Battle of Britain film [Archive]

cinema1

16th Dec 2009, 20:57

"cgi or "real" aircraft?"

Good question. Unfortunately the answer is "both".

Being a fan of the genre myself, I'd love nothing better than to see it all done with real aircraft or replicas (Waldo Pepper), but given the number of dogfights, damaged aircraft, and crash sequences, the use of real aircraft for the entire project would be difficult, cost-prohibitive and dangerous. Good news is, the CGI company is also fans of military aviation. I can't say too much, but rest assured we've discussed making the scenes as gritty and realistic as possible where CGI is required. In short...we want you to get white-knuckled watching it, because it's what we want too. :ok:

As for correct Mk's, every effort will be made to get that right as well. Keep in mind though, budget and aircraft availability will be a factor here.

treadigraph

16th Dec 2009, 22:27

An excellent subject! I first read "Fly For Your Life" at about the age of seven or eight, shortly after seeing the Battle of Britain Film and recently sought out a copy to add to the library. A superb book.

Tuck also flew Gauntlets and Gladiators before the war - there are two Gladiators flying in the UK (and another on the way I believe) and a Gauntlet in Finland (with P&W engine I think).

And I think there are three or four Mk1 Spits being rebuilt to fly in the UK, including the one Peter Cazenove force landed on a beach near Dunkirk whilst on 92 Sqn with Tuck when first they went into battle.

He111s and Dorniers would be a bit tricky to find these days - no more Spanish sources to tap. I hope the CGI company can reign in their enthusiasm a little and slow the pace of the animations to something rather more realistic than Pearl Harbour!

Good luck and look forward to seeing it.

cinema1

17th Dec 2009, 02:08

"An excellent subject! I first read "Fly For Your Life" at about the age of seven or eight, shortly after seeing the Battle of Britain Film and recently sought out a copy to add to the library. A superb book."

Since you're a fan of the book, let me share a few tidbits I've discovered during my research. As you know, the book only briefly touches on Tuck's escape from prison camp and subsequent (and rather arduous) journey back to the UK. It's come to my attention that he kept detailed memoirs of this time period. These could be made available to me at some point, depending on how this project goes. These writings have not seen the light of day for many years.

Sadly, I've also learned that the merchant ship on which Tuck served, the Marconi, was sunk in 1941 by the Germans with a number of hands lost. And, I even found pictures of the ship, the layout of which I needed for some of my scenes. I know it's off topic, so I won't post them here. Glad to send 'em if you like.

Also worthy of note -- although Larry Forrester is gone, his widow is alive and well, and I was extremely fortunate to find their original literary agent, who still had her address after all these years.

Tempest

17th Dec 2009, 10:01

A film about the life of Bob Tuck is well overdue. 'Fly For Your Life' was the first aviation book that I read back in the 70's and it led me into a career as an RAF pilot and Battle of Britain enthusiast. My big regret is that I never had the opportunity to meet the great man himself though I do have a signed copy of his book.

I have taken the liberty of posting a link to this thread on the Battle of Britain Historical Society Forum as there are many members there who will be interested in this news and could well be a vital source for information and expertise.

Best of luck with your venture.

Fly-by-Wife

17th Dec 2009, 11:07

"cgi or "real" aircraft?"

Good question. Unfortunately the answer is "both".

CGI done well isn't a problem.

For CGI done badly (among many other problems) I recommend looking at the fairly recent Pearl Harbour film. :yuk:

Everything, but everything, in that film was crass, unrealistic and bloody awful.

In particular, the "compression" of aerial combat sequences gave the impression that fighters got within 10 yards of each other! 100 yards would have been considered close!

Problem is, that doesn't look good on screen - at least for hollywood.

FBW

johnfairr

17th Dec 2009, 12:01

Cinema1 - check your PMs (Personal Messages, at the top right of the screen, where you see your PPRuNe name)

jf

treadigraph

17th Dec 2009, 13:04

I don't think the pics of "Marconi" would be off-topic at all if you wanted to post them!

Incidentally, aside from the subject matter, part of the reason the book is so very readable is down to Larry Forrester's excellent literary style.

