Television & Radio Programmes of Naval Interest

[Mitch Hinde]

Originally Posted by chris westwood

most people neither know nor care about the mionutiae of naval uniforms and technicalities.
What matters is whether it worked as a piece of drama. I thought some of it was brilliant, some of it was mundane

Hi

If the researchers can't be bothered to get the small things right how can we rely on them getting the rest of it correct?

Mitch Hinde

[chris westwood]

Originally Posted by Mitch Hinde

Hi

If the researchers can't be bothered to get the small things right how can we rely on them getting the rest of it correct?

Mitch Hinde

it was a piece of drama not a documentary. At least one of the characters was fictional.

It worked for me once it got going.

[Ednamay]

Yes, a lot was questionable, badges, forms of address, 'romance', (which gave us a reminder of German civiian life ashore), etc, etc, but I hope it gained the interest of the man (and woman) in the street. We see so many American versions of 'what happened in the war', it is essential that we keep to the forefront our own involvement, and the chivalry of the German Uboat commander. War is a dirty business, let's give honour where honour is due.

Edna

[Rob Hoole]

Originally Posted by Mitch Hinde

Hi

If the researchers can't be bothered to get the small things right how can we rely on them getting the rest of it correct?

Mitch Hinde

I enjoyed the story without getting too worked up about the fine details (I'm tending to do more of that as I get older - it's much better for my blood pressure). Anyway, I reckon police and medical staff have far more reason to complain about the accuracy of TV dramas (not that many of us would notice the errors). I was particularly struck by this:

Young doctors learn bad habits from TV medical dramas

A recent study shows that medical dramas like ER have actually been influencing how real life doctors perform procedures.

When physicians at an Alberta hospital asked why so many medical students and residents were using a faulty technique for inserting life-saving breathing tubes in patients, they received an unexpected answer: It's television's fault.

Many of the doctors in training said they had learned the procedure from watching medical dramas. And a subsequent analysis of the show ER revealed its fictional MDs and nurses performed intubations incorrectly almost every time...

[Dave Hutson]

Originally Posted by Ednamay

Yes, a lot was questionable, badges, forms of address, 'romance', (which gave us a reminder of German civiian life ashore), etc, etc, but I hope it gained the interest of the man (and woman) in the street. We see so many American versions of 'what happened in the war', it is essential that we keep to the forefront our own involvement, and the chivalry of the German Uboat commander. War is a dirty business, let's give honour where honour is due.

Edna

Agreed Edna, and also with you Rob.

I wonder what Hartenstein's fate would have been had he survived the last patrol or the war. Would he have had Doenitz's protection against Hitler during the war, or, would he have been tried as a War Criminal after the war.

Personally, I think it was a tragedy that he came upon the Laconia, but his subsequent action in trying to make some amends for his action earns his some sympathy [probably a bad word] and credence as a humanitarian. I find the action of the US Liberator crew to be questionable in light of what they must have seen but only access to the true reports and witness statements would reveal the true facts.

It was after all an adaptation and as Rob implies [I think] too much fact would have put some people off watching what was a part of our maritime history in WWII.

Verdict: Quite well done BBC but could do better on the detail aspects.

Dave H

[chris westwood]

maybre hartenstein was wrong to rescue the survivors
maybe the bomber crew were right.

[Dave Hutson]

And maybe I won't return fire.

[harry.gibbon]

Originally Posted by Dave Hutson

Agreed Edna, and also with you Rob.

I wonder what Hartenstein's fate would have been had he survived the last patrol or the war. Would he have had Doenitz's protection against Hitler during the war, or, would he have been tried as a War Criminal after the war.

Personally, I think it was a tragedy that he came upon the Laconia, but his subsequent action in trying to make some amends for his action earns his some sympathy [probably a bad word] and credence as a humanitarian. I find the action of the US Liberator crew to be questionable in light of what they must have seen but only access to the true reports and witness statements would reveal the true facts.

It was after all an adaptation and as Rob implies [I think] too much fact would have put some people off watching what was a part of our maritime history in WWII.

Verdict: Quite well done BBC but could do better on the detail aspects.

Dave H

That summation will do fine for me Dave

Little h

[harry.gibbon]

Originally Posted by Jan Steer

but as an retired matelot with a Masters degree in creative writing I feel that I have earned the right!

best wishes
Janm

Jan, in my opinion you certainly have and BZ on your achievement Sir.

Whether your 'Masters' be long since achieved or only recently, you did right good - that man!!!

