I boycotted 3:10 to Yuma. Couldn't they find a single American actor? I don't have a problem with British or Canadian actors, but come on! It's a cowboy movie for heaven's sake.
Can British people pretend to speak like Americans?
I think all of the actors besides the two leads were American. ;) including Peter Fonda.
I don't get into that must-cast-by-type deal. After all, it's called ACTING -- it's the art of deliberately pretending to be someone else. And sometimes, a particular actor brings the qualities that a role requires, regardless of their personal origins. On the screen, they are the character. Doesn't matter who they are off the screen.
Roger Ebert makes the point that Westerns are usually morality plays, and the best Western actors are not the flashy movie stars, but the character actors, and so character actors make the best leads -- put a movie star in the role, and it becomes vapid. Western heroes and outlaws were always independent iconoclasts, with their own unique little quirks and hang-ups and character flaws, and those were the things that made them interesting and often drove their choices -- not their good looks. I never thought about it that way, but I think that's why Young Guns, with its ridiculous brat pack cast, fell so short of the mark. Christian Bale does great character acting. And really, so does Russell Crowe, although they have tried to make a movie star out of him.
I don't get into that must-cast-by-type deal. After all, it's called ACTING -- it's the art of deliberately pretending to be someone else. And sometimes, a particular actor brings the qualities that a role requires, regardless of their personal origins. On the screen, they are the character. Doesn't matter who they are off the screen.
Roger Ebert makes the point that Westerns are usually morality plays, and the best Western actors are not the flashy movie stars, but the character actors, and so character actors make the best leads -- put a movie star in the role, and it becomes vapid. Western heroes and outlaws were always independent iconoclasts, with their own unique little quirks and hang-ups and character flaws, and those were the things that made them interesting and often drove their choices -- not their good looks. I never thought about it that way, but I think that's why Young Guns, with its ridiculous brat pack cast, fell so short of the mark. Christian Bale does great character acting. And really, so does Russell Crowe, although they have tried to make a movie star out of him.
There are actually many different ways of speaking "British" English, just as there are regional accents and dialects in the U.S. And by the way, if you think a Brit can't speak "American" have you ever watched House or Without a Trace. The stars of both these shows are British.
"Nuv-AH-duh"
Not that most Brits have occasion to include the name Nevada in any conversation at any given time. Same with, say, Montana. Do you want to know how most of us say that name? I think we're split down the middle here - depending on where you come from in the UK whether it's a short A or a long one. Same maybe with Alabama. I know some of us mis-pronounce the CH in Michigan.
While we're on this topic, what is the correct way of saying Hawaii? Do Hawaiians pronounce it differently from the way most people do?
Not that most Brits have occasion to include the name Nevada in any conversation at any given time. Same with, say, Montana. Do you want to know how most of us say that name? I think we're split down the middle here - depending on where you come from in the UK whether it's a short A or a long one. Same maybe with Alabama. I know some of us mis-pronounce the CH in Michigan.
While we're on this topic, what is the correct way of saying Hawaii? Do Hawaiians pronounce it differently from the way most people do?
Uriel- I wouldn't care that about the nationality of actors, but cowboys are the archtype American Male. They are what all men born in the U.S. try (and fail) to be and the reason that many forigners say that American men attempt to be too macho. If the plot had sounded promising, I probably would have gone and seen it, but that didn't sound too good either. However, since you gave it a good word and since I watch too many movies anyways, I will rent it when it comes out. (Confession: I actually liked Emilio Estevez in Young Guns and I have no idea why.)
Damian- I was in Hawaii last year and they seemed to pronounce the w as sort of a clipped v.
Damian- I was in Hawaii last year and they seemed to pronounce the w as sort of a clipped v.
Rene - I understand what you’re saying but spare a thought for us poor Britons. We constantly get 'big name' yanks portraying British royalty or getting the lead in British films.
A perfect example is the forthcoming film 'The Other Boleyn Girl'. This film has an Aussie - Eric Bana, portraying King Henry the Eighth, whilst an American (Israeli??), Natalie Portman is playing one of his wives - Queen Anne Boleyn and another American - Scarlett Johansson, is playing her sister Lady Mary Boleyn.
A very British film and not one of the three leads are British (Scarlett Johansson is also playing Mary Queen of Scots!!!). Thank god for Kiera Knightley is what I say!!!!!!
