Jump to content
Great War Forum

Remembered Today:

Sign in to follow this  
Steven Broomfield

BBC2 Scotland 100Days to Victory

Recommended Posts

Steven Broomfield
8 hours ago, IanA said:

Jings! Crivvens! Help ma boab! Ah watched (through ma fingers) the second pairt o' the series. Michty me! Ah niver kent that yon Haig chappie spoke in mangled Scots (seein' as he wis a toff) an' yon Horne!! Whit kind o' speakin' wis yon? Yin mair thing (Ah could gang oan, an oan, an oan) Ah cannae mind Haig wi' a pipe afore. The Lord be thankit it didnae gang oan till 1919 or we micht hae had a third episode. Dumfoonert! 

 

Thank you, Pa Broon, for that incisive analysis. Translations will be available just as soon as we decipher. I've got the runes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phil andrade

At the risk of being a bit boring and questioning the narrative, if memory serves me the Australians deploying for the big attack at Amiens were hit by a German attack a day or two before, and got quite badly knocked about, with heavy shelling doing a lot of damage.

The much vaunted secrecy and surprise of the operation is brought into question.  I don’t think this was mentioned in the programme.

 

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeMeech
24 minutes ago, phil andrade said:

At the risk of being a bit boring and questioning the narrative, if memory serves me the Australians deploying for the big attack at Amiens were hit by a German attack a day or two before, and got quite badly knocked about, with heavy shelling doing a lot of damage.

The much vaunted secrecy and surprise of the operation is brought into question.  I don’t think this was mentioned in the programme.

 

Phil

Hi

 

I believe that was III Corps, which was also part of the operation.

 

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phil andrade

At the risk of being a bit boring and questioning the narrative, if memory serves me the Australians deploying for the big attack at Amiens were hit by a German attack a day or two before, and got quite badly knocked about, with heavy shelling doing a lot of damage.

The much vaunted secrecy and surprise of the operation is brought into question.  I don’t think this was mentioned in the programme.

 

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phil andrade

Sorry about that double post : don’t know how that happened.

 

I’ve just watched part 2 on my iPad , and feel inclined to cast a better judgement : other British troops are mentioned, and - blimey ! - even the New Zealand troops.

 

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interested
7 hours ago, Steven Broomfield said:

I've got the runes

That's dialect for what, exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
squirrel

It's a medical condition...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fattyowls
4 hours ago, phil andrade said:

Sorry about that double post : don’t know how that happened.

 

I’ve just watched part 2 on my iPad , and feel inclined to cast a better judgement : other British troops are mentioned, and - blimey ! - even the New Zealand troops.

 

Phil

 

New Zealand was involved in WW1? Who'd of thought it......

 

Pete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phil andrade

In proportion to population, New Zealand suffered a heavier loss of life in those Hundred Days than the other Dominions.

 

We just don’t hear much about it.

 

The words “ New Zealand “ were mentioned twice - maybe three times - in the second episode of the programme.

 

If the Kiwis have their own special poppies, I would like to buy a few for this centennial .

 

Phil

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Fattyowls
3 hours ago, phil andrade said:

If the Kiwis have their own special poppies, I would like to buy a few for this centennial .

 

Put me down for nine.

 

Pete.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phil andrade
13 hours ago, Fattyowls said:

 

Put me down for nine.

 

Pete.

 

Pete,

 

You’ll forgive me, I hope, if I draw a statistical  analogy - using poppies - regarding the Dominions and the UK and the cost in lives of the so called Hundred Days.

 

I used CWGC data, and investigated the number of commemorations for the Army in France and Belgium for the period 8 August to 11 November 1918.

 

I then assessed the loss of life of each of the  Dominions and the UK as a ratio of their total population.

 

Using the criterion of one hundred poppies representing the proportionate loss for the UK, ninety seven would be bestowed on Canada, seventy seven on Australia and one hundred and forty one on New Zealand.

 

I know this is a bit nerdish of me, but I feel the numbers make a big impact in emotional terms.

 

A friend of mine in Canada has been discussing these battles with me online.  His own Uncle was killed at Valenciennes , literally within a week or so of the Armistice .  He was under age.  We agreed to swap poppies : he sent me a dozen Canadian poppies, and I reciprocated with our British counterparts. The Canadian poppies are more luxuriant than ours, and they look exquisite when a little Canadian flag is inserted into the middle.  I’ve given some to my grandchildren, and made them very aware of the role played by Canada in the final battles of the Great War.

 

How I wish that I’d tried the same excercise with some Kiwi cousins of ours !

 

Editing : This Sunday will mark the centennial of the death of my Canadian friend’s uncle.