Cheers

Treadders

cinema1

17th Dec 2009, 13:21

"Everything, but everything, in that film was crass, unrealistic, and bloody awful"

I can't argue with much of that, except to say that any film which calls attention to the bravery, deeds, and aircraft of WW2 is generally a good thing. In that respect, I think Pearl Harbor served its purpose.

That said, on-screen dogfighting sequences will always have an element of "unrealism" because, well, they aren't real. The challenges faced by filmmakers in trying to convey the three-dimensionality of air combat on a 2D screen are legion.

One thing I disliked about PH is how they rather brushed over the aircraft themselves. Just another element in a shot, like a control tower. We're taking into account Tuck's (and Britain's) justifiable love affair with the Spitfire. And yes, Hurricanes will get attention as well.

cinema1

17th Dec 2009, 14:24

"I don't think the pics of "Marconi" would be off-topic at all if you wanted to post them!"

Alas, I think my juniorness may be preventing me from doing so? I don't see provision for it on my page. Unless I'm going blind.:cool:

Here's a link to one of them. The other pic shows the name on her bow.

http://enc.slq.qld.gov.au/cgi-bin/Di...00/133855r.jpg (http://enc.slq.qld.gov.au/cgi-bin/DisplayResearchImage.pl?title=Marconi%20(ship)&ImageNumber=133855&Publisher=John%20Oxley%20Library,%20State%20Library%20of%20Q ueensland&url=http://enc.slq.qld.gov.au/slq/neg/research/133000/133855r.jpg)

Gainesy

17th Dec 2009, 15:29

Another trap is audio, not every aeroplane sounds like a Harvard.

aviate1138

17th Dec 2009, 16:05

As a Visual Effects Supervisor my only beef with any CGI content in any action film is the dynamics of the shot.
In Aviator there were some technically superb shots spoilt by the fact that the shots were impossible to achieve any other way than CGI. The 'bums on seats' public may not know why a shot looks phony but with the expense involved in creating CGI material, each one should be at least believable.

Good luck with the project and make every shot count!

tinpis

17th Dec 2009, 18:44

Films.
Not another Algenon and Bertie please.

(Cut to gloved hand on spade grip)

Q: Does the stick shake when trigger is pressed?

GeeRam

17th Dec 2009, 20:20

Black Six ended up upside down in a ploughed field the other side of the M.11 at Duxford after what was thought by the pilot to be an engine problem during a display some years ago. It was deemed irrepairable, and is now in the RAF Museum at Hendon.

It didn't end up in Hendon because of the accident, that was it's scheduled last ever flight before permanent grounding and displaying at Hendon anyway.......and it was easily repairable to fly again had there been a willingness of the MOD to let it happen, but it had already been given an extention to it's flying days, after a missed season a few years earlier. Both of the higher time Black 6 pilots were unavailable for that last Duxford display slot, so, said high ranking officer, who was the 3rd pilot, flew the display, but hadn't done so for a while IIRC, which resulted in an incorrect human/mechanical interface issue occuring.......

Aerials

17th Dec 2009, 21:48

Quote "Q: Does the stick shake when trigger is pressed?"

I would like to know if every piston engined aircraft that is in a powered dive to the (inevitable) meeting with Mother Earth sounds like a Stuka on a mission?
cinema1, I don't know how much influence a script writer has in a production but I think you are among like-minded folk on this Forum and I hope that they listen to you. A good project and I wish you and the rest of the team the best outcome possible.

Aerials

cinema1

17th Dec 2009, 23:31

"I don't know how much influence a script writer has in a production ..."

In general, very little.

That is, unless that writer happens to hold the "option" to the material being produced -- which I do. That makes me producer as well as writer, which means I get to have some "say" in how this goes down. I've promised Tuck's family that I'd tell his story in a way that honors his memory as well as others like him. Doing it this way gives me the best chance of keeping my promise.

"I think you are among like-minded folk on this Forum and I hope that they listen to you."

It's likely I who will listen to them. From what I've seen here thus far, most everyone here almost certainly knows more about the Battle of Britain participants, events and hardware than I. I'm truly glad I found this site.

And Tempest, your comment about posting this information to the Battle of Britain Historical Society forum did not go unnoticed, and is greatly appreciated.

