rorkesdriftvc.com :: View topic

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 11:00 am

Yes, THE AFRICAN Queen is British - though like ZULU, LAWRENCE, etc (and in fact most "big" British films of the 50s and 60s), it should really be regarded as an Anglo-American co-production as it was co-financed by American sources (United Artists in this case).

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 1:01 pm

Sheldon, Peter et al..

It was great to see all your lists and seeing what you all like in film. I will be busy in the next few months! That Goal! looks interesting. Some real good ones I agree with..Black Narcissus, Dambusters, Canterbury Tale, (that US soldier is something.. Wink

Henry V (Branagh version) , Man for All Seasons (and I'll add Becket and Cromwell). And one war picture i just love and remember seeing it when I was a child in the theater, Sink the Bismarck with Kenneth More. I think that was a Brit production right? That movie has stayed with me all my life. And I always remember when the Hood and its men went down. Tough stuff back when. It probably got me to read everything I could about WWII!

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 3:09 pm

I like SINK THE BISMARCK! too - a British production financed by 20th Century-Fox, so really another mid-Atlantic job.

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 3:27 pm

And Sheldon btw I see "Overlord" in the Criterion Collection. Notes that the late John Alcott (he did work with Kubrick) filmed it. Has anyone seen it?

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 3:28 pm

I saw it on TV years ago and have an off-air recording. An interesting low-budget production directed by one of THE DIRTY DOZEN.

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 3:45 pm

Thanks for that.

And do you all have an opinion about 3-D? I don't think it's going to happen but what would be the consensus of getting "Zulu" in 3-D???? Good, bad or leave it alone?? And I'll note that James Cameron thinks it's the next best thing after sliced bread!

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 3:48 pm

Leave it alone! And all other movies that weren't meant to be in 3D.

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 7:35 pm

A couple more suggestions.

A Fish Called Wanda

Wild Geese

I did have Great War Movie (and Western) Theme LPS but they have gone. There is an outside chance that they are in the attic but I suspect that they departed to a jumble sale in a fit of temporary insanity many moons ago. Bit like throwing out a favourite toy...........

Peter
(still traumatised at the rejection of The Man Who Would Be King)

Posted: Tue Nov 23, 2010 8:10 pm

What rejection?! I just pointed out that it wasn't British! Would it help to say that THE DIRTY DOZEN is also Anglo-American (made in Britain by MGM)?

Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2010 10:21 am

My interpretation of British (taking advantage of the fluid definition) is setting, actors and story rather than funding and production. I see that The Dirty Dozen was filmed here but it's never struck me as British.

I was also tempted to include Who Dares Wins. A truly dreadful film but a great comic book ending.

And in my comedy section Carry On Up The Khyber.

Peter

Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2010 11:51 am

Peter, the British Film Institute uses the term "culturally British" to designate the sort of thing you mean. Successive governments have always used financial criteria, though the many loopholes (such as foreign, i.e., American, companies being allowed to set up UK-based subsidiaries to produce films here that are officially British by virtue of using locally based technicians, facilities and indeed money earned from UK cinemas) mean that distinctions are never clear-cut. The real muddy area is when films with British actors, settings and stories are financed and filmed abroad, such as THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD (the Errol Flynn version). To illustrate the point further, the director Robert Aldrich made THE DIRTY DOZEN entirely in Britain with a largely American cast and subject, so it is technically British, then followed it with THE KILLING OF SISTER GEORGE, set in London with British actors but filmed almost entirely in Los Angeles aside from a few exterior shots, and therefore officially American!

Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2010 12:28 pm

Well, that stirred some debate and as expected the term "British" can be interpreted in many way. Does this make Full Metal Jacket a British Film or the Series Band of Brothers? - half of the actors in the latter were British and it was filmed here. Interesting.

It was remiss of me not to include The Bridge on the River Kwai.

What other top tens can we share?

Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2010 12:35 pm

Sheldon

Muddy waters indeed. Talking of which, how could I have omitted:

The Yangtze Incident

Peter

Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:51 pm

I'm not sure how it works for television productions, but FULL METAL JACKET is certainly British (or Anglo-American, being financed by Warner Bros), as were all Kubrick's films from LOLITA (1962) onwards. THE BRIDGE ON THE RIVER KWAI was actually one of the first films to raise a controversy about this whole issue. Being a Columbia-financed release (and very popular), it received large sums from the Eady Fund, which had been set up to pay back to UK-based producers an amount collected from the revenue of all films in Britain, awarded as a proportion of their own revnue. Questions were asked in Parliament about this particular film, because although Columbia-British was a legitimate subsidiary it was still ultimately owned by an American parent company which thereby enjoyed the benefits of a fund supposed to help indigenous producers. Complicated, isn't it?

Posted: Wed Nov 24, 2010 1:52 pm

And speaking of this dichotomy of British/American do most, some all of you believe Straw Dogs would've been a little different on the screen if it had say a British director to helm it?? From what I read, the writer of the book, Gordon Williams, didn't like Mr. Peckinpah's treatment. Peckinpah as we know is not averse to showing what humans do to each other when they don't like each other.