'Our World War' - BBC3 series

[NigelS]

Apparently tonight's episode (14th August) on the Somme has an interactive version linked to it Click; don't think it's a trail I'll be heading down though - Tetris is pretty much a far as my gaming skills go - or I should say went - and so far, as far as I want them to go.

NigelS

[Scalyback]

I just get buffering all the time. Tis not my connection, it is fibre optic!

[David Filsell]

Was Steele from Oz?

Did he wear a slouch at Mons?

Did he wear a Barbour or the Oz version there off?

I doubt it but ....

[Black Maria]

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?

In Gerald Gliddon's V.Cs book (1914) it says that Dease, before the battle, had ordered that flour sacks be filled with shingle to afford protection for his machine guns

and had taken off his coat and had helped to shovel the shingle into the sacks, but like you, I doubt he was without his tunic when he died.

[Gunboat]

I am afraid I have found the second episode to be utter bilge.

I couldn't get past the stupid woollen hat under the helmet - in July (yes some spotty skateboarder might wear such a hat all year round) And the ridiculous Mohican attachment to the helmet! The dialogue was awful.

I considered it to be as bad as The Crimson Field.

[dave]

Agree with gunboat just as bad as the first episode but if the youth of today sit and watch it then maybe they may get a little understanding of war.. But only a little as the programme is that bad sadly.

[slick63]

I`m not quite sure where they got the idea that William Hunt was wandering around the woods, his court martial seemed to tell a different story. I thought this series was supposed to be based on fact ? http://blindfoldandalone.wordpress.com/the-prosecuted/surnames-h-i/hunt-private-william-1957-18manchester-regiment/

[Knotty]

I am confused, William Hunt shot for desertion 14/11/1916 offence took place 12-16th Oct, this was all supposed to happen in July 1916.

I guess Dave and Gunboat have summed it up, shame as after watching first episode again I was of the opinion it was ok.

John

[marytin242]

Mmm, I also thought the first episode was a lot better..did anyone spot he guy sharpening the knuckle knife. ? USA one if I, m not mistaken, I stand to be corrected, being a newbie.lol

[Gunboat]

Having calmed down a bit - the battle scenes were quite good but unlike last week where the sheer relentless pace of it kept you at the edge of the seat - this lacked the pace or the drama.

[LEUZEWOOD]

Was it me, or did Trones Wood look rather peaceful and picturesque for the time of year?!!

[Mark Hone]

Presumably the BBC3 budget didn't stretch to employing a technical adviser like Taff Gillingham.

[Steven Broomfield]

Well, controversialist to the end, I can say I thoroughly enjoyed it. Maybe I'm getting doddery, but I'm happy to accept that, on BBC3, I'm not the target audience, and able to accept that the series is based on fact rather than a true representation of fact. On that basis I can accept the inaccuracies and anachronisms.

The good intentions - I think this is a sincerely-done series with the intention of making the youth audience appreciate what men went through - shine through, and the efforts to attract the attention of the BBC3 audience are laudable. It's on after Don't tell the Bride for goodness' sake - what do you expect. It's certainly more sincere than some f the shoddy knock-off journalism of much of the Beeb's coverage so far.

The use of Godley (week 1) and Kennedy (week 2) speaking from the grave at the end of each programme is inspired.

And I also found the use of Teenage Kicks over the recruiting scnes served well to sum up (for a youth audience) the spirit of adventure and excitement for Kennedy and his mate.

Finally, the discussion between Kennedy and the Padre over the ethics of capitalpunishment was a very good summation of the arguments and handled extremely impartially.

Well done, BBC3. Good work.

[Gunboat]

I actually agree about the use of teenage kicks but found the filming that accompanied it a bit stupid paticulatly the hat.

I don't deny it is well intended but why is it excusable for BBC3 to play to the audience but we universally (and rightly) condemned The Crimson Field) for playing to its target audience which is the Downton Abbey/Holby cross over audience.

If you want to approach a subject like about execution for cowardice and desertion don't you have a duty to get the facts right if you are taking about a real case.

Some of our favourite films play hard and fast with the truth Zulu for example a quick dip into Skindles and every innacuracy is laid bare - but we all love it. Would we love it if Chard came out wearing an Narive American war bonnet and Private Hook wore a beanie hat? Because to me that's how grating the wooly hat and that ridiculous attachment to the helmet was. It makes the slouch hat matter seem credible.

There is stuff to commend - I like the modern filming techniques -I can accept the music - the battle scenes are good and not video game footage.

But to trying to project a modern youth into that situation is a step too far - better to show how those young men were the same as our young men today.

[paulgranger]

This pretty well-known photo may have had something to do with the character wearing the roll of material. The man second right has what is probably a rolled up sandbag on his helmet, doubtless to be used as a helmet cover in due course. As regards the woolly hat under the helmet, I think that's a device to show something about the character wearing it, and in it's way, it's not totally dissimilar to photos of men wearing helmets/caps over balaclavas - not common, but not unheard of.

Once again, I thought there was much to commend, though Trones Wood did seem eerily quiet, and it seemed a bit chilly for July. Another reason for a woolly hat!

[widavies]

I thoroughly enjoyed it....especially the Scottish part with the dry officer handing out a chit!!

Will

[Gunboat]

This pretty well-known photo may have had something to do with the character wearing the roll of material. The man second right has what is probably a rolled up sandbag on his helmet, doubtless to be used as a helmet cover in due course. As regards the woolly hat under the helmet, I think that's a device to show something about the character wearing it, and in it's way, it's not totally dissimilar to photos of men wearing helmets/caps over balaclavas - not common, but not unheard of.

Once again, I thought there was much to commend, though Trones Wood did seem eerily quiet, and it seemed a bit chilly for July. Another reason for a woolly hat!

I'm not trying to be picky about this

I take the point about the photo but had it been sacking on his helmet I may have thought it looked odd but assumed it was to going to be used for the purpose we knew they were used.

Yes had it been a cap comforter or a balaclava (ala Baldrick) and it was winter I wouldn't have questioned it - I possibly would even have forgiven that style of hat was it not deliberately styled as modern youths wear them and was worn throughout as a fashion accessory and that is just silly.

As for the strip of goatskin - I don't think it was a reference to the photo i think it was a definite stylisation - and owed more to Platoon or Apocolypse Now.

Could I say for certain that a Tommy somewhere on the Western Front didn't stick a strip of goatskin on his helmet no of course not because I can't possibly know - bit would you like that to be seen to be representative of a typical tommy from a Pals Battalion?

Does it not seen odd that the 18th Manchesters alone pushed the boundaries of military millinery

I accept the of the programme is meant to capture the feel of the Our War series which showed the modern army in Afghanistan - but these soldiers didn't stick strange adornments on their helmets either

And if they did a drama of squaddies in Afghanistan (or the Falklands or Gulf Wars) and for no apparent reason someone stuck a strip of goatskin on their helmet - would we not think it just as odd? Yes we would so why do it in this.

If there was context I could possibly forgive it

"Here Harris - a shilling if you put that bit o' goatskin on your helmet for a week"

"You're on!"

"HARRIS - get that stupid thing of your helmet!"

"Oh come on sir it's a bit of a joke!"

I could buy that (just about) because it's got context.

But to be fair I thought the Highland troops looked splendid.

So if it wasn't for those gimmicks that in my view was a step too far maybe it wouldn't have been so bad and I will watch it again and try and get passed those things.

[paulgranger]

TBH I watched the episode in less than ideal circumstances, and thought the helmet adornment was sacking, and not some sort of coxcomb. I will also have another look at the programme, without, hopefully, canine interruptions.

[Steven Broomfield]

Whole world's going to the dogs.

[GRANVILLE]

I think its important that comments are made because you can be sure the producers and would-be producers will read and consider.

I've watched both programmes and wish I could say I'm bowled over by the quality of the productions which are certainly very impressive, and even without Taff's input I think someone has done some fairly thorough research to try and get things as 'right' as they can from a setting point of view - the historical accuracy may well be another matter. The only aspects which hold me back are the attempts to bring the production into a the modern age by the inserion of modern pop music etc. To me, this just grates and jars. Out of time with us today, it may well be, but I imagine the suffering Tommy will have had the words of songs by the likes of Vesta Tilley droning on in his head rather than anything by The Undertones and Teenage Kicks etc. Much more likely: 'It's a (chuffin') long, long way to Tipperary'!

I also don't buy the use of certain language, even if delivered in an authentic Mancunian accent. You only had to listen to the actual central characters recorded voice of years later, to know his youth will hardly have been as portrayed.

These niggles apart, I believe these programmes are in a class of their own and certainly look forward to the third.

I also agree that the photo in post 116 will almost certainly be the inspiration for the furry growth across the top of the helmet - I can't think of any other photo which might lead anyone to think this was at all a common practice.

David

[mark.topham]

In response to Blackmaria.

I think I have figured out why Dease was only wearing a shirt in the action scene. The jacked was probably a loan garment to the costume department (hence the Imperial Service badge already attached) and very expensive to replace if you cover it in fake blood and put holes in it. Now a shirt a can be found for a few quid and you can do what you want with it.

There is no way an officer of the British Regular Army in 1914 would have gone into action in shirt sleeves (no doubt I will be corrected) for goodness sake this was a generation that dressed for dinner. Contemporary accounts state officers didn't even 'bob' (duck) when under fire(See Bernard John Denore's account in Everyman at War 1930) so to be seen without his jacket??

Bom T

Edited 15 August , 2014 by Bom T

[Sepoy]

I just thought that the bloke had been attacked by a squirrel.........

[Guest Hpass]

Hi this is my first post on the forum - hello everyone.

I have only seen the first episode, I am far from any form of expert on WW1, which is why I joined the forum in the first place. However I found the first episode both 'thrilling' and incredibly moving at the same time.

When Godley was given the order to cover the withdrawal, it was very likely issued on the understanding, that he was going to die. I very much doubt he or anyone else expected him to survive.

It took a brave man to accept that order; and if for all of the errors, people take something away from the programme about how individuals find themselves in terrible situations, and the sacrifices they are prepared to make for others, then it served its purpose.

My understanding is that Godley manned the Vickers for 2 hours covering the withdrawal is that correct?

[Moonraker]

I enjoyed the second episode more than the first but, as with the slouch-hatted Australian officer in the first, the Mohican attachment served only to distract. It may (or may not) have been "a nice, authentic touch", but every time it appeared I found myself wondering about it.

I`m not quite sure where they got the idea that William Hunt was wandering around the woods, his court martial seemed to tell a different story. I thought this series was supposed to be based on fact ? http://blindfoldandalone.wordpress.com/the-prosecuted/surnames-h-i/hunt-private-william-1957-18manchester-regiment/

There does seem to have been an "adjustment" of the facts, perhaps in the interests of drama.

BTW, to pick at nits, surely the padre would know the Lord's Prayer by heart and not need to read it?

Moonraker

[Steven Broomfield]

My older daughter, Emily, was home for last week's episode and watched it with me; she watched last night's episode on iPlayer after she got in from the movies (Inbetweeners 2, I believe). She's 24 (don't tell her I told you) and thought them both excellent. Having had 24 years of her father's interest to live with I suppose it's understandable she watched them, but as the "target audience" I believe she is a good judge: she thought them both great. She told me she cried at the end of last night.

That's fine with me. If other viewers of her age group also found the stories moving and memorable, I'm happy with them.