'Our World War' - BBC3 series

[Gareth Davies]

I managed to see the repeat last night (9pm on a Thursday is currently reserved for BBC2's excellent The Honourable Woman) and thought it very good. While I haven't been in a firefight for a few years, and even then the ones I was in weren't quite as dramatic as the Battle of Mons, from my experience of battle I think their representation of the intimacy, the chaos and the effects of battle was pretty good.

I am not that taken by the subject of the second episode but I am already looking forward to the third. I assume that they have read Peter Hart's A Very British Victory which excellently describes the action.

[mark.topham]

I am one of those who watched this programme with low expectations, but enjoyed it. Perhaps the lesson is that we should lower our expectations for First World War documentaries?

Shouldn't see why we should expect to lower our expectations. TV producers today have no excuses for inaccuracies there are enough military advisor's out there to give them the necessary help Taff Gillingham's Khaki Devil springs to mind. They did good work for Channel 5's VC heroes (a much lower budget than Our great War) and the recent stage production of Journey's End.

Too much is given over to "dramatic effect" which allows sloppy work.

Both Lt Maurice Dease (24) and Pte Sidney Godley (25) were pre-war regulars granted it was for both of them their first time under fire.

Why can't they show the men as they were? Some of the best British war films have the "stiff upper lipped officer" and yer "chirpy cockney" Tommy in them

I'll get off my soap box now

Bom T

[roughdiamond]

TV producers today have no excuses for inaccuracies there are enough military advisor's out there to give them the necessary help

Couldn't agree more, when it comes to GLARINGLY bad errors like a L/Cpl wearing Cpl stripes and the same L/Cpl continually being called Sir when they obviously had to put in some serious research on him, that's inexcusable, also if they knew an Imperial Service badge existed and could source one, they should surely know who was entitled to wear one. Someone must have been paid as an adviser.

Sam

[Gunboat]

I think broadcasters underestimate the young.

Good point

[Gibbo]

My point about lowering expectations related to the significant number of posters on this forum who have stated that they had low expectations for this programme but enjoyed it.

In the past some eagerly anticipated WWI documentaries that were no worse than this one have been heavily criticised because they failed to live up to expectations.

[jf42]

So-

Apart from the gimmicky camerawork, the meretricious use of computer graphics and contemporary music,

the inaccuracies of weaponry, weapons handling and uniforms,

-THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE

inaccuracies in depicting the professionalism and discipline of the men and the relationship between the ranks,

-THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE-
the sentimental depiction of the characters as fresh-faced, full-toothed, sensitive and- mostly- pretty young actors- sorry- young men

-THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE

the lazy, poorly researched and at times fatuous script,

the bloopers of empty belts being fed into the MG, trees changing from summer to winter and back again.(do infra red cameras work in daylight?)

THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE

oh, and the mystifying and grotesque assertion, summing up the story, that the battle of Mons was humiliation for the British Army-

-what was there not to like?

Well, I'd like to point out that the bridge at Nimy was a railway bridge....

I would say that if you want to watch how film techniques can now depict the mayhem of a fire fight then watch 'Saving Private Ryan', 'Band of Brothers' or 'BlackHawk Down.'

If you want to watch a fire fight via a helmet camera then watch the original 'Our War.'

if you want to watch a teleplay about the BEF at Mons, er,.... I'll get me coat.

[marytin242]

well I thought it a excellent portrayal..o.k. it,s T.V. for heavens sake..and a DRAMA/Doct,y..the emphisis on the Drama..but what the heck..seen a lot worse..shoulda been shown mainstream..thursday,chan 7 freeview at 9p.m. is part 2..we all can get toooooo tech..so go with it..

[slick63]

So-

Apart from the gimmicky camerawork, the meretricious use of computer graphics and contemporary music,

the inaccuracies of weaponry, weapons handling and uniforms,

-THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE

inaccuracies in depicting the professionalism and discipline of the men and the relationship between the ranks,

-THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE-

the sentimental depiction of the characters as fresh-faced, full-toothed, sensitive and- mostly- pretty young actors- sorry- young men

-THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE

the lazy, poorly researched and at times fatuous script,

the bloopers of empty belts being fed into the MG, trees changing from summer to winter and back again.(do infra red cameras work in daylight?)

THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE

oh, and the mystifying and grotesque assertion, summing up the story, that the battle of Mons was humiliation for the British Army-

-what was there not to like?

Well, I'd like to point out that the bridge at Nimy was a railway bridge....

I would say that if you want to watch how film techniques can now depict the mayhem of a fire fight then watch 'Saving Private Ryan', 'Band of Brothers' or 'BlackHawk Down.'