But as Uriel said Actors are doing just that - Acting!!! As long as the accent is spot on I'm as happy as Larry.
What is worse, and no offence young lady, is how Americans continually re-write OUR history, this is something that I find absolutely unforgivable, especially when it is rewritten for self-serving purposes.
Take the film U-571 starring Matthew McConaughey and Harvey Keitel. This film tells of one of the great triumphs of the war - the capture of the 'Enigma' machine which helped the Allies decipher German codes and was crucial in the Allies winning the war. In the film it is the Americans who are portrayed capturing the machine but in REAL LIFE it was actually the British who risked or even lost their lives capturing this machine - surely these brave men deserve their incredible story to be told TRUTHFULLY. How Hollywood had and has the nerve to do and continue to do this is beyond me.
This, to me, reflects negatively on American culture because otherwise why else would American film makers feel that Americans need to be lied to just so they’d go and see the film?? Can it really be that Hollywood feels that Americans would find the film more thrilling only if they replaced the nationality of the REAL heroes with fake American ones??? This strikes me as not only pathetic but also very worrying.
Films, especially ones 'based' on real events are very powerful mediums which have the ability to colour peoples perceptions of history (which Hollywood know) and therefore the makers have a duty to tell the facts. The events in the aforementioned film occurred in 1941 well BEFORE the Americans even entered the war. Plus U-571 was never captured, it was U-110, again this is a disservice to the Real German crew of U-571 who served their country with distinction. Disgraceful stuff - and it happens ALL the time. I hope someone got sued.
We get the rawest deal of all Rene. Imagine (this is very far-fetched), if Britain had the media might of the US and we decided to tell the story of the Moon landings and instead of Americans we used the British. Imagine if, for what ever reason, the facts of this event were unknown and this film led to the world actually thinking it was the British and NOT the Americans who did the monumental Moon landings (I told you it was far-fetched).
Quite rightly the yanks would be a bit peed off to say the least at seeing another country get the credit for this wonderful piece of American history - so spare a thought for the feelings of all the men & women and their families who have their stories constantly whitewashed just so Hollywood can make more money or create self serving propaganda.
Don't get me started on the film Braveheart!!! Needless to say, the English get it the worst of all!!!
A perfect example is the forthcoming film 'The Other Boleyn Girl'. This film has an Aussie - Eric Bana, portraying King Henry the Eighth, whilst an American (Israeli??), Natalie Portman is playing one of his wives - Queen Anne Boleyn and another American - Scarlett Johansson, is playing her sister Lady Mary Boleyn.
A very British film and not one of the three leads are British (Scarlett Johansson is also playing Mary Queen of Scots!!!). Thank god for Kiera Knightley is what I say!!!!!!
But as Uriel said Actors are doing just that - Acting!!! As long as the accent is spot on I'm as happy as Larry.
What is worse, and no offence young lady, is how Americans continually re-write OUR history, this is something that I find absolutely unforgivable, especially when it is rewritten for self-serving purposes.
Take the film U-571 starring Matthew McConaughey and Harvey Keitel. This film tells of one of the great triumphs of the war - the capture of the 'Enigma' machine which helped the Allies decipher German codes and was crucial in the Allies winning the war. In the film it is the Americans who are portrayed capturing the machine but in REAL LIFE it was actually the British who risked or even lost their lives capturing this machine - surely these brave men deserve their incredible story to be told TRUTHFULLY. How Hollywood had and has the nerve to do and continue to do this is beyond me.
This, to me, reflects negatively on American culture because otherwise why else would American film makers feel that Americans need to be lied to just so they’d go and see the film?? Can it really be that Hollywood feels that Americans would find the film more thrilling only if they replaced the nationality of the REAL heroes with fake American ones??? This strikes me as not only pathetic but also very worrying.
Films, especially ones 'based' on real events are very powerful mediums which have the ability to colour peoples perceptions of history (which Hollywood know) and therefore the makers have a duty to tell the facts. The events in the aforementioned film occurred in 1941 well BEFORE the Americans even entered the war. Plus U-571 was never captured, it was U-110, again this is a disservice to the Real German crew of U-571 who served their country with distinction. Disgraceful stuff - and it happens ALL the time. I hope someone got sued.
