The Dam Busters (Peter Jackson)

Any news on Peter Jackson’s remake of The Dam Busters?

Last I heard the script that Stephen Fry wrote for it was being reworked, and visual effects tests were being done. But that was second hand news, several months ago.

What will they call the commander’s dog?

I would prefer that he be historically accurate. At the time and place, the word wasn’t especially derogatory. In British usage it just meant ‘dark-skinned foreigners’. But I don’t think he can get away with using it today.

That was going to be my question too!

The Wikipedia indicates that “Nigsy” might be what they’ll go ahead with.

Works for me. For people who know what the dog was actually named, it’s close enough that it seems accurate. For people who don’t know, it won’t be a distraction.

On the other hand, a modern equivalent like Blacky would probably be sufficiently accurate – it’s just using modern language instead of period.

Why do I get the impression that if Shakespeare were alive today and writing movies, he’d be told “Bill! We love the script! It’s perfect! Now we’re gonna get Akiva Goldman to do a polish on it…”

Jackson will be doing the two Hobbit movies for sure now, and probably before The Dam Busters.

Jackson wasn’t slated to Direct, but Produce. The intended Director was Christian Rivers.

As long as it’s directed well. :wink:

Bump.

Sir Peter Jackson on why it’s chocks away for the Dam Busters movie

The dog has been replaced by a pet badger named Orville.

The dog is a white, black, and brown beagle, called Progress.

I hope they keep the theme music. Like the Star Wars theme, half the effect of the movie depends on it.

His reference to having the rights for three more years is weird. You don’t need to use Brickhill’s book to dramatise Operation Chastise there are other sources available. It’s a historical event for goodness sake anybody can turn it into a movie.

Hope they do it! Here’s Wiki on the remake: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dam_Busters_(film)#Remake

The name is important intellectual property which you would probably want to use if you can, and if you don’t buy the rights to SOMEBODY’s book on the subject they will probably try to sue. You can’t do it all from public domain sources.

Why mention his name at all? It should be possible to show the dog around, without ever speaking the word. Then you could have dialogue like:

Wallis: “What shall be the code for mission success?”
Commander: “How about my dog’s name?”
Wallis : “Good idea, sir.”
[…]

Pilot: Dam destroyed. Send the signal.

[Radio operator begins to operate the radio
Scene cut to female radio operator at base, hears the signal over her headphones. Look of joy comes over her face. Runs to tell the commander.]

Radio operator: “Sir, we have received the signal. Mission success.”

Do it cleverly enough, and people might not even notice that the word is never actually spoken.

A good idea, Peter. That would be acting niggardly in using the dog’s name. :slight_smile:

I am always up for war films made with 21st century technology. The Dambusters combines scientific ingenuity and military daring like few other stories and I would love to see the final flying sequences in Imax 3D. And yes that theme music wonderfully evokes an old-fashioned Britishness and I hope they make use of it in some way.

I wonder if the film will address the moral complexity of the attacks, which killed hundreds of civilians and would have been illegal after changes in the 1949 Geneva conventions.