If you want to watch a fire fight via a helmet camera then watch the original 'Our War.'

if you want to watch a teleplay about the BEF at Mons, er,.... I'll get me coat.

I think you put it rather succinctly given the level of silliness in the programme

As for the ridiculous aussie, his haircut in real life looked quite restrained http://www.masonicgreatwarproject.org.uk/writeup.php?string=2930

[Gunboat]

So-

Apart from the gimmicky camerawork, the meretricious use of computer graphics and contemporary music,

the inaccuracies of weaponry, weapons handling and uniforms,

-THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE

inaccuracies in depicting the professionalism and discipline of the men and the relationship between the ranks,

-THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE-

the sentimental depiction of the characters as fresh-faced, full-toothed, sensitive and- mostly- pretty young actors- sorry- young men

-THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE

the lazy, poorly researched and at times fatuous script,

the bloopers of empty belts being fed into the MG, trees changing from summer to winter and back again.(do infra red cameras work in daylight?)

THAT RIDICULOUS AUSSIE

oh, and the mystifying and grotesque assertion, summing up the story, that the battle of Mons was humiliation for the British Army-

-what was there not to like?

Well, I'd like to point out that the bridge at Nimy was a railway bridge....

I would say that if you want to watch how film techniques can now depict the mayhem of a fire fight then watch 'Saving Private Ryan', 'Band of Brothers' or 'BlackHawk Down.'

If you want to watch a fire fight via a helmet camera then watch the original 'Our War.'

if you want to watch a teleplay about the BEF at Mons, er,.... I'll get me coat.

A perfectly valid critique save the following

"the sentimental depiction of the characters as fresh-faced, full-toothed, sensitive and- mostly- pretty young actors- sorry- young men"

Did you see the actor that played Sid Godley? That's a face only a mother could love.

[marytin242]

A lot of them were fresh faced young and had a full set of teeth....I did at their age..TEENAGERS..and their mothers loved them..!!

[marytin242]

O.K. being a Newbie on here,I suppose I should chill...and yes do agree the Aussie,s hair was a bit naff..then again you ever see the famous pics of the SAS when it was formed in the desert in W.W.2...it takes a radical sometimes..not all conform..

[mjh]

After posting a rant about the worst WW1 film, I've ever seen (1914), elsewhere on the forum , I have to say that my faith in WW1 drama has been restored. I had no expectations and was pleasantly surprised . I'm in agreement with a great deal of posters . Australian hat , jacket and haircut a bit ott, music sometimes slightly jarring , but overall a first rate attempt at a part of WW1 history, I knew nothing about.

The graphics and the unusual / modern film making techniques were certainly different ( I missed the series Our War , so have no point of reference ) but never distracted from the drama, and indeed added to the sense of urgency .

Thumbs up ! Looking forward to the next in the series - I believe about the Somme . Does any forum member know the topic of the third programme ?

[David Ridgus]

Part 3 is about a tank crew at the Battle of Amiens

David

[SteveGreen]

I was pleased with the programme. One of my distant cousins was killed at Mons on that day fighting with the 2/Suffolks, further to the west of the action in the programme. With kind help from members of the Forum with access to various histories etc, and by downloading the war diary, I've been able to piece together what probably happened to him. But is a dry historians paper. This programme, despite its detailed inaccuracies (probably more to find as people watch it frame by frame on iplayer), some undoubted dramatic licence and some modernism creeping in, gave what the books and records can't: an emotional context. These soldiers had been sitting in barracks or at home as reservists only two weeks beforehand. called up, boat to France, long trains and marches and suddenly into an action none had expected. Professional soldiers yes but few were experienced in fighting.

The use of the headcam was a masterstroke, the uncertainty, the fear, the resilience, the poor intelligence, the lack of preparation to blow the bridges. The pace of the battle was well filmed. Reports do say that the Germans initially advanced as in the film and were mown down by rapid rifle fire. I wasn't concerned about the exact cap badges, the exact version of the rifle or the narrowness of the canal.

It's pointless to expect a retro-documentary in perfect order; all credit to the production crew. There was enough to understand.

[Moonraker]

... As for the ridiculous aussie, his haircut in real life looked quite restrained http://www.masonicgreatwarproject.org.uk/writeup.php?string=2930

I suspect that the makers wanted to depict the popular conception of an Australian soldier, complete with slouch hat. (I'm still very dubious about that.)

Given the large number of people involved in making these productions, surely there was at least one who could have pointed out on set the howler about the corporal/lance corporal being called "sir". And there must have been some technical advice available that could have covered the point.

Moonraker

[Gareth Davies]

After posting a rant about the worst WW1 film, I've ever seen (1914), elsewhere on the forum , I have to say that my faith in WW1 drama has been restored. I had no expectations and was pleasantly surprised . I'm in agreement with a great deal of posters . Australian hat , jacket and haircut a bit ott, music sometimes slightly jarring , but overall a first rate attempt at a part of WW1 history, I knew nothing about.