Now; since reading of such ... I've been thinking how by using the same words'ish I could respond 'appropriately' to someone with your teaching/lecturing skills ... so here goes :-


As for me; 'well, as a retired matelot, I constantly wish that I could just master a degree of creativity whilst writing'

Little h

[chris westwood]

Originally Posted by harry.gibbon

Chris, I don't doubt there is some truth in this element of your post.
However, I would suggest/suppose that MOST people/members of this Forum would both know and care!!!!!
I would suggest that it is the Forum members who count, not the wider transient public viewers/readers.

Little h

I disagree
the people making the play made it for the general public to watch notsolely a few naval history enthusiasts.
most people ie the vast majority of the people watching the drama wouldn't know or care. I knew but I didn't care: apart from the ASDA wafer thin ham for some odd reason.

[Ednamay]

One thing that concerns me is that the Laconia was listed as a troopship and, as such, the Germans would have seen her as a logical target.
BUT (a) the civilians? (b) the Italian prisoners? Who made those decisions??????
Edna

[INVINCIBLE]

Originally Posted by chris westwood

I disagree
the people making the play made it for the general public to watch notsolely a few naval history enthusiasts.
most people ie the vast majority of the people watching the drama wouldn't know or care. I knew but I didn't care: apart from the ASDA wafer thin ham for some odd reason.

Chris,

You are of course absolutely right “…the vast majority wouldn’t know or care..” - perceptive but sadly very accurate. It is a growing facet of our “…am I bovvered culture?”. I can well understand the BBC, in these cash strapped days not wanting to waste money to get things right to a level of accuracy that most people are insufficiently interested in, or too ignorant to appreciate (the law of diminishing returns). There is a popular technical term for this syndrome; ‘dumbing down to the lowest common denominator’ (speed of the slowest ship in the convoy). One wonders how many will have reflected on the various rather serious issues that lay behind the film. But hey does that matter - it was good entertainment for a couple of hours and that is all that seems to really count nowadays. I have not seen what the viewing figures were but I hope enough came back for the second episode on the following evening.

Originally Posted by INVINCIBLE

I can well understand the BBC, in these cash strapped days not wanting to waste money..

Then how come the BBC can employ 250 weather presenters nationwide, on 60k each, to tell us this vital bit of information about our weather?

They seem to open a new box of presenters every other week!

The money could be better spent on 'detail advisors' in good dramas, and make everyone 'appy!..

[Destroyerman]

Originally Posted by ekd

Then how come the BBC can employ 250 weather presenters nationwide, on 60k each, to tell us this vital bit of information about our weather?

They seem to open a new box of presenters every other week!

The money could be better spent on 'detail advisors' in good dramas, and make everyone 'appy!..

..... not to mention three overpaid and overdressed female presenters to host "Rip-off Britain". Surely the series could have been presented by just one EFFICIENT and EXPERIENCED host.

Yet another excuse to throw more luvvies at us in these celebrity driven times.

As for part two of the programme in question; having purposely missed it, I gleaned more accurate information on the subject in 15 minutes by researching online. Perhaps even on Wiki.

Each to his/her own.

[chris westwood]

Originally Posted by INVINCIBLE

Chris,

You are of course absolutely right “…the vast majority wouldn’t know or care..” - perceptive but sadly very accurate. It is a growing facet of our “…am I bovvered culture?”. I can well understand the BBC, in these cash strapped days not wanting to waste money to get things right to a level of accuracy that most people are insufficiently interested in, or too ignorant to appreciate (the law of diminishing returns). There is a popular technical term for this syndrome; ‘dumbing down to the lowest common denominator’ (speed of the slowest ship in the convoy). One wonders how many will have reflected on the various rather serious issues that lay behind the film. But hey does that matter - it was good entertainment for a couple of hours and that is all that seems to really count nowadays. I have not seen what the viewing figures were but I hope enough came back for the second episode on the following evening.

I would guess that the vast majority wouldn't know or care throughout history. It's badges on uniforms for heaven's sake. Again it wasn't a documentary it was a piece of drama. It was a sophisticated piece of drama, with some top class actors, and high production values: not 'dumbed down' and certainly not cheap. I reflected on the serious issues on this very thread a couple of posts ago, nobody has taken up the implied offer.
I'm proud to live in this society in 2011. It has major problems. It always has, but people are fundamentally decent just like they always have been. I don't drive, I use public transport. 9 times out of 10 the rude and the bad mannered aren't of 'this' generation. I've helped to bring 5 children up-three of whom are step children. They have grown up to be fine people, all their friends are fine people. They are members of the 'today's society' you malign. I can think back to my own younger days in the 1950s as a child and the 1960s as a young man. There were aspects of society back then that were to be ashamed of.

