wider audience than those of us with a detailed interest. The series has the very difficult job of trying to cover the huge areas of the effects and events of the Great War in just six episodes. As a starter, this was OK. It will be interesting to see how the series develops.

Bruce

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As a lead in to BBC coverage of the centenary I thought it was well done. Well clearly aimed at others than forum members it was effective at describing the impact of the war on the British people rather the services. Two aspects that seemed to me to be below the general standard were the sweeping oversimplification of the causes of the war and a failure to significantly mention that other nations were involved in particular the Belgians and French. A few sentences would have been sufficient. I note that the criticism in the Times today reminds us that in the BBC series 'The Great War' renowned actors voices were heard, but they were not seen. Less Paxman and more information would have allowed just a touch of essential detail.

Old Tom

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did I also hear Paxman refer to those imaginary Russians as having "snow on their beards" rather than "boots"? Or perhaps I am just going deaf in my old age?

Very much enjoyed the Hartlepool survivor though. The BBC did well to roll back the "living memory" tag when they tracked down this lovely lady.

But I still can't help but feel that it was a bit "slight" given its cost and advanced trumpeting

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have to agree with MickB post #41, Chris post #45, also that the events leading up to the War were not well covered.

Choice of film footage and photographs could have been better researched.

As has been said though, for a series aimed at those with little knowledge of the War not a bad programme.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...