Donate SIGN UP

Dambusters - Warning!!

Avatar Image
saintpeter48 | 16:15 Thu 24th Dec 2015 | Film, Media & TV
23 Answers
Just settled back to watch 'The Dambusters' on Channel 5 and the announcer warned that there is strong language that some people may find offensive, from a 1954 film surely not!
The only thing I can think it might be is Guy Gibson's dog is called N****r, yes the 'N ' word, what do you think?
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 23rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Avatar Image
"So I guess all you people who resent the modification (on the grounds it wasn't considered wrong at the time) would also welcome repeats of Jim'll Fix It. " Slightly different issue, but it wouldn't bother me in the slightest as I've no wish to airbrush history. I say it's different for two reasons: Firstly "Jim'll Fix It" was not a historic portrayal of...
18:01 Thu 24th Dec 2015
yep sp, I'm guessing that's what it'll be

x x
..also, wish I wasn't so open to earworms....that's the rest of today's sorted then.....;)

x x
That will be it. I was disgusted to watch the original film a year or so back and they edited out the black Labrador's name.The grave of the black dog can be found at RAF Scampton museum with,thankfully,the name of the dog enscribed on it still.
If they don't warn they get in bother, so they do it.
-- answer removed --
they`d probably bleep that out - they censor carryon films in the US - the biggest producer of porn in the world
"Just approaching the target now skipper!!"

"Thanks Ginger. Right. Mumbai open! Starting our run in"
I'm getting my film theme tunes mixed up,...I am of course referring to The Great Escape ;)

x x x
Ha Ha Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa retro^^^^

(I find that better that "LOL")

I too was disgusted when the edited eddition was broadcast. I understand how the use of that word can be offensive when directed towards a black person in a derogatory manner. (Though my understanding is somewhat tempered when black people use it among themselves - often in an insolent way - with apparent impunity).

However, in the film the word is not used in that context. It is the name of a dog, bestowed upon him because of his colour, in a time when the use of the word was not viewed so sensitively as today.

Stuff has happened in the past which today is unacceptable. I understand and fully appreciate that. Times change. But the film is a historical portrayal of events from a time past and to censor events on the basis that what was acceptable then is not now is madness.

Incidentally, just watching the film (on 5+1) and the scene where Guy Gibson alights from his Lancaster and calls his dog over has just been on. How anybody can find that offensive is beyond me.
Sadly some people don't have the ability to distinguish context and the censors feel they have to step in just in case.

In a similar vein , Black Beauty: The Autobiography of a Horse by Anna Sewell in the early chapters the title horse is referred to as 'Dark + ie' , don't think I have ever heard that referrred to in TV adaptations for a no doubt similar reason.
So I guess all you people who resent the modification (on the grounds it wasn't considered wrong at the time) would also welcome repeats of Jim'll Fix It.
Canary........I'm not sure that Gibson's dog was a paedophile.........was he?
I might be wrong there.
I don't imagine that all "Jims" are paedophiles are they?
-- answer removed --
Not sure that is a good comparison really , we are discussing words that have become taboo not people.

Re the words, I can safely place then in a time,place or context and have no difficulty doing so - some struggle.
Channel 5 has to protect itself... wansn't it launched by Scary, Ginger, Posh Baby and a moose. To be forwarned though is a good thing shame they have to do it these days... much prefer that than the edited stuff that people may take offence at.
"So I guess all you people who resent the modification (on the grounds it wasn't considered wrong at the time) would also welcome repeats of Jim'll Fix It. "


Slightly different issue, but it wouldn't bother me in the slightest as I've no wish to airbrush history.

I say it's different for two reasons:

Firstly "Jim'll Fix It" was not a historic portrayal of history. It was a series made by a person who has subsequently been discredited.

However, more importantly, the alleged behaviour by Savile (assuming the allegations could be substantiated because they've never been properly tested) would be as unacceptable then as it is now. It's not the same with Guy Gibson's dog. In the 1940s nobody would have blinked at a dog with that name. You might as well say that stories portraying Anne Boleyn being beheaded, or women not being allowed to vote, or domestic violence being acceptable, or people being hanged for murder should be similarly censored.
^^^should have been a "dramatic portrayal of history"
There are plenty of plants with the name nigra in them because they are black and no problem there.

Sadly many old songs that had the word gay in them are now seen as something to laugh at.

!let's suppose the word 'happy' (for example) became a swaer word or insult to a particular race would we have to censor all the TV shows and films that used the word 'happy'.
More of a concern to me is why they are showing a war film at Christmas when it is meant to be a time of peace.

1 to 20 of 23rss feed

1 2 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Dambusters - Warning!!

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.