I may be stating the bleeding obvious to UK members, but have not yet seen reminder on Forum that tonight Channel 4 is showing a 2hr long dramatisation about 1/7/16.

Had a good review in the ST tv guide.

I'll be glued!

I'll miss the first half but should be home in time for the 2nd hour.
Now if only I could find a decent tape for the video?

Mandy

The Radio Times is complementary about it too:

This is a particularly good example of a drama documentary but, despite all its grimly authentic re-enactments of life and death in the trenches, it's the smatterings of archive footage that touch the heart. Grainy, jumpy film of young men waving their flat caps at the camera as they eagerly head off to war. Many lied about their age to enlist; many didn't return. Using contemporary diaries and letters, The Somme quietly and without artifice tells the story of this most horrible of battles, a bloody disaster in every sense that sent 60,000 men over the top, straight into a barrage of German machine guns and artillery. By the end of the first day, 19,240 of these men were dead.

Swizz

I'm looking forward to it.

But just hope they don't repeat the old myth that the "first day" devastated urban communities with the death of the Pals.

John

Course it will ... see my PM to you.
Seems to be packed with Mancs stuff John .. you have owt to do with it???

Damn

I hadnt read this post, when I responded to your PM challenge.

well done ch4,lets have more of this pleez..in the first 25 min ,im there !!!

So far so good, I'm typing and watching, quite dramatic. Coal Scuttle hats for the Germans mind-according to Jack Sheldons superb book they didn't really appear in numbers until September.

Good so far

I enjoyed that. They could've found a proper pair of Devonshire Regt shoulder titles though.

Excellent- I liked the way we finished off with the personal stories of the men/women, their fates and futures.

A bloody good programme.!
Aye
Malcolm

Made me cry!

Terrific programme

Excellent 10/10 for Channel 4
Dave

After it being poo-poo'd yesterday, condemned for being a 'docu-drama', I think the responses above confirm they don't always have to be hopelessly inaccurate or simply regurgitated soundbites !!
Well done Ch4 - and the next programme in the series on Sunday...
You are spoiling us...!
Jim

Great programme.
My daughter watched intesley and aked all sorts of questions throghout, looks like she will be more understanding in her fathers pasion.
Knitted together brilliantly.

James

Thought it was good. Certainly a fairly accurate portrayal of 22/Manchester's day.

But wasnt the music bloody irritating and distracting.

John

Very Very good
And at times quite moving
Glyn

Of course, the moment Captain May appeared, you just know that Malcolm Brown
is the historian concerned selecting some choice parts from his "Book of the Somme"- and of course, its impossible to listen to May's story without a lump in the throat - but overall, I was disappointed that more couldn't have been done with 2 hours of television and a biggish budget. Goodish graphics, I suppose. I do feel a bit let down though. Could have been so much better with a bit of effort. Think of the use of English in "The Great War". In comparison this script was really flat. A missed chance to do something really definitive ?

I missed the first 10 minutes. Was Haig mentioned at all ? If not surely a pretty fundamental omission whether you characterise him as a butcher or an educated soldier ? The final "shape" of the battle was as much dictated by him as Rawlinson.

I liked the final footage of May' s grave and the movement of the camera to look down on it. I would also agree that it was fairly well balanced. Must agree with other posts that Rawlinson's characterisation was just silly.

Perhaps a good introduction for the general viewer and designed to go worldwide, I think. Perhaps these facts put "definitive" out of the frame in themselves ?

A very good programme, hopefully watched by many who had not previously known much of the First War. As for John's Urban Myth comments, Salford certainly suffered because of 1st July!

If I said I didn't have a lump in my throat come the end, I'd be a liar!

"Damn good show" C4...... more of the same

Les.

Absolutely excellent showed Rawlinson in a fair light I thought. For once a balanced account I thought of the action.

regards
Arm

I thought it did the Manchesters, Devonshires and Middlesex brilliantly.
A little but 'regeneration' in its footage at times.
Overall, I give it a pat o the back. Would have liked to see the opportunity used to better effect in actual trench fighting. Where were the bombers?
The CGI from the 'air' was very powerful.
Des

I won't grumble that 'my blokes' were left out, lots of others in the same boat I suspect!

Yes, I too was impressed with the programme. I thought it was particularly moving when the image moved from the drama recreation of a character to a wartime photograph of the actual person portrayed - a very effective way of bringing it home that these were once living human beings, whose actual written words and thoughts had been delivered to us over nearly ninety years through the medium of this television programme.