We get the rawest deal of all Rene. Imagine (this is very far-fetched), if Britain had the media might of the US and we decided to tell the story of the Moon landings and instead of Americans we used the British. Imagine if, for what ever reason, the facts of this event were unknown and this film led to the world actually thinking it was the British and NOT the Americans who did the monumental Moon landings (I told you it was far-fetched).
Quite rightly the yanks would be a bit peed off to say the least at seeing another country get the credit for this wonderful piece of American history - so spare a thought for the feelings of all the men & women and their families who have their stories constantly whitewashed just so Hollywood can make more money or create self serving propaganda.
Don't get me started on the film Braveheart!!! Needless to say, the English get it the worst of all!!!
Sorry, I said "how Americans continually re-write OUR history". That should probably read "how Hollywood continually re-writes OUR history".
Everybody knows full well that Hollywood's versions of real life historical events, especially those which took place in Britain (which we can suss out so easily) or relating to WW2, were pie in the sky fantasies most of the time. I think it's fun, though - mixing up the actors playing parts from the "wrong" side of the Atlantic. Some of the Americans were quite good doing the Britspeaks, but one or two were crap, but I can't comment on our guys playing the American bits.
The mis-casting of Braveheart was a total iniquity, but we've done that one to death.
The mis-casting of Braveheart was a total iniquity, but we've done that one to death.
PubLunch, in a way, you're both right.
I'm quoting from memory, now, so please don't get angry if I get some of the details wrong.
The Americans' role in the Enigma machine was relegated to its breaking of the JAPANESE codes. If I recall, there were two codes--the PURPLE code and the RED code. The red one--a less secure one--was broken early in the War, but the Purple code stumped them for years. My understanding is that a man named Walter Freeman (sic?) in the Cryptoanalysis section of the FBI broke it, with the help of congruences, group theory, and a whole lot of other mathematic gobbly-gook that I don't understand.
The whole story can be read in the book THE CODEBREAKERS, available at your local library, or through inter-library loan.
I'm quoting from memory, now, so please don't get angry if I get some of the details wrong.
The Americans' role in the Enigma machine was relegated to its breaking of the JAPANESE codes. If I recall, there were two codes--the PURPLE code and the RED code. The red one--a less secure one--was broken early in the War, but the Purple code stumped them for years. My understanding is that a man named Walter Freeman (sic?) in the Cryptoanalysis section of the FBI broke it, with the help of congruences, group theory, and a whole lot of other mathematic gobbly-gook that I don't understand.
The whole story can be read in the book THE CODEBREAKERS, available at your local library, or through inter-library loan.
Jasper -
Yeah your right, the Polish were responsible by and large for laying the ground work for deciphering Enigma machines in general, but it was an almost exclusive collaboration between British and American intelligence which helped decipher the codes being exchanged by the German Navy. The Americans played their role mate - there is no question about that at all.
But the film I am talking about refers to the 'capture' of one of the Enigma machines, the event in question was a British only triumph and those brave men did not deserve to have the credit of their achievement given to Americans just so a few extra tickets could be sold (I really don't mean to sound Nationalistic here mate).
I realise many films are fictional, but when a film is based on 'real events' and certainly events as important as well as sensitive as those in World War 2, then the film makers surely have a duty towards being as factual as possible.
I remember a few protests being held but this travesty of a film went largely un-noticed anyway - jolly good job and all.
Yeah your right, the Polish were responsible by and large for laying the ground work for deciphering Enigma machines in general, but it was an almost exclusive collaboration between British and American intelligence which helped decipher the codes being exchanged by the German Navy. The Americans played their role mate - there is no question about that at all.
But the film I am talking about refers to the 'capture' of one of the Enigma machines, the event in question was a British only triumph and those brave men did not deserve to have the credit of their achievement given to Americans just so a few extra tickets could be sold (I really don't mean to sound Nationalistic here mate).
I realise many films are fictional, but when a film is based on 'real events' and certainly events as important as well as sensitive as those in World War 2, then the film makers surely have a duty towards being as factual as possible.
I remember a few protests being held but this travesty of a film went largely un-noticed anyway - jolly good job and all.
They are making a film out of "The Other Bolyn Girl?" with the leads being played by non-brits? The book was lame enough, why torture us (or you) any further?