JEM60

18th Dec 2009, 15:43

GEERAM
Thanks for the info. No one had ever mentioned 'last flight' as far as I recall.:)
Said High Ranking Officer came in for a large amount of abuse from the spectating community, but in my opinion, he was rather between a rock and a hard place, in that the engine didn't stop when expected to. Interesting accident report.

longer ron

19th Dec 2009, 04:27

What a wonderful idea to film Tucks story,it was the first biography I ever read (circa 1968) - always wanted to find out more about this man...it was a great story.
Good luck with the film...something to look forward to.
Cannot agree more about the CGI on the 'aviator',just looked like a cartoon,personally I would rather see a wrong (but real ) a/c than a bad cgi scene.
Also I would agree with Jem60 about the 109 pilot,I knew him when he was wingco flying at Abingdon,he is a really genuine guy and ISTR that he would not let the rescue party damage the 109 to get him out,I believe he was upside down in the cockpit for something like 30 mins until he could be released without causing further damage.

longer ron

19th Dec 2009, 04:43

Some footage of Tuck and co...

YouTube - Robert Stanford Tuck (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=JxMJ2mX9UWo)

XV490

19th Dec 2009, 08:02

Do you mean Bob Stanford-Tuck, the ace mushroom farmer (http://www.britishpathe.com/record.php?id=833)?

cinema1

19th Dec 2009, 12:58

"Do you mean Bob Stanford-Tuck, the ace mushroom farmer (http://redirectingat.com/?id=42X487496&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.britishpathe.com%2Frecord.php%3Fid%3D83 3)?"

That's the one.

I knew he was a mushroom farmer before I began writing, but only because of a mention in Wikipedia about it. Initially, I started the story using the convention of "old Tuck" on the farm reminiscing about his days as a fighter pilot. At that time I hadn't seen the above referenced Youtube clip, and didn't have the foggiest idea of what a mushroom farm looked like or how it functioned. I located a mushroom distributor in the UK, whom I think dealt with 5 (or so) farms. I sent them an email explaining my project (without specifically naming Tuck), and asked if they could supply me with information regarding various aspects of mushroom farming. They forwarded my letter to their farmers.

Imagine my surprise when about a week later I received a letter from the owner of one of the farms, stating excitedly that this particular mushroom farm had in fact been established by her father, a retired RAF ace! She added that if I wanted to interview him I'd better hurry, and that remarkably, even at 90 years of age, he was still contributing to farm operations to a small extent. Unfortunately, they had the impression it was this man my film was about, and I greatly regretted having to tell them it wasn't. Not surprisingly, I didn't hear back from them. I found the parallel remarkable, but in hindsight I really regret not mentioning Tuck's name in my request. Perhaps things would have turned out differently if I had.

So, still not having the information I needed for my farm scenes, I garnered what generic information I could from the web and started writing. It was after I'd nearly finished the scenes featuring Tuck on his farm that I stumbled across the Youtube clip. It was a shock, because there were eerie similarities between what I'd written thus far and what I saw in the clip -- enough to send a chill down my spine -- right down to the presence of a german shepherd and Tuck looking up at the sound of passing airplanes.

I have since cut the opening scenes on the farm. They were simply too much exposition, and were slowing everything down. Elements of this part of Tuck's life will be featured elsewhere in the story, however.

XV490, thanks for posting that clip. It's got much more in it than the Youtube clip shows, and I hadn't seen that additional footage.

Jimbo27

19th Dec 2009, 13:13

There was a couple of things I found fascinating about "Fly for your life"

One was the scene were RST mediates in a row between Douglas Bader and Sailor Malan.

The other was the chap who RST meets who had allegedly died in the war, but he lived on under an assumed name?

Are these going in the script?

cinema1

19th Dec 2009, 22:32

"...the scene were RST mediates in a row between Douglas Bader and Sailor Malan"

Actually, the three were being questioned about the viability of adding cannon to their aircraft, something Malan and Tuck supported, but Bader was dead set against. When Malan offered his support for the addition of cannon, Tuck agreed and that set Bader off. The ensuing "row" was between Bader and Tuck.

The other incident you referred to took place well after Tuck's escape from prison camp in France.

