62 replies to this topic

[C_O_L_I_N]

Just watched Beneath Hill 60, very enjoyable, even if it was a bit claustrophobic on times, how could they work under there?

[towisuk]

Excellent Iain. I forgot to include the mines fired by the other side...I'm programmed to think only about our mines and their size, even though I have fellow forum member Simon Jones's excellent book....."Underground Warfare 1914-1918".
Looking forward to your book coming out Iain....how's it going mate?
regards
Tom

[iain mchenry]

towisuk, on 27 September 2010 - 06:40 AM, said:

Excellent Iain. I forgot to include the mines fired by the other side...I'm programmed to think only about our mines and their size, even though I have fellow forum member Simon Jones's excellent book....."Underground Warfare 1914-1918".
Looking forward to your book coming out Iain....how's it going mate?
regards
Tom

Fine thanks mate. Up to Sept 1916 at the mo. More to do over the winter.

Regards

Iain

[veklee]

saw it last week not a bad film , now im not saying do this or ive done it as its prob illegal but search u torrent ?

[rossjthomas@bigpond.com]

Iain, many thousands would disagree with you. Might be best if you not see the movie if that is your early judgement. What war movie is perfect in details anyway? The Beneath Hill 60  production is based on 'real events'. It is not a documentary. Touched a lot of hearts and displayed much Anzac Spirit in its making. Not to mention the long overdue memorial to the Aussie tunnellers that spun off from the production. How about sending a $ to the Army History Museum in Townsville to support the cause? Ross Thomas, Executive Producer.

iain mchenry, on 08 September 2010 - 03:39 PM, said:

If the movie is anything like the book then I will stay well away from it. I was very dissapointed with Will Davies book. Apart from some extra information on the life of Oliver Woodward the book at times seemed to be almost direct lifts from "Tunnellers" and "War Underground". I noticed that there were a number of factual errors in the book that are also found in "Tunnellers" making me suspect that this is where the info was coming from. It was information that with the advent of the inernet, could be found with some basic searching and reading of other tunnelling related material. St Eloi was not the biggest mine fired during the war! This year has seen the release, in Australia of two Great War Tunnelling Books and I have no qualms in saying that Damien Finlaysons "Crumps and Camouflets" blows Will Davies book out of the water. I wait with bated breath to see the movie. I was again put off from this when a few months ago I watched an Australian TV report on the movie (60 mins?) it described the Australian led Messines Ridge offensive.......very poor reporting, indeed again with just a little insight some factual accuracy could have been forthcoming.

Iain

ain, many thousands would disagree with you. Might be best if you not see the movie if that is your early judgement. What war movie is perfect in details anyway? The Beneath Hill 60 production is based on 'real events'. It is not a documentary. Touched a lot of hearts and displayed much Anzac Spirit in its making. Not to mention the long overdue memorial to the Aussie tunnellers that spun off from the production. How about sending a $ to the Army History Museum in Townsville to support the cause? Ross Thomas, Executive Producer.

[ianw]

Only £7.99 at a certain internet retailer at the moment.

Having been at Hill 60 only yesterday, I am tempted to give it a go.

I can't see any problem with getting the history right in a Great War film. No reason to be cavalier with the history. Why should accuracy get in the way of a good film?

[judy7007]

Quite a few reviews here

All from Aussies (at the moment).  Certainly I know I'll be getting a copy - in fact have been hanging out for it to be available locally - and what a great price!

Judy

[Moriaty]

It is on sale in Sainsburys, price £8.99.

[iain mchenry]

[quote name='rossjthomas@bigpond.com' timestamp='1286794849' post='1485593']
How about sending a $ to the Army History Museum in Townsville to support the cause? Ross Thomas, Executive Producer.

Ross,

I managed to see the film just a few days ago for the first time. I do not doubt that the film portrays the ANZAC spirit, nor am I attempting to stain or detract from that. The story of Hill 60 and the Underground war is so interesting and dynamic anyway, that I doubted it needed any historical innacurracies to fill in the film. I was a bit suprised when I saw the scene showing the lads moving up to Hill 60 in an army truck. It described them in text at the bottom of the screen as being on "Messines Ridge, April 1916". If I was there in 1916 in a British army truck I would be bloody worried and looking to bollock the driver, as Messines Ridge was well behind German lines. What was wrong with describing the location as "Just south of Ypres"? For those of us who care about how the Underground War is portrayed in film and documentary, showing Oliver Woodward as being the only one to throw down a switch firing the mines was also greatly erroneous, what about the other two with him that did exactly the same....no mention at all. To cap it off, the made up story of the young tunneller being trapped by a collapse just minutes to go before detonation and then the dilema shown by Woodward of "Do I fire or dont I fire?" was just fanciful! Why did you have to make up such stories when there are many truthfull events that took place under Larchwood/Hill 60. What about the terrible tradgedy of the Aus T Coy officers testing the resisitance of the detonators which were in explosive, the result being they were blown apart. If memory serves me right, doesnt one of the Company officers get an MC for the awful task of recovering those remains. This, I think is a fine example of the hazards face by all miners underground and would have made a gory but realistic scene that would have hammerred home the risks of what these brave men faced underground.
All in all I thought the movie was watchable. It is better than "Passendale" but not by much, in my opinion. Little went in to the movie to show the true international struggle that occurred under Hill 60 during WW1, although I must say I was impressed with how the German miners were portrayed.

On the subject of donations, I have no qualms about donating money to a memorial portraying the tunnellers of WW1. I was part of the team that raised money and built the Tunnellers memorial at Givenchy Lez la Bassee earlier this year. As you are probably aware Ross, this memorial remembers all men of whatever nationality or Company who worked in British, Australian, NZ and Canadian Tunnelling Companies. Seeing you are Executive Producer of Beneath Hill 60 and seeing how successful the movie was in Australia, how about making a sizeable donation with the movie profits to the Tunnellers Memorial Fund that will go towards the maintainance and upkeep of the Tunnellers Memorial? The website is www.tunnellersmemorial.com

Regards

Iain

[ianw]

Quite agree with Iain that there are more than enough real-life incidents that happened below and above Hill 60 for any movie.

The simultaneous detonation of these mines was so important that I doubt that the trapping of any one man would have caused much more than a moments regret let alone an age of heart searching.

I have been offered a lend of this DVD so will give it a go.

Generally I would say to film-makers that they should strive for accuracy and excitement. These 2 are not mutually exclusive. In fact the opposite applies IMHO.

[judy7007]

When I have been able to see the film, I may well agree with Iain on many points (and I would be the first to admit that Iain's expertise in this area is to be extremely respected and taken note of).  However there is something that is a little bit intangible about Aussies seeing Aussie WWI movies.  It is not just a matter of 'nationalistic pride'.  There is something else - I can't quite put my finger on it yet - but I have no doubt that it exists...  It is part of my ongoing research to try to understand more of what it is really all about.    

I am very much looking forward to seeing the film.  It was filmed around the area where my husband lived for many years and where he went to school.  But I'll certainly be keeping in mind those things mentioned re historical inaccuracies.  But then it would be hard to find a WWI film that doesn't have them - some I am much more aware of than others.  
Judy

[Dawleyjockey]

Allowing for some inaccuracies I thought the film was not too bad and quite enjoyed it.
You can also pick up copies at ASDA and also it is on the Virgin TV Movies on Demand play list this week.

[Roxy]

I saw this for sale today at Tesco but thought that I'd seek the views of the Pals.  Notwithstanding some discontent, it appears to be worth a go.  I'll let you know shortly!

Roxy

[Herekawe]

iain mchenry, on 08 September 2010 - 03:39 PM, said:

If the movie is anything like the book then I will stay well away from it. I was very dissapointed with Will Davies book. Apart from some extra information on the life of Oliver Woodward the book at times seemed to be almost direct lifts from "Tunnellers" and "War Underground". I noticed that there were a number of factual errors in the book that are also found in "Tunnellers" making me suspect that this is where the info was coming from. It was information that with the advent of the inernet, could be found with some basic searching and reading of other tunnelling related material. St Eloi was not the biggest mine fired during the war! This year has seen the release, in Australia of two Great War Tunnelling Books and I have no qualms in saying that Damien Finlaysons "Crumps and Camouflets" blows Will Davies book out of the water. I wait with bated breath to see the movie. I was again put off from this when a few months ago I watched an Australian TV report on the movie (60 mins?) it described the Australian led Messines Ridge offensive.......very poor reporting, indeed again with just a little insight some factual accuracy could have been forthcoming.

Iain

I got a copy out of the library and thought the book was fact based rather than factual. The padding between the facts stretches the immagination a bit. That said its a good light read not to be taken seriously; but I think a major drop in standards from Somme Mud and Footsteps Pte Lynch which are also not strictly factual but better written and more interesting. Woodward was obviously an interesting character.

Once I read pg 202-203 about how the Australian 3rd and 4th Divsions captured Messines I decided not to buy it! That was one inaccuracy too far!

I am going to enjoy the film - pointless worrying too much about inaccuracies, all films are a compromise of some sort.

James

[apple]

Herekawe, on 17 October 2010 - 05:13 AM, said:

I am going to enjoy the film - pointless worrying too much about inaccuracies, all films are a compromise of some sort.

James

Well said James. Although, I did like your suggestion that they should have a dug a hole and set off 90,000 lbs of explosives for factual accuracy. That'd put Lucas/ Jackson/ some CGI wizard to shame ;-)

iain mchenry, on 12 October 2010 - 03:29 PM, said:

It described them in text at the bottom of the screen as being on "Messines Ridge, April 1916". If I was there in 1916 in a British army truck I would be bloody worried and looking to bollock the driver, as Messines Ridge was well behind German lines. What was wrong with describing the location as "Just south of Ypres"?