Historical inaccuracy had me tied up in knots just as I was while watching Braveheart, Gladiator, Shakespeare in Love, and King Arthur (yeah, the Saxons are really going to go way out of their way to invade from north of Hadrian's Wall. I guess the writers decided that they would definately have gone to all that trouble just to see Kiera Knightly out there on the ice in her skimpy little outfit showing her complete lack of a female figure and somehow managing not to freeze to death). What galls me most in the history department is that Hollywood can't even get American history right! Pearl Harbor was bad as far as that went, not to mention Glory. We are forced to take three years of U.S. history in school and the filmakers still can't remember it. So good luck if an American gets their hands on European history. My pity goes out to you on that one.
Historical inaccuracy had me tied up in knots just as I was while watching Braveheart, Gladiator, Shakespeare in Love, and King Arthur (yeah, the Saxons are really going to go way out of their way to invade from north of Hadrian's Wall. I guess the writers decided that they would definately have gone to all that trouble just to see Kiera Knightly out there on the ice in her skimpy little outfit showing her complete lack of a female figure and somehow managing not to freeze to death). What galls me most in the history department is that Hollywood can't even get American history right! Pearl Harbor was bad as far as that went, not to mention Glory. We are forced to take three years of U.S. history in school and the filmakers still can't remember it. So good luck if an American gets their hands on European history. My pity goes out to you on that one.
Sorry about the double post here, but I just wanted to clarify. I noticed that you use the term Britons Pub Lunch. I used non-Brits. I hope that is not considered offensive by anyone. It certainly wasn't meant to be.
Publunch:
I see; I misperceived a part of your original post.
My understanding is that the Brits broke the German code, but handed over the Japanese code to the Americans, who had vastly deeper sources with that difficult tongue.
I didn't know about the incident you described about the Brits capturing an actual machine; that's fascinating, indeed.
The fact that the Americans took credit for it is messed up, I agree. I guess that's Hollywood for you. The American $$ market always comes first with Hollywood films, and hence, it's in their financial interest to warp history. Sad, but true.
I see; I misperceived a part of your original post.
My understanding is that the Brits broke the German code, but handed over the Japanese code to the Americans, who had vastly deeper sources with that difficult tongue.
I didn't know about the incident you described about the Brits capturing an actual machine; that's fascinating, indeed.
The fact that the Americans took credit for it is messed up, I agree. I guess that's Hollywood for you. The American $$ market always comes first with Hollywood films, and hence, it's in their financial interest to warp history. Sad, but true.
<<The fact that the Americans took credit for it is messed up, I agree. I guess that's Hollywood for you. The American $$ market always comes first with Hollywood films, and hence, it's in their financial interest to warp history. Sad, but true. >>
Oh yeah - of course. The American market is huge and this is where all and sundae want to make it big and understandably so. I suppose money makes the world go around so what can you do?? It pretty much explains why even British films will get big name American actors/actresses for lead roles, it guarantees that much more interest. I am just as bad, if I see Al Pacino’s name on a poster I’ll go and watch the film.
I think pinpointing who was responsible for deciphering of the codes is quite complex as there were so many and I'd need to really learn the full history of it Jasper. From what I remember I believe it was the Polish who initially cracked the codes, before the war had even started but it was British intelligence that started to crack the codes of the messages being sent tween the U-Boats.This was eventually hugely helped by American intelligence. The cracking of Japanese codes was left to the US, who were pretty much solely responsible for cracking the Japanese red and purple codes.
<<I noticed that you use the term Britons Pub Lunch. I used non-Brits>>
Saying Non Brits is cool as cucumber Rene, I hope yank does not offend you (it is definitely the standard term used for Americans here and is no way ever said to be offensive – unless of course someone says something like "bloody yanks" – then maybe not). I always use Briton as opposed to Brit because I remember my teacher at school telling me that British people refer to themselves as Britons I am not sure if this is true but I got into the habit of using Briton anyway.
When you mentioned Pearl Harbour I realised that I am probably taking it a bit too personally (although the English frequently get portrayed as arseholes – especially historically). That film is also a travesty to the memory of the brave Americans who lost their lives as well as the ones who survived, in that terrible event. I can imagine many Americans raising their voices about that one (that is one of the great things about the yanks, they don’t take any bollocks and stick up for themselves – as shown by your boycotting of that Western film you mentioned. We need more of that here).