"Are these going in the script?"

Keep in mind, the script's in its first draft stage and very much in flux. Things that are in it now may not be in the next draft, and vice versa. As it stands now, yes; the altercation between Tuck and Bader is in there, because Tuck's campaign to get cannon fitted is an important subplot.

As for the other question, I can't really answer that because it plays into where and how I've decided/will decide to end the film, and that'll have to remain under wraps. :=

But, take comfort in knowing that the things in the book which stood out to you, also stood out to me. I'll do my best to incorporate them, but the bottom line is the story has to be entertaining on screen, and not everything in the book works well that way.

mach79

20th Dec 2009, 10:07

Both of the higher time Black 6 pilots were unavailable for that last Duxford display slot, so, said high ranking officer, who was the 3rd pilot, flew the display, but hadn't done so for a while IIRC, which resulted in an incorrect human/mechanical interface issue occuring.......

GeeRam, well said, it was an absolute disgrace that this occurred and ended up with severe damage to this very unique aircraft.
I think the man was villified for this-rightly so.

JEM60

20th Dec 2009, 17:08

Mach79.
I trust that you read the accident report then before coming your conclusion that what he did was a disgrace???. I assume you never made a mistake in the cockpit or flight deck then, if you were in one????.
If you haven't read the accident report, then I suggest your report is over-critical of a fine pilot.!!

cinema1

20th Dec 2009, 17:20

Anyone know if reinforced areas were available for standing on either side of a Spit cockpit, or was it left side only?

avionic type

20th Dec 2009, 18:01

In this thread Peal Harbour has been given the "Thumbs down " by many critics and rightly so but it was always going to come second best to the best film on Pearl Harbour "TORRA TORRA TORRA" the aerial battle seqences were superbly re-enacted by real aircraft, C.A.F have the kept mockup Zeros flying since the film was finished but i'm with the Writer/producer of the Sanford-Tuck film that CGI is the way to go, well done it can be hard to tell it from actual aircraft. at possibly half the cost my only plea is No Merlin engined German planes please get the planes right or the "nit pickers" will have a field day I,m with them to a certain extent nothing is worse than inaccuraties[Like my spelling I think] .
I wish the filmm all the sucess it deserves

cinema1

22nd Dec 2009, 14:59

Thanks, and don't worry -- the Merlins will be right where they belong. :ok:

cinema1

12th Feb 2010, 12:38

Thought everyone might like to see this if they haven't already. Aviate, you mentioned the distraction of unrealistic camera angles, and I think the following very well done piece of CG shows it can be done both with considerable realism and logical "camera" placement. To be honest, I was fooled for a few seconds. Imagine what this guy could do with a film budget!

YouTube - De Haviland Mosquitos and Supermarine Spitfires 2006-merlins (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNJ8rIEPLOo&feature=related)

Saab Dastard

12th Feb 2010, 13:18

For purposes of comparison, here's the real thing (particularly the sound).

YouTube - Pure Merlin Engine Sounds "Without Music" (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2nlGN6aS8g&NR=1&feature=fvwp)

SD

cinema1

12th Feb 2010, 14:38

Yeah, saw that. Very nice! Those howling engine/airframe combos make the arm hair stand at attention. Bear in mind that wherever possible I'll push for the use of real aircraft. In the scenes that require CG, I hope to get the best artists available, and their sounds will have been recorded from the real thing anyway.

Of course, I'm counting my chickens prior to hatching, but I like to think ahead.

cinema1

6th Nov 2010, 13:01

Greetings chaps!

No, I haven't disappeared, and yes, the project is still moving along. Nothing is finalized just yet, but my wife and I are coming to England late in December for some meetings, and that's when we'll get a better idea of our prospects.

We do have the interest of a British director, and Nick Stein, one of the venerable members of this site, is on board as historical advisor. Nick has been incredibly helpful throughout the scriptwriting process and I'll be eternally grateful. It's worthy of note that Nick's career in the RAF was inspired by Tuck's story, so his participation in this project certainly feels right.

There has been other progress as well, but unfortunately I'll have to keep that under my hat for now (sorry!)

Stay tuned!