[chris westwood]

Originally Posted by ekd

Then how come the BBC can employ 250 weather presenters nationwide, on 60k each, to tell us this vital bit of information about our weather?

They seem to open a new box of presenters every other week!

The money could be better spent on 'detail advisors' in good dramas, and make everyone 'appy!..

because they give local weather related information

Originally Posted by chris westwood

because they give local weather related information

I see.

Then, after the local weather, another BBC Guy or Gal gives us the National weather, which includes all the local weather situations!

Chris, stop digging!

I know you were a teacher. Teaching what, may I ask?

You seem to be getting irate about something?

No offence, but it is getting a little bit 'pearshaped'. What is the big issue here?

[Mitch Hinde]

Originally Posted by chris westwood

because they give local weather related information

Hi

Which you could obtain far more accurately by looking out of the window.
But it doesn't change the fact that Jon and Dan Snow could probably have done a better job for far less money.

Mitch Hinde

[harry.gibbon]

Originally Posted by chris westwood

I disagree
the people making the play made it for the general public to watch notsolely a few naval history enthusiasts.
most people ie the vast majority of the people watching the drama wouldn't know or care. I knew but I didn't care: apart from the ASDA wafer thin ham for some odd reason.

Chris,

The thread is entitled Television Programmes of Interest .... and is on the WNSF to alert members of this Forum about subject matter that might be interesting to our/the membership.

Thus, whilst I understand your comments about the general public viewership, my comment still stands ... WE ON THIS FORUM CARE ABOUT ACCURACY, let the public perceive what the wish, we won't be hearing/reading anything from them so; whilst I got the importance of the issues behind the series, I still want the production to represent naval matters accurately.

Although actors, these folk are in a way, impersonating Naval Personnel (of whatever country) and that deserves attention to detail.

Little h

[Scurs]

Personally, my feeling is that if film makers portraying actual events, cannot research enough to get basic things like uniforms correct, then I have no interest in the programme or faith in their ability to get the larger picture correct.
Discovering what uniforms look like is hardly rocket science, when portraying WW2.

[INVINCIBLE]

Originally Posted by harry.gibbon

Chris,

The thread is entitled Television Programmes of Interest .... and is on the WNSF to alert members of this Forum about subject matter that might be interesting to our/the membership.

Thus, whilst I understand your comments about the general public viewership, my comment still stands ... WE ON THIS FORUM CARE ABOUT ACCURACY, let the public perceive what the wish, we won't be hearing/reading anything from them so; whilst I got the importance of the issues behind the series, I still want the production to represent naval matters accurately.

Although actors, these folk are in a way, impersonating Naval Personnel (of whatever country) and that deserves attention to detail.

Little h

Well put Harry. I entirely agree though I suspect not everybody will.

[Rob Hoole]

This programme was an enjoyable piece of TV drama, not a historical documentary. Are its detractors going to refuse to watch the Royal Shakespeare Company's latest production of 'Julius Caesar' because the Roman legionnaires' costumes aren't entirely accurate? Mind you, the play's plot, characterisation and dialogue aren't exactly factual either but people still flock to see it.

[Jan Steer]

Yeah Rob What did he Roman's do for us anyway?!

best wishes
jAN

[chris westwood]

Originally Posted by ekd

I see.

Then, after the local weather, another BBC Guy or Gal gives us the National weather, which includes all the local weather situations!

Chris, stop digging!

I know you were a teacher. Teaching what, may I ask?

You seem to be getting irate about something?

No offence, but it is getting a little bit 'pearshaped'. What is the big issue here?

not irate and no big issue
this is an internet talking shop not the UN security council.
I don't have a problem with the way the weather is presented on tv: you do. No big deal
I taught in a securue unit for boys who had committed seriouis crimes-the most serious you can think of.Before that |I taught in middle schools, I am also a qualified psychiatric nurse, leaving the profession at charge nurse level. Why do you need to know this?

[chris westwood]

Originally Posted by Rob Hoole

This programme was an enjoyable piece of TV drama, not a historical documentary. Are its detractors going to refuse to watch the Royal Shakespeare Company's latest production of 'Julius Caesar' because the Roman legionnaires' costumes aren't entirely accurate? Mind you, the play's plot, characterisation and dialogue aren't exactly factual either but people still flock to see it.

exactly: thanks Rob