My own thoughts are that I usually enjoy watching documentaries but I am wise enough, old enough and ugly enough to accept that they will usually frustrate those that have a detailed knowledge of that specific topic
Is it fair to suggest that:
a) This program MUST be entertaining
b) It will be shown in a way that will reflect the opinion of those making the program
c) Experts or anaroks that watch this item will tear it to pieces
d) Licence is usually used in descriptions, images or names... I watch documentaries depicting Naval events and we regularly see footage of ships that were the wrong class, the wrong country or even the wrong time era. I know that but Mr Joe Public would not and they still enjoy watching the program.
d) Bottom line is that I usually find them entertaining and it provokes me into researching the topic to get a better in sight
ENJOY the program for what it was and forgive those that may have got certain parts of it incorrect. At least they called the aircraft by its right name and always showed the correct type
As an outsider looking in, I enjoyed the program, I certainly did NOT get the impression it was critical of anyone.
Rather than post a link I have copied this message as it deserves a second hearing.
Originally Posted by MMHendrie1
Bomber Boys seemed to me to be aimed at giving long overdue recognition to the RAF Bomber Command aircrew who were treated shamefully by their country. Their losses were appalling: 55,573 out of the 125,000 aircrew who served in the Command. And the manner of their passing was often frightful.
Shown on prime time television, the programme was aimed at a largely lay audience to highlight the sacrifices of young men charged with a terrible duty. They were trained to do a job which they did to the very best of their abilities knowing the risks and their chances while suspecting the appalling reality of their likely end.
For much of World War II, it was RAF Bomber Command that was the only realistic means of taking the fight to an enemy who knew only Total War and who waged it unmercifully.
Yes, it would have been nice to hear a little more about the Battles and the Blenheims, the Hampdens and the Wellingtons, the Stirlings and the Halifaxes, but perhaps this was not the programme to tell that story. If it had tried to it may not have had the same wide appeal to the public at large.
The reality is that for countless numbers of people the Lancaster will always be associated with the Bomber Offensive just as the Spitfire will always be credited with ‘winning’ the Battle of Britain. And as far as who did what to the Tirpitz, then that discussion is best continued at Happy Hours at Lossiemouth or Marham, or between the RAF and the RN. And I am sure that it will be for many years to come.
Last night’s story was about the sacrifice of a generation of young men, many of them in their teens. It was not meant to fuel or to close a debate about the merits of the area bombing of German cities during WWII versus so-called precision bombing of targets in Germany, which was often nothing of the sort.
But for those of us who have relied upon the comfort of a nuclear umbrella, under successive governments, it seems slightly hypocritical to seek the moral high ground when discussing area bombing.
For me, Bomber Boys was not about a bloke called Harris or someone called Churchill, or even about Ewan McGregor (although both brothers eloquently told a long-overdue story). Bomber Boys was about some ordinary blokes who were called upon to do extraordinary things. And then they were forgotten.
I say well done the BBC, and the McGregors, for remembering such a generation.