Bill16STN

6th Nov 2010, 14:14

"Both of the higher time Black 6 pilots were unavailable for that last Duxford display slot, so, said high ranking officer, who was the 3rd pilot, flew the display, but hadn't done so for a while IIRC, which resulted in an incorrect human/mechanical interface issue occuring.......

GeeRam, well said, it was an absolute disgrace that this occurred and ended up with severe damage to this very unique aircraft.
I think the man was villified for this-rightly so."

I shall not name names; however it would be fair to say that this pilot is a well respected airman who is very capable & flies some of the oldest airworthy aeroplanes in the world.

BEagle

6th Nov 2010, 14:50

...this pilot is a well respected airman...

By whom?

.

robin

6th Nov 2010, 22:25

If you want to see a truly awful example of CGI try Flyboys. No understanding of how an aircraft looks or moves, and overloads the screen. Not a patch on Aces High

cinema1

7th Nov 2010, 00:12

Believe it or not, Flyboys was the first film (to my knowledge) to use motion capture on actual aircraft, so many of the manuevers you see are replicated from the real thing. Somehow though, it never looks quite right. A friend of mine was a stunt pilot on the film, and he generally wasn't too fond of the CGI either.

poppahymen

7th Nov 2010, 01:19

Sorry have not had the chance to read Fly For Your Life. For a long time I have wished for a modern remake of the Battle of Britain. LOL I clearly remember going to watch it with my Mum when I was about 12years old. But as mentioned previously not like the remake of Tora Tora Tora (Pearl Harbour) Hope it all works out for you. I for one am waiting to see it.

thetimesreader84

7th Nov 2010, 20:51

One thing that i haven't seen mentioned yet, re: CGI aircraft...

remember, when aircraft fly in formation, they "wiggle". Little bit up/down, little bit in/out. it is quite unrealistic (and something most war films get wrong) to see waves of bombers rolling along like flies stuck on wallpaper...

good luck with your film!

TTR

robin

7th Nov 2010, 21:09

The problem with CGI is that directors like to fill the screen.

Look at Ace's High and watch the way the aircraft behave

Look at some of the CGI sequences in Flyboys where having created a digital model of an aircraft the director clones a number of identical copies flying unrealistically close together.

As pilots we know how hard it is to keep formation. Directors don't and tend to overload things to give a dramatic effect.

cinema1

11th May 2011, 14:06

Hello everyone,

Been a while since I've updated, so just a note to say the project is still in motion. Had the pleasure of coming to England over the winter for a number of meetings with my director, Tuck's sons Michael and Simon, PPRUNE member Nick Stein, Carolyn Grace and a few others. A wonderful time indeed.

We hope to do a press release some time next month to announce the film as being "in development". Work is underway on a teaser trailer, and within the next few months we should have a website up and running. Still a long way from guaranteed funding and production, but at least things appear to be moving in the right direction. Keep those fingers crossed.

Cheers!

Greg

treadigraph

11th May 2011, 16:04

Glad to see the project is still rolling, keep us posted and good luck!

Cheers

Treadders

GQ2

12th May 2011, 00:41

It'd be very jolly to see a well-made and accurate portrayal of RST. He was the archetypal RAF fighter pilot, and the very epitome of understated professionalism.
Realistically however, I'm struggling to think of many decent aviation films, let alone factual ones, that were worth watching for any but the flying sequences.... It's a difficult undertaking. There is also a tendency for those holding the purse-strings to play fast and loose with the facts to make the end result entertaining to a Disney age group of eight to eighty years old. Hollywood takes history and shreds it. U571 would be a good example. There is dumbing-down, and there is utter distortion.
I hope that you manage to attract sufficient funds to do RST's story justice - I really do. Just promise us that if you can't attract enough funding, you don't make it. We don't end-up with straight to video 'Movies for Men' special.
I think the last decent aviation film I saw was Dark Blue World, which I think was actually fiction but set in a quite accurate context. Very un-Hollywood and quite watchable. The CGI content was (Just.) passable.
Lastly, a pet hate of mine;- Speech is always a reflection of the times. People really did generally speak the Queens English at that time. No glottlestops and AQT and the general slaughter of English perpetrated on T.V & radio seventy or so years later.
Good Luck! :ok: