Why haven't they...

[macwilkin]

I think the U.S. did declare war on Germany. Perhaps, I will look that up if I get a chance today.

Only after Germany declared war on the US, December 11, 1941:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/3532401.stm

T.

[Bugbear]

Only after Germany declared war on the US, December 11, 1941:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/3532401.stm

T.

Yes, but I don't thank that was what was said in the post I was looking at. I will go back and reread it carefully.
In a quick search I did find that and also what you were saying about the U.S. fighting with Germany before the formal declaration of war.

[Dan R Porter]

I think the U.S. did declare war on Germany. Perhaps, I will look that up if I get a chance today.

I believe the term used was "Wage war."

[macwilkin]

I believe the term used was "Wage war."

See my post above.

T.

[Swampthing]

We've already got 'The Longest Day,' so why not?

[Bigkahuna]

You left out a personal favorite of mine, "Cockleshell Heroes".

[McClef]

Yes, I am very much aware that Richard Todd played Gibson; my point was that The Dam Busters should not be remade!

T.

The charm of the black and white picture and some of the wonky (by today's standard) special effects.

But with the quality acting and Eric Coats' stirring music who could want to remake it? The PC Brigade would rename Gibson's dog for a start.

Those American films made during this period more often than not were concerned with life in occupied Europe-- Hollywood doing it's bit to convince the American public, which was largely isolationist, that there were good reasons to enter the war on the side of the French, Belgians, Dutch, Austrians, Norwegians, Danes, and yes, the British. No, but it did end after the U.S. came in. (No doubt something to do with 16 million troops the US sent to fight in all theaters of the conflict.) I really think it all depends on whose ox is getting gored.

Citing examples of these movies would be of interest. I have always understood that it was the broadcasts of Ed Murrow that had the greatest effect.

I am sure many people in Britain were unhappy with the Mel Gibson film, The Patriot because of its portrayal of the British. Well, suprise, suprise, the picture made money in the UK, and did extremely well in -- India, where they may not exactly share your views regarding historical inaccuracy. I remember laughing my **** off listening to British film critics complaining that all of the main characters in the film Amadeus had American accents-- what did they expect? German accents? No, it was a case of British cinematic "chauvinism" because RADA-trained actors weren't cast in any of the principal roles.

Well Gibson can get away with things that many others cannot. He constructed an English villain full of ambition to be the "bad guy" and nobody likes a rotten apple. I look forward to a movie featuring Benedict Arnold.

Simon Callow was RADA trained but he then had to do a silly American accent so he would sound more German. Only the Italian parts were allowed an actor with an English accent. However Americans like F. Murray Abraham managed a passable English accent (ah but he was playing an Italian wasn't he!)

Britain has a tiny film industry when compared to Hollywood. And Britain is pretty much unsurpassed when it comes to making "British" films. But, when it comes to making movies, Hollywood is the gold standard. Even if they sometimes take liberties with history.

Yet Hollywood still likes to use British film studios to make some of them. It is, however, the exception to the rule when they do not "take liberties with history."

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Citing examples of these movies would be of interest.

Rather than recite dozens of films I'll give you just one example: The Great Dictator, released in 1940. This was Charlie Chaplin's first all talking picture and, although nominally a comedy, in it Chaplin departed from his usual slapstick to include satire and social commentary. In the film he plays the dual roles of a Jewish barber in the ghetto, as well as Adenoid Hynkel, dictator of Tomania. Hitler's entire entourage is brilliantly satirized, as is his chief ally, Mussolini-- in this instance "Benzino Napaloni", the dictator of Bacteria, as played by Jack Oakie. The satire and social commentary was not lost on American audiences, and for the first time since the war had began, grass-roots Americans began to be openly hostile toward Hitler and his regime.

Well Gibson can get away with things that many others cannot. He constructed an English villain full of ambition to be the "bad guy" and nobody likes a rotten apple. I look forward to a movie featuring Benedict Arnold.

Just as soon as I finish the musical version of Oswald Mosley and Lord Ha-Ha In Love I'll get right on it.

Simon Callow was RADA trained but he then had to do a silly American accent so he would sound more German. Only the Italian parts were allowed an actor with an English accent. However Americans like F. Murray Abraham managed a passable English accent (ah but he was playing an Italian wasn't he!)

That, Trefor, is called acting.

Yet Hollywood still likes to use British film studios to make some of them.

There are a couple of reasons for using British studios:
1) The crews speak English, and work to an American standard.
2) Because very few films are produced in the UK it is often easier to get studio space (ie: sound stages) in the UK than at home in Hollywood.
3) Financing. Because the money comes from all over, it is sometimes necessary to give a film a certain "domestic" content in order to give investors a tax break. A film shot in the UK qualifies for all sorts of EU tax advantages because of its "EU content"; that is the percentage of the films budget in time or spend that takes place in the EU.

It is, however, the exception to the rule when they do not "take liberties with history."

It's called Dramatic License, and it goes back to the days of Shakespeare. You remember him. He was English, and he never took liberties with history. Did he?

[McClef]

Rather than recite dozens of films I'll give you just one example: The Great Dictator, released in 1940. This was Charlie Chaplin's first all talking picture and, although nominally a comedy, in it Chaplin departed from his usual slapstick to include satire and social commentary. In the film he plays the dual roles of a Jewish barber in the ghetto, as well as Adenoid Hynkel, dictator of Tomania. Hitler's entire entourage is brilliantly satirized, as is his chief ally, Mussolini-- in this instance "Benzino Napaloni", the dictator of Bacteria, as played by Jack Oakie. The satire and social commentary was not lost on American audiences, and for the first time since the war had began, grass-roots Americans began to be openly hostile toward Hitler and his regime.

A brilliant film indeed but it hardly fits your defence of Hollywood at the time.

Chaplin remained a Brit throughout his entire Hollywood career and never became an American Citizen. He began preparation on the movie even before Britain went to war with Germany and he later stated that had he known the full horror of the Nazi regime he would never have made it. It was touch and go if it would ever be released and he had to largely finance it himself and in the teeth of alarm messages coming from United Artists.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Great_Dictator

So citing other examples of Hollywood's input in that period would still be welcome.

Just as soon as I finish the musical version of Oswald Mosley and Lord Ha-Ha In Love I'll get right on it.

Must be a long distance love story!

It's called Dramatic License, and it goes back to the days of Shakespeare. You remember him. He was English, and he never took liberties with history. Did he?

There is a world of difference between dramatic licence and wholesale rewriting of history which is less about taking liberties and more like taking the pi$$.

[macwilkin]

I'll mention another example of a movie made in 1941 to counter the isolationalist sentiment in the USA: Sgt. York, with Gary Cooper in the starring role.

The real Sgt. Alvin York was an outspoken interventionist, and had a number of public debates in the media with the noted isolationist Charles Lindbergh, who made a very vitrolic anti-Semitic, anti-British speech in Des Moines, Iowa as part of the "America First" committee:

http://www.charleslindbergh.com/amer...rst/speech.asp

Every time I read it, it makes me sick to my stomach.

T.