Good, too, to have the Franch and German participants allowed to discourse in their native tongues, with subtitles; the voice over of their written words rendered in English was sensible, though. On the subject (and a minor quibble) - would Rawlinson have spoken with what sounded rather like a Glasgow 'hardman' accent?

Ciao,
GAC

As one of the docu-drama 'pooh-pooers' and also one who taped this in order to watch episode two of 'Finding The Fallen' (doh!) I am very much looking forward to watching it tomorrow judging by the comments above.

Excellent programme, a big well done to channel 4. It was watched in total silence in our house, no one said a word not even in the commercial breaks, until it was over.

Stephen

I thought it gave a fair view of the day - and not one steeped in the old stereotypes. Above all, though, I have to award full marks for underlining that the French also took part and were remarkably successful on the day.

Most of all I hope the general viewer walks away with a new perspective on the events of that day.

Am I correct in saying that it was Rawlinson sitting in the back seat of the aircraft during the aerial recce scene? The voice over certainly implied that it was. If I am, is it historically accurate?

If the comments of those in our house that only watched because I did, are anything to go by, then channel 4 have been successful on that score.

Stephen

Excellent. It makes a welcome change from many of the programmes on the Great War but one thing spoilt it.

After taking the first trench, the lads were off to attack the second line, not a shell hole in sight. And where was the results of the creeping barrage? Days and nights of bombardment?

I realise is would be expensive to have more realistic ground. I suppose it is just a detail but nevertheless, it is a shame in an otherwise excellent production.

Howard

Excellent job by C4 I think, they gave a pretty decent overview of the battle and a damned good idea of what it would have been like.

Hopefully in this special week it would have given more people an idea of what it was like..lets hope



and-....
The programme wasn't aimed at us anoraks ( maybe we should have a seperate thread..wrong ST for 22nd, alfred burke-pat burke etc etc)

we do have a newspaper report of charlie mays death, ( courtesy of Bernard's hard work) but i'm struggling to get a decent image

(note to bernard..thats when you broke the machine in central library )

[quote=ianw,Nov 14 2005, 11:13 PM

I missed the first 10 minutes. Was Haig mentioned at all ? If not surely a pretty fundamental omission whether you characterise him as a butcher or an educated soldier ?


[/quote]


I can only recall him being mentioned once towards the end, although I missed a couple of minutes at the beginning. There didn't seem to be anything about the disagreements between Haig and Rawlinson about the plan of attack. Did I miss that?

Overall, I thought that it was pretty good, but I enjoyed the Dunkirk drama a couple of years ago much more. I was impressed by the fact that it dealt with the French involvement.

Regards,
AGWR

I saw this and it was really, really interesting. It was such an eye-opener.

Quite agree that us anoraks are not the prime target audience, however I got the impression that Rawlinson's "bite and hold" strategy was put into effect. Having briefly explained "bite and hold", surely they might have mentioned that Haig then undermined it. Although I suppose if you pretty much ignore Haig - to avoid having to come out pro or anti him ? - this is going to be difficult.

"How are we going to deal with the Haig controversy ? I know, we'll just ignore it. That's a whole separate programme. We'll get that Sheffield chappie in for that one"

Ian

that wasn't the point of the programme,

if me and you put a tv prog about 'bite and hold' not being properly done until 1918..what chance would it have had of being shown

It was for people to get an idea of what is was like for the lads out there..they did a good job I thought

the Haig controversy isn't going to improve C4 ratings, best we can hope for there is history channel around 11pm ( IMHO)

I`m probably going to make myself rather unpopular when I say I wasn`t all that impressed . The fact that the docu-drama doesn`t go into detail about the British being under heavy political pressure from the French to have an offensive because of Verdun . Unless I`m mistaken Verdun isn`t mentioned once !

I also couldn`t help noticing that the British army of the day was described as " inexperienced " frequently . Perhaps if the docu-drama had mentioned that Kitchener`s BEF composed of volunteers had effectively been wiped out in 1915 it would have added some historical context as to the British army`s " inexperience " at the time

Hope I don`t sound paranoid or xenophobic

Neither were the mines that were detonated at 7.20am.

Otherwise I thought it a very worthy enterprise. Certainly a cut above much that has been churned out recently.

I saw part of it and will see the rest tomorrow. The first section was pretty good but the narration seemed rather unsure of military nomenclature e.g. 'the 2nd Devonshire battalion'. Maybe I wasn't paying full attention but did they imply that Albert Andrews was in the same battalion as the other featured Manchesters? He was in 19th not 22nd.

I am certainly not suggesting that the programme should have been a detailed 2 hour discussion of strategy and tactics but Haig's relationship with Rawlinson simply can't be sensibly ignored - indeed it could have added a bit of "docu drama" to the "worried staff" sections - and leaving us with the impression that "bite and hold" was the dominant tactic is just plain wrong IMHO. One gets the impression that Rawlinson was the supreme commander.

It seems to me that the programme is getting too much credit for not being as woeful as much of the Great War TV that is served up to us.

By the way, Verdun was mentioned at least once - the German defenders drink an understandable toast not to being at Verdun but rather on the "peaceful" Somme front ! But yes, the importance of the Somme attack to take pressure off the French is, I think , not mentioned.

I think the Germans get a fair crack of the whip - although their dug-out conditions are presented as much too cushy - very distant thumps of shells and not much of an apparent threat.

No, it was mentioned, sort of. There was a reference to the French only being able to commit five divisions (I think) due to them being locked in conflict at Verdun.

A lot of uneccessary critisms coming thro here.

Sure the terrain could have shown more shell holes and barbed wire, but this was hardly a speilberg production and the way the camera was used to film and 'narrow' the area of action specific to its storyline was very well done.

There was no need to go into the why and wherefores, the circumstances caused by Verdun or the different opinions within the High Command, or even the politics thats not what this production was about, its been done and no doubt will be done again by others.

This was about the battle, the biggest, greatest and worst in British history, by keeping to within their set parameters of 'The Somme' they produced something rather unique, a factual historic drama documentary account of what it was like on that one day.

The way the modern drama with its glimpse of the real men thro their diaries and journals, was excellently interlaced with Geoffrey Malins actual scenes which brought added reality and sadness. The graphics too held you to the enormity of what lay ahead and gave you the layout and understanding of the battlefield.

Now i havnt studied the website fully yet, but it seems to me Channel 4 are to be commended for their website and the whole series of programmes they are producing for this.

Some people will just never be satisfied tho i suppose.

Would some kind soul be able to copy me this programme ? I'll cover all costs of course.

I agree with much of what has been said. This programme does not appear to have been aimed at the expert but at the interested viewer who knew little of the battle or the circumstances surrounding it. As such, it was an impressive and moving glimpse into what it might have been like for those young men in 1916. Maybe Channel 4 could now look at Ypres 1917?


Kevin

I switched on at 9.00, fully expecting to have switched off through boredom by 9.30 - how wrong I was - it was a very good bit of TV, and full marks to the programme makers, for producing a well balanced and absolutely captivating couple of hours..!!

Rob.

No I think the criticism is justified as it was the producers who chose to feature Rawlinson rather prominently- Although I agree that the experience of the troops on 1st July was the prime focus and I think they fell down a bit here as well. This was a big budget production in Great War terms and although not expecting Spielberg, they could have done so much better. 3 strands of barbed wire and a bunch of blokes crashing about in a field is well short of Spielberg by any reckoning. It was carried by the very moving personal stories but they deserved better. Some parts were convincing, such as the horrendous affect of bullets on soldiers but much was not.

Mark

All Mancs featured were supposed to be 22nd. Perhaps there was another Albert Andrews.

And was Arthur (?) Burke actually Paddy Burke? I can't think of another great letter writer in the 22nd (he's extensively quoted in Stedman's book).

John

I enjoyed the program, the format, the way it was filmed, the use of the journals and such like. But there are plenty of things I could criticise. It was aimed at the general and not the anorak.

Verdun was mentioned, but was it important to the story that the British were put under pressure from the French to relieve pressure at Verdum (I don't think it was). I think the lack of Haig being mentioned was more important.

I will be interested to see what someone I work with has to say about it as they have just a passing interest in the Great War.

In fairness the 2 hours it was on passed quickly so that must mean I enjoyed it, but I did come away feeling a little let down - but I maybe being a little picky

My comment was based an an analysis of the statistics (at least some of the readily available ones). And I accept that the numbers of wounded add to the tragedy.

However....

In 1911, the City of Manchester had a population of 714,000, considerably more than today. The number of soldiers killed from various battalions of the Manchester Regiment was 663 (SDGW).

Of the 663, 104 were from the 17th Battalion. And of these, SDGW shows that at least 37 were not living within the City boundaries at time of enlistment.

I'd suggest that as a percentage of the population (which was used to death from social and environmental conditions as well as dangerous workplaces) this figures do not suggest a "devastation of communities" from one' days loss.

Tragedy - yes.

John