PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Aviation History and Nostalgia (https://www.pprune.org/aviation-history-nostalgia-86/)
-   -   Battle of Britain film (https://www.pprune.org/aviation-history-nostalgia/399031-battle-britain-film.html)

longer ron 19th Dec 2009 04:43

Some footage of Tuck and co...

YouTube - Robert Stanford Tuck

XV490 19th Dec 2009 08:02

Do you mean Bob Stanford-Tuck, the ace mushroom farmer?

cinema1 19th Dec 2009 12:58

"Do you mean Bob Stanford-Tuck, the ace mushroom farmer?"

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

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"

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


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:09.


Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.