Come on, lighten up buddy

testing the resisitance of the detonators which were in explosive, ......... and would have made a gory but realistic scene

Would have been a boring, confusing scene. This wasn't funded by a major studio. They needed to get financial backing. There was always going to be some teenaged eye-candy for the fan-bois/ grlz, as well as, a character of non discernable ethnicity. What was Billy meant to be, by the way? It showed him being good at rugby. So I'm thinking Polynesian, which (and I could be wrong) didn't strike me as very accurate for an Australian miner of that era. If we are going to nit-pick, like the guy from Goulburn complaining that he didn't see a Lewis gun, Billy definitely lead with his hip going into the tackler. I've watched quite a bit of rugby and Jonah Lomu, in the 1990's, was the first player I'd ever seen do that. Also, the scrum seemed to only have three flankers and I am sure the referee would have noticed that kind of blatant cheating. But, well done with the research that the try only got 3 points, not the 4 or 5 it would have been awarded later

Antony

[(nzef)]

I think I remember seeing one token Kiwi walking by at one point :-)

Cheers

[Herekawe]

Hi

Well I have seen the DVD now and I liked it. Plenty of inaccuracies, poking your head up to a loop hole, especially built up above the line of trenches nicely outlined for the enemy would not be a good idea I imagine. While the  inaccuracies don't detract from the film I would have thought the difference between getting the details right or not would make no difference to the cost.

The scenes with his young lady - Marjorie - I thought were not out of place, I imagine everyones thoughts flicked back home occasionally.

The end was weak - the young miner being trapped was not in the book but  its almost formulaic for this sort of film, someone gets trapped in the burning tank, crashing plane, sinking ship, clingling mud etc. Did anyone seriously think he wasn't going to fire the mine, its an historical fact that he did. And why was the detail added in  of the mines being fired in sequence - so the lad could sit there in the dark listening to death approaching. Maudlin nonsense.  Its bad because people will remember that and a good portion of them will think it is a true detail. And I thought the explosion was a bit off, something like a giant Hawthorn Redoubt would have been more realistic wouldn't it?

But overall I thought it was a good effort and I would watch it again.7/10

James

[jasmor58]

Even with the errors etc. it was watchable. Not fantastic, but watchable!
Jasmor58

[Staffsyeoman]

I attended an academic conference at the University of London  this weekend on 'Film in Britain and the Second World War'. It seemed that myself and two other colleagues were the only military historians present amongst the social and film historians. However, there was almost a nexus when an elderly gent, who said he was not an academic but there from interest, said of his experience of the war, all films were inaccurate as no-one could salute,dress properly, it sounded wrong etc. One of the less 'up themselves' film historians tried to explain that 'truthful' representation slipped away as the commercial imperatives dominated, especially as the big ticket, fictional, Technicolor, star vehicle movies of the 60s took over. We felt bound to agree. An utterly truthful film would not sell.  On the one hand - mass periods of boredom. The other - an opposite extreme. Do you want to see a Sherman crew immolated on screen?

We all cavil at the horrendously wrong, the lazy and the horribly misrepresentative. This film does seem to have tried to balance the demands of commercialism, telling a story that non-specialists would want to see with more than the usual nod at something approaching (if not completely reaching) accuracy.  

I even thought, given the increased politicisation of the Dardanelles in Australia, even the tag line was brave/clever - "After Gallipoli, there was still a war to be won".

[Arnhem44]

I saw this a couple of days back and enjoyed it,there's not many films out there on the subject so when I saw a movie called Company K based on the AEF I thought I'd give that one a go as well,OMG steer well clear people,a movie from 2004 and imo is absolute rubbish.
Regards
Brendan

[egbert]

Here is  Beneath Hill 60 for free. The whole movie on youtube, divided in some 8 or so parts. This is part 1

Enjoy

[Wendy Mac...]

  I to have seen Beneath Hill 60 and thoroughly enjoyed if for what it was!

Wendy

[Tephrite]

I bought it lst week and thought it was well worth it.  
I watched it immediately after "Passchendaele", which I picked up for £3 in a bargain-bucket at a well-known High Street retailer.  A direct comparison between the two is quite enlightening. The £3 was wasted.
M

[ianw]

Watched in on DVD this week. As a film I guess it was workmanlike but not convincing as a portrayal of WWI.

It just seems a bit daft to me to assemble all those resources and then not attempt to make a really good WWI film.

[Roxy]

I've just watched it - snowed in - and, whilst it is not the best film that I have seen, it is by no means the worst.  Definately watchable; although I do agree that the young lad getting caught in the collapse at the end brought very little to the story and the actual explosion didn't work for me.

Roxy