 

Frank Thomas Grafton, Private, 72nd Bn. Canadian Infantry.

 

04/11/1918

 

Aged 17

 

Valenciennes

 

🌺    🇨🇦 

 

I am wearing one of those Canadian poppies as I post this .

 

 

 

 

 

 

Phil

Edited by phil andrade

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MikeMeech
On ‎31‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 13:25, phil andrade said:

Sorry about that double post : don’t know how that happened.

 

I’ve just watched part 2 on my iPad , and feel inclined to cast a better judgement : other British troops are mentioned, and - blimey ! - even the New Zealand troops.

 

Phil

Hi

 

I have now watched the second part, it was 'better' than the first, mentioning some Army commanders, but probably only because they used some quotes from them so needed to name them.  I still await a decent production on the '100 days' but unlikely now.  Considering the BEF had five Armies in the advance, alongside the French, US Army and the Belgians I presume it would be hard to simplify and give details.  Also I expect that the development of the 'new' tactics and methods of warfare 'combined arms', mentioned but not really explained (some things were 'described' in part, but the actual progressive development of the 'systems' would have been too difficult to put over I suppose?), was classed as too 'boring' and also not just down to the two 'outsiders', Monash and Currie, so would have 'confused' the viewer.

 

Although I do not expect much accuracy from re-enactments and CGI, I do wonder why the Sopwith 1 1/2 Strutter was being used to indicate aviation use in 1918, especially when TVAL have produced flying RE.8s which would be more apt for 1918? 

 

However, better than no production on the '100 Days' I suppose.

 

Mike

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ron Clifton
On 31/10/2018 at 17:35, Fattyowls said:

 

New Zealand was involved in WW1? Who'd of thought it......

 

Pete.

I have heard it said that in Australia, the word ANZAC is pronounced with a silent N and Z.

 

Ro

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
phil andrade

The upshot of the programme was successful in that it left the layman with a hard hitting and important message : the warfare of 1914 would have been understandable to the soldiers of the Napoleonic era ; the fighting of 1918 would allow today’s troops to feel at home.

 

I might not remember it correctly: but I think that was the gist of it.

 

Plenty of flaws, but that bit worked, for me at least.

 

Phil

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Open Bolt

My belated ha'penny's worth is that the second episode was far better, less nationalistic and conveyed something of the transition in tactics - infiltration and dribbling between shell holes. So why do the 1918 re-enactments always make it appear as though everyone is shoulder to shoulder? I appreciate that never more than a section is shown but I want to ball at them to spread out... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Norrette

Just watching (fast forwarding) my recording of part 1. I agree with most comments above, and this one won't make my archive. Thought Currie was of larger build than his looky-likey and that the creeping barrage was first implemented at Vimy Ridge in 1917. (Btw most Canadians were ex pat Brits, I think)

 

Wonder how my g-grandfather in the 11th South Lancs got his gsw on the 21st March. ;-)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark Hone

The creeping barrage was first used by some units of the British Army at Loos in 1915. Contrary to popular belief it was employed by a few Divisions (e.g. 30th) on the First Day of the Somme.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Gunga Din
23 minutes ago, Mark Hone said:

The creeping barrage was first used by some units of the British Army at Loos in 1915. Contrary to popular belief it was employed by a few Divisions (e.g. 30th) on the First Day of the Somme.

 

As one might expect from the BBC both episodes were riddled with errors.

 

On the first use of 'creeping barrages', I think it was used in a more rudimentary form earlier than this ..but you point is valid en masse

Edited by Gunga Din

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Mark Hone

Mr Hone's First Law of Inventions: 'You can always find an earlier example.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Steven Broomfield

 

I have just watched Part 2 and am minded to agree that it was better than Part 1. It was slightly lessof a pile of steaming horse's poo, but certainly still a pile of steaming horse's poo. I can't really think where to begin, and life is too short, but really? That's the best anyone can do?

 

Two questions I will ask:

 

1. Was a pipe issued specifically to all GW Generals (irrespective of nationality) so they had something to tap on maps while planning battles?

2. What accent did the real General Horne speak with? The chap 'playing' (if that's the word) Horne seemed to have something that drifted beween Scottish/Irish/Canadian and was extremely difficult to pin down.

 

Overall, however, the thing that depressed me most was the extremely old-fashioned style of the thing. Talking Heads in book-lined studies, poor CGI, clips of old film repeated ad nauseam (whether relevant or not), shockingly poor 'dramatisations', imposing music, portentous voice-overs, constant revisiting of events that had already happened and a general feeling that the whole thing was being done by numbers.

 

Probably not the worst thing inflicted on us during the centenary, but possibly the biggest waste of resources and money: it must have cost a packet to make.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...