I have never read the book 'The Other Boleyn Girl' or seen the BBC programme that aired a few years ago that was based on it. I'll admit, the film has already got me sold though - I wonder why that could be???
Actually, the only reason I know about the film was because I went on a day trip to the incredibly beautiful Ely Cathedral in Cambridgeshire a few months back only to find that it had been closed because they were shooting scenes for this film. Talk about sod's law!!!
Oh yeah - of course. The American market is huge and this is where all and sundae want to make it big and understandably so. I suppose money makes the world go around so what can you do?? It pretty much explains why even British films will get big name American actors/actresses for lead roles, it guarantees that much more interest. I am just as bad, if I see Al Pacino’s name on a poster I’ll go and watch the film.
I think pinpointing who was responsible for deciphering of the codes is quite complex as there were so many and I'd need to really learn the full history of it Jasper. From what I remember I believe it was the Polish who initially cracked the codes, before the war had even started but it was British intelligence that started to crack the codes of the messages being sent tween the U-Boats.This was eventually hugely helped by American intelligence. The cracking of Japanese codes was left to the US, who were pretty much solely responsible for cracking the Japanese red and purple codes.
<<I noticed that you use the term Britons Pub Lunch. I used non-Brits>>
Saying Non Brits is cool as cucumber Rene, I hope yank does not offend you (it is definitely the standard term used for Americans here and is no way ever said to be offensive – unless of course someone says something like "bloody yanks" – then maybe not). I always use Briton as opposed to Brit because I remember my teacher at school telling me that British people refer to themselves as Britons I am not sure if this is true but I got into the habit of using Briton anyway.
When you mentioned Pearl Harbour I realised that I am probably taking it a bit too personally (although the English frequently get portrayed as arseholes – especially historically). That film is also a travesty to the memory of the brave Americans who lost their lives as well as the ones who survived, in that terrible event. I can imagine many Americans raising their voices about that one (that is one of the great things about the yanks, they don’t take any bollocks and stick up for themselves – as shown by your boycotting of that Western film you mentioned. We need more of that here).
I have never read the book 'The Other Boleyn Girl' or seen the BBC programme that aired a few years ago that was based on it. I'll admit, the film has already got me sold though - I wonder why that could be???
Actually, the only reason I know about the film was because I went on a day trip to the incredibly beautiful Ely Cathedral in Cambridgeshire a few months back only to find that it had been closed because they were shooting scenes for this film. Talk about sod's law!!!
Nah, Yank doesn't bother me. If I was from the Southern U.S. it might, but I'm not.
Here's an interesting one. Master and Commander was based on the Patrick O'Brian novel wherin Captain Jack and his ship the Surprise chase an American frigate around during the War of 1812. O'Brian based the structure of that vessel on the USS Constitution (otherwise known as Old Ironsides) which was the ultimate frigate of its era. The design made it even faster than its rivals though it was heavier and the sides were of such thick oak that cannons of other ships had a hard time penetrating it (look to the Battle of New Orleans). In the movie, the ship is French, but the Americans are given credit for its design. Who thought that one up? If it was an American producer (which I very much suspect given what appears to be a very large budget) I guess he figured that American audiences could cheer for the British captain as long as he wasn't hunting an American ship. Of course, we kept the credit for the better ship design. Now if that isn't warped marketing, I don't know what is.
Here's an interesting one. Master and Commander was based on the Patrick O'Brian novel wherin Captain Jack and his ship the Surprise chase an American frigate around during the War of 1812. O'Brian based the structure of that vessel on the USS Constitution (otherwise known as Old Ironsides) which was the ultimate frigate of its era. The design made it even faster than its rivals though it was heavier and the sides were of such thick oak that cannons of other ships had a hard time penetrating it (look to the Battle of New Orleans). In the movie, the ship is French, but the Americans are given credit for its design. Who thought that one up? If it was an American producer (which I very much suspect given what appears to be a very large budget) I guess he figured that American audiences could cheer for the British captain as long as he wasn't hunting an American ship. Of course, we kept the credit for the better ship design. Now if that isn't warped marketing, I don't know what is.