The graphics and the unusual / modern film making techniques were certainly different ( I missed the series Our War , so have no point of reference ) but never distracted from the drama, and indeed added to the sense of urgency .

Thumbs up ! Looking forward to the next in the series - I believe about the Somme . Does any forum member know the topic of the third programme ?

Follow my link in post #76

[mjh]

I tried following the link ...but nothing

[Gareth Davies]

I tried following the link ...but nothing

Whoops! Sorry. What I was trying to link to is this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b04f8cw8

The tank is 9437 Niveleur, commnaded by 2Lt Mould. The actions of the tank on 8 and 9 Aug 18 are described in Peter Hart's 1918 A Very British Victory.

[jf42]

A perfectly valid critique save the following

"the sentimental depiction of the characters as fresh-faced, full-toothed, sensitive and- mostly- pretty young actors- sorry- young men"

Did you see the actor that played Sid Godley? That's a face only a mother could love.

"-mostly- pretty....."

[Gunboat]

"-mostly- pretty....."

[Stew]

One other thing that caught my eye was before he took off his jacket, Lt Dease was sporting an "Imperial Service" badge above his right breast pocket, am I right in saying he was a Regular Officer and not a Territorial?

Sam

I noticed that as well at the start when he was wearing his tunic, pretty sure he was a regular and would not have worn that badge. Maybe the costume dept had one lying around and though that they just had to use it.

[Black Maria]

I find the 1914 period of the B.E.F fascinating and it has always interested me but I could not take this programme seriously, with Private Godley and his 'gangsta patois'

the 'Australian' maverick officer with the long hair and the South African accent and all the other things mentioned already, I couldn't even say it gave me an idea of what

it must have been like at Mons. Hopefully one day someone will come up with a decent docu/ drama or film about the battle but this 'Horrible Histories' type version was not

it, in my view.

[Scalyback]

I find the 1914 period of the B.E.F fascinating and it has always interested me but I could not take this programme seriously, with Private Godley and his 'gangsta patois'

the 'Australian' maverick officer with the long hair and the South African accent and all the other things mentioned already, I couldn't even say it gave me an idea of what

it must have been like at Mons. Hopefully one day someone will come up with a decent docu/ drama or film about the battle but this 'Horrible Histories' type version was not

it, in my view.

However the Horrible Histories special was good. A few howlers but for children under 11 a very good primer to learn more. Not perfect but youth I work with have more questions over WW1.

[Black Maria]

However the Horrible Histories special was good. A few howlers but for children under 11 a very good primer to learn more. Not perfect but youth I work with have more questions over WW1.

I have not seen the WW1, but the ones I have seen have been entertaining as well as educational.... your right, I shouldn't have used that analogy

[mark.topham]

I think broadcasters underestimate the young.

I think this is the most important point with producers imposing what they think the "young" would like; understand; etc.

Regarding the programme. Not too going to get too bothered and hot under the collar about the inaccuracies but just a few hours on the internet by the most junior researcher would have provided enough information to at least get the "right look" there are some excellent pictures available on the web. There is even one of the 4th Fusiliers resting in Mons just before the action. How much more do you need for accuracy?

The actor playing Lt Dease was a ringer for him. Take a look at a picture of the real man. However, don't think he would have been in his shirt sleeves though. Not exactly setting a example for his men? As for Lt Steele wearing a driza-bone; a slouch hat and trench boots (not in vogue till at least 1915) suggests that to establish the identity of a character requires significant overt signals. So any portrayal of an American serving in the British army at the time - and there were a few - requires them to wear a Stetson, cowboy boots carry a six shooter and shout "yeeha" a lot!

The point I was making was who the people were and how they behaved allowed them to do what they did. Surely this is important? It would make it easier for modern generations to understand how and why men of 1914 did what they did.

A point missed by the producers was the BEF of 1914 was made up of significant numbers of reservists who had soldiered in South Africa and on the North West Frontier. So the men were mainly mature seasoned troops not gibbering half wits that they make Godley out to be (ok he did like his booze, but that was not an uncommon thing in 1914). Shades of the representation of Pte Hook in Zulu.

I also firmly believe 'Carry on Up the Khyber' gives a more honest portrayal of Officer man relations than the first episode of Our Great War did.

Right! off my soap box again.

So too summarise. Forgetting the inaccuracies the programme wasn't that bad. A missed opportunity certainly but a step in the right direction definitely.

Bom T

P.S. Bullets don't swish when they go past your ear they CRACK! very loudly. That I know.

Edited 14 August , 2014 by Bom T