You lot like a whinge...

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

16 years 2 months

Posts: 2,248

You are spot on. Talk about 'arslikhan'

Stephen Bungay or James Holland would have been a much better choice for presenter rather than the dreary and repetitive O'Dreary.

Err.. Holland was there for much of the program and to call O'Leary dreary then mention Bungay rather suggests you either are the latter or are at least related to him! His book wasn't as good as most seem to think either. Too many contradictions and inconsistencies. Have you heard what he has to say about Dresden btw? I doubt you'll think too highly of that.
Did you actually watch the program?

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 9,780

'you know what?, I thought exactly the same!, when did the British army let you walk around with 3 days growth and sport a mop of hair like that?'

They do let some !

Member for

17 years 11 months

Posts: 2,024

when did the British army let you walk around with 3 days growth and sport a mop of hair like that?'

When you have left? :)

Member for

12 years 11 months

Posts: 6,535

Yes, he was there but, he wasn't the presenter. Holland and Bungay have a 'gravitas' lacking in O'Dreary. O'Dreary was lightweight and appeared to almost run out of comments and questions. Most of to-days general purpose presenters, seem to be big on 'feelings' and not much else.

I presume you're referring to Bungay's "The Most Dangerous Enemy?" You'd be hard put to find better.

Member for

11 years 5 months

Posts: 11,141

Having never heard of O'Leary I googled the name to discover he's a disc jockey and light entertainment presenter!! QED m'lud!!

Member for

16 years 2 months

Posts: 2,248

"Gravitas" of the Bungay type would have had the general public turning off in droves. The program wasn't just for you and our ilk John.
Don't disagree about the feelings bit though.
Yes I am referring to that book, read it twice as for the life of me I can't see what additional insight it brought to the subject, as many hyped. In fact I bought the book based on the hyped reviews. It also, as I already noted, contradicted itself on a number of occasions and had all sorts of other inconsistencies. My conclusion in the end was that those who were praising the work simply didn't know as much as they would probably represent themselves as knowing thus the "additional insight" to those who had a clue wasn't really additional at all.
It's not a bad book but it isn't the revelatory work some represent it as.

Member for

12 years 11 months

Posts: 6,535

I do admit to being quite strongly prejudiced towards James Holland and Stephen Bungay. Bungay in particular is in the mould of the late A.J.P Taylor, Richard Holmes and David Starkey. All of them quite outstanding TV historians.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 9,780

Either Jodie Kidd or Guy Martin would have been my choices for the programme !

Member for

11 years 5 months

Posts: 11,141

Tongue in the cheek there, I presume........?;)

Member for

12 years 11 months

Posts: 6,535

Jodie Kidd is visually distracting and it's next to impossible to understand what Guy Martin is saying.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 9,780

Spitfires are visually distracting ! Do you need a presenter???

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 16,832

Raymond Baxter and his ilk are largely dead

I think I can confirm that Mr Baxter is totally dead.

It was a strange programme. It never quite made up its mind what it wanted to be. A few filmed inserts, using Holland or whoever, could have been prepared in advance to actually create some feeling of the situation on the morning of Sept 15 rather than some vague gesturing at a map board in the rain. There must have been a better choice for linkman, but I can't offhand think of one, but I swear if yon Dermot had said 'iconic' one more time my TV screen was in serious danger.

That said I thought some of the filming was brilliant, especially looking down on the aircraft from the chopper.

Better than watching another episode of Top Gear or CSI Wigan. So 6.5 out of 10 for me.

Moggy

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 3,208

In spite of the usual suspects who insist on living in a world which the rest of the population left behind half a century ago, I think the key point here is that it was an (undeniably populist) positive slant on historic aviation that is hugely needed in the wake of the negativity of the recent lurid post-Shoreham headlines and editorial.

Member for

12 years 11 months

Posts: 1,542

Some truly excellent footage, but somewhat tainted by overbearing commentary. The dedication at the end was a bit poor too, the pretty average soundtrack muting the engine sounds of the aircraft.

My favourite part was probably the two amputees learning to fly Spit's. :) What an amazing experience that must have been, and a fitting reward for those who dedicate their lives to serving the country. :)

Member for

18 years

Posts: 426

There's a joke there about giving right arms to fly a Spitfire, but probably in very poor taste... :D

(delete as appropriate)

Member for

18 years 3 months

Posts: 2,025

I thought Dermot O'Leary did a pretty good job, I absolutely hated the ex-lax factor and was slightly dreading his take on the BoB, however I was pleasantly surprised, he is after all presenter, and Stephen Bungay isn't, so I don't know why some would suggest him.

The programme was obviously made on the fly, and appeared unscripted (in the main) that takes a certain kind of a person to carry that off, and also appeared to have been made as cheaply as possible, that appears to be the way at the moment, and I guess we'll have to get used to that; as for the BBC, pitiful.

Member for

16 years 2 months

Posts: 2,248

Has it occurred to those slagging the BBC that they were not invited to the party beyond basic reporting?
If I were Channel 4 and the production company, Arrow I believe, and had presumably bid to present the event would I be happy with the Beeb turning up and competing with me?

Member for

12 years 5 months

Posts: 333

Oh dear. It seems many here are as hazy about the facts as the media they love to deride.

Pot, meet kettle.

I will apologise for my ignorance, not a huge follower of the younger members of the royal family who seem to rise the in ranks of the armed forces that would leave most of us in a spin! its just that when they kept showing photos of the young Hewitt, sorry Wales in the cockpit of modern military hardware I obviously thought he was still 'IN'. I was a staff cadet in the ATC til they chucked me out at age 19 but I don't wear my yellow lanyard when I go to the shops! or show photos of me sitting In a hawk at Brawdy circa 1983.

Member for

18 years 3 months

Posts: 2,025

Has it occurred to those slagging the BBC that they were not invited to the party beyond basic reporting?
If I were Channel 4 and the production company, Arrow I believe, and had presumably bid to present the event would I be happy with the Beeb turning up and competing with me?

I don't believe the BBC had to be invited to make a fitting tribute to those men women and machines that fought, and endured the Battle of Britain.