Ain't It Cool News (www.aintitcool.com)
Movie News

Peter Jackson producing another DAM (Busters) remake?

Ahoy, squirts! Quint here. For the longest time I've had this box set of DVDs in my ever growing "To Watch" DVD pile. It's a compilation of British War Films that Anchor Bay put out a while ago. I've been looking at it for a year now and every time I get close to finally picking it up I either get sent some DVDs to review or I go on a binge in the used DVD section of CD Warehouse.

Yesterday morning I finally popped in the 1954 film THE DAM BUSTERS, the first of 5 movies in this set. I had only ever seen clips before, mostly in other movies like PINK FLOYD'S THE WALL. The story always intrigued me... That of a select group of Allied forces in WW2 who are brought together to target Germany's steel industry, most notably by destroying heavily defended dams. British scientists figured out a new bomb that, when dropped at low altitude, would skip across the water's surface and hit the dam wall. Theoretically. They needed the best of the best of the air corps to fly so low (less than 100 ft) and under such heavy resistance. And, of course, Robert M'fing Shaw was one of the tough bastards sticking it to those Nazi bastards. They didn't stand a chance.





Now it has been announced that Peter Jackson has signed a deal with Universal to produce a remake of the classic war flick, with his long time collaborator, Christian Rivers, making his directorial debut. Of course, Weta Workshop and Weta Digital will step up to make sure the movie looks great and, hopefully, provide us some of the best goddamn air combat visuals we've seen on the silver screen since STAR WARS. In fact, one of the reasons the original jumped so high up on my "want to see" list was the bit of trivia that Lucas based much of the attack on the Death Star sequence on THE DAM BUSTERS.

Here's the press release as well as a photo of Jackson and Rivers (credit to Grant Maiden) in the cockpit of a real Lancaster aircraft, the exact type of plane used in the bombing runs by the 617 Squadron, and a great piece of art by Robert Taylor depicting the bombing run :

UNIVERSAL CITY, CA, August 31, 2006 — Production will soon begin on DAMBUSTERS, an inspirational story of heroism and one of the most daring missions in aeronautic military history, it was announced today by Universal Pictures and StudioCanal.

Christian Rivers will direct the film, which is inspired by actual events and based on the book The Dam Busters by Paul Brickhill and the 1955 Associated British Picture Corporation motion picture. The WingNut Films production is produced by Jan Blenkin, Carolynne Cunningham and Peter Jackson, with Sir David Frost and Ken Kamins serving as executive producers.





A Universal Pictures presentation in association with StudioCanal, DAMBUSTERS chronicles the story of Operation Chastise, a top-secret Royal Air Force bombing mission designed to strike a decisive blow against the seemingly invincible Nazi war machine at the height of its aggression.

In March 1943, a group of airmen drawn from across the ranks of the RAF were assembled and trained for an unprecedented and potentially deadly assignment whose complete nature was not revealed to them. This largely hand-picked group, known as 617 Squadron—including pilots from Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and the USA—were led by Wing Cmdr. Guy Gibson. They had only seven weeks to train with exercises that imitated, but never revealed, their ultimate intent: to fly deep within well-armed Germany at tree top level and destroy three dams that were essential to the Nazi steel industry. A revolutionary “bouncing” bomb that could skip across water had been developed by a visionary scientist, Barnes Wallis, but to be effective, the bomb had to be dropped from a terrifyingly close range and at very low altitude. In specially-modified Lancaster aircraft, the airmen trained for a single mission, the likes of which had never been undertaken and whose potential for success was small.

“This is one of the most remarkable true stories to come out of World War II,” stated Jackson. “When Michael Anderson made his thrilling version of this story in 1955, many details of the dams raid were still a closely guarded secret. It has since been declassified by the British Government, making the dynamics of the story and the people involved even more intriguing. That, combined with our ability to harness state-of-the-art computer generated visual effects, will enable us to bring the events of these desperate days of 1943 to life in a very visceral way. This is an astonishing story that continues to be revered in British Commonwealth history, and our hope is to make their exploits known to more of the world and extend their legacy to a generation that might not otherwise recognize their inspiration and sacrifice.”

“Peter Jackson is the ideal producer for a remake of DAMBUSTERS,” said Sir David Frost. “Not only because of his film-making genius, but also because of his aeronautical expertise and his unique understanding of the human pressures wrought by war.”

DAMBUSTERS marks the feature film directorial debut of Christian Rivers, who has worked with Jackson for over 17 years—first as a storyboard artist while still at school, then as an animator, pre-vis supervisor, second unit director—culminating in his work as animation director on Jackson’s King Kong, which won him a 2006 Academy Award® for Best Visual Effects (an honor Rivers shared with Joe Letteri, Brian Van’t Hul and Richard Taylor).

“The bravery of these young pilots, some of whom were only 20 years old, inspired the whole Allied world not just to resist, but to strike back against Nazi Germany,” said Rivers. “I grew up with the Dambusters mythology as part of my heritage. I remember seeing it for the first time on television in England with my grandfather. I’ll never forget marveling at the image of the bouncing bomb punching across the water. This is one of the most revered stories of British ingenuity and heroism. We intend to be true to the values of the era in which these events took place.”

The Oscar®-winning artists at Weta Digital, Ltd. and Weta Workshop, Ltd. will create the visual effects and miniatures necessary to fully realize DAMBUSTERS for the motion picture screen.





I should have some more info on this project shortly, straight from the horse's mouth, plus a major update on all things Wingnut. Keep your eyes on the site, squirts!!!



Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Aug. 31, 2006, 4:45 p.m. CST

    Woo hoo. Remakes!

    by brycemonkey

    You think he would have learned his lesson with Kong...

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 4:47 p.m. CST

    Wow

    by Cincy Vigilante

    why another remake? Think of something original hollywood!

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 4:48 p.m. CST

    Good movie

    by georges garvaren

    that Dam Buster is. Im not down on remakes, im just down on water wasting.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 4:48 p.m. CST

    I was shocked when I heard this though...

    by brycemonkey

    really who cares about remaking this? Yes it was cool 60 years ago. Now you've got smart bombs and spaceships and lightsabers...

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 4:50 p.m. CST

    It can't be any worse than...

    by Frank The Rabbit

    King Kong, man that movie sucked donkey balls!!!

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 4:51 p.m. CST

    Hurrah!

    by peter skellen

    A film that acknowleges Britain was in WWII. Thank heavens Steven Speilberg and Tom Hanks didn't get their mitts on this one.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 4:51 p.m. CST

    One Word....

    by turbonegro

    WHY???!!!!

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 4:55 p.m. CST

    True turbo, I bet 99% of people are more interested in

    by brycemonkey

    his Halo movie than this. Why? Dam Busters is almost certainly a better and more compelling story, but Halo is more relevant to people today. I wonder if they&#39;ll keep the dog&#39;s name the same as the original DB or change it? <arf!>

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 4:57 p.m. CST

    Powerful Words...

    by repus3000

    HAD to comment

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5 p.m. CST

    can ZOMBIEs break through dams?

    by kidjingo

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Azo8heDmNoQ

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5 p.m. CST

    TOO JUGG FUCKLING SOON!!!

    by JimBelushi

    For another remake from Peter Jackson.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:01 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson is a dick,

    by fortheloveofgod

    And wants to remake everything. All his original work is b-movie crap.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:01 p.m. CST

    Blah!

    by jerkstore

    I would prefer that he do Ghostbusters.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:06 p.m. CST

    I&#39;m not opposed to a remake, so long as...

    by Vim Fuego

    They keep the theme tune. And it had better star British actors too.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:10 p.m. CST

    I expect this will be a great, great film.....

    by Giant Ape Balls

    that no one will bother to see. It has a lack of Americans in it. Or we&#39;ll get Brad Pitt with a Dick Van Dyke style English accent .

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:13 p.m. CST

    I mentioned this

    by emeraldboy

    over in Coaxial. suggesting that film purists should reach for the heart medication. We should all be thankful that Mel gibson didnt get to it first.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:15 p.m. CST

    Supringly Mel Gibson had the rights

    by Giant Ape Balls

    to do this. Now that would have been a flick!! I&#39;d have thought he&#39;d change it so the heroic Germans get back at the dastardly English for their cowardly bombing of a dam that gave drinking water to the children of Germany, thus starting WW2. They find out that the English were in league with the evil Jews. Proving that all was is their fault.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:18 p.m. CST

    will it be better than FLYBOYS?

    by godoffireinhell

    j/k

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:29 p.m. CST

    Seriously

    by PCH Boy

    We get it. Mel Gibson said something about Jews running shit. Get over it, already.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:32 p.m. CST

    Awesome (as in "awesomely shitty")

    by Liberty Valance

    I&#39;m always down for a bloated 3-hour remake that&#39;s 50% slow motion. Bring it on Pete, you&#39;re a genius in the most completely inaccurate sense of the word.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:39 p.m. CST

    Another PJ article, another remake article

    by Atticus Finch

    Surprise, surprise.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:40 p.m. CST

    Ape on a plane

    by Stollentroll

    WW II plane, that is. Screw Peter Jackson for King Kong, screw him for wasting three hours of our lives!

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:44 p.m. CST

    truth being, of course

    by aestheticity

    that the dambusting raids were a big project but ultimately an ineffective, expensive gimmick. the impact the destruction of the ruhr valley had on the war was absolutely minimal, given the rapid rebuilding by the germans. the majority of the death toll was in fact allied POW&#39;s. its only value was in affecting morale, which is debatable, and solidifying the support of britains allies by demonstrating her power - even more debatable, since both stalin and roosevelt had by the time of the raid prepared for full scale retaliation independent of british involvement (ignoring any hindsight we now have).

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:51 p.m. CST

    *Sigh* He&#39;s right, it is one of Britain&#39;s most revered

    by scrumdiddly

    war stories. Dunkirk, the Battle of Britain and the Dambuster raid are the big three, I think. Quint&#39;s exposition would be unnecessary for anyone in the UK - it&#39;s knowledge everyone simply grows up with. If they Hollywoodize this thing, I swear.....

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 5:55 p.m. CST

    Guy&#39;s black dog

    by Miami Mofo

    So ya think P.J. will change the name of Guy&#39;s dog to, say, Blackie? Or will he be true to history and use the dreaded N word?

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 6:10 p.m. CST

    No movies with Brits looking badass please!

    by J-Dizzle

    What&#39;s next? A black guy runs riot on the PGA tour????

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 6:29 p.m. CST

    Rivers has the best imagination

    by messi

    A shitload of the insane shots from LOTR and King Kong were him. This will look visually amazing.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 6:29 p.m. CST

    An early role for Patrick McGoohan in "Dam Busters"

    by Uncapie

    He&#39;s the one that is responsible for getting the dog killed. I kid you not!

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 6:31 p.m. CST

    What? how can anyone say King kong sucks?

    by messi

    What a beautiful film. That Peter Jackson pacing that&#39;s like an Isis song. Precise and just Perfect. Not only that but the fucking score was amazing.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 6:41 p.m. CST

    Is it technically a remake?

    by Alientoast

    Can the term remake even be applied to something based on factual events? I can maybe see if they are taking the original flick and essentially ripping off cinematic bits of it, but if they&#39;re conceiving a new project based on the factual documents I hardly think it should automatically be labeled a remake. Will any movie on the Battan Death March be automatically pinned as being a remake of Bridge on the River Kwai?

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 6:42 p.m. CST

    So coincidentally

    by AshleyMonday

    ...you watched Dam Busters for the first time yesterday and todat it was announced that Peter Jackson is remaking it? I&#39;m sorry...I just don&#39;t believe that. Couldn&#39;t think of an intro, eh?

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 6:46 p.m. CST

    As long as Jackson&#39;s wife doesn&#39;t write it.

    by Monkeybutt2000

    The sreenplay for King Kong was an abomination.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 6:54 p.m. CST

    Now that&#39;s how you do a movie poster!!

    by Mel Garga

    Po-ta-to.......

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 6:58 p.m. CST

    Another Terrible 10 Hour Long B-Movie Remake?

    by LaserPants

    Great. Just the world needs. In all seriously, this guy crashed and burned pretty quick, huh? Loved HEAVENLY CREATURES and LOTR, but, man, that KING LONG was an unmitigated disaster. Its weird though, if you read the reviews, there was this crazy disconnect where more or less every reviewer went on at length at how bad it was, but then gave it an average of 3/4 stars anyway? One of the weirdest phenomenons I&#39;ve ever witnessed in reportage; people liked LOTR so much they gave KING LONG a pass even though it was an excrutiatingly long and pretensious steaming pile of monkey poop that bombed at the box office.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 7:02 p.m. CST

    Cool.

    by raw_bean

    Gonna have to show my Dad this article, I think he&#39;ll be intruiged. Bit of a history buff, and a fan of the first film (and book too, I think).

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 7:33 p.m. CST

    WETA must be busy...

    by Rindain

    With HALO, AVATAR, and now this.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 7:59 p.m. CST

    Why do epople hate Kong? Makes no sense to me

    by Lovecraftfan

    Honestly whenever I read these boards the hostility is soooo over the top. You would think Kong was Manos or something. The movie was great. I enjoyed the characters, loved the set pieces, and the time flew by. I dont get the Kong hate. Another example of ACINers jumping on a bandwagon.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 8 p.m. CST

    edit: people

    by Lovecraftfan

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 8 p.m. CST

    Could Someone Please Say NO to PJ...

    by CRanapia

    and encourage him to start devloping and making his own projects instead of being a re-make whore? I remember when he used to be rather good at it.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 8:01 p.m. CST

    typical

    by Kizeesh

    another film that doesnt necessitate any form of a remake. its not like theres a lack of WW2 to make films about. Monte Cassino anyone? Would make a great film.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 8:20 p.m. CST

    OH. MY. GOD.

    by jaxnnux

    This sounds EXACTLY like KING KONG. I don&#39;t KNOW about you, but I would rather have MY eyes cut out, my shoulder drilled through, and my NECK cut while listening to my mother get JUGG FUCKLED than watch another KING KONG.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 8:55 p.m. CST

    Why do people hate King Kong?

    by Lovecraftfan

    Now LOTR I cannot sit through. Cant stand that movie.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 9:31 p.m. CST

    ...so the hero gives a 15 minute dying speech....

    by I Dunno

    Then we cut to after the war and everyone&#39;s standing around saying, "Wow, that war sucked". And then everyone romps around on a bed. Then, 3 Special Editions later, we see the allies actually winning the war. And there&#39;s a lot of walking. OR....everyone oozes blood and pus from every pore for whatever reason. PEter Jackson rules!!

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 10:32 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson...the new George Lucas

    by LeiaDown&FuckHer

    It&#39;s happening right before our eyes. How long until he goes back to Bad Taste and Meet The Feebles to add all new fancy CGI effects to bring them closer to his "original vision"? It&#39;s not too late Peter Jackson, turn away from the dark side and make something fresh and new, you can do it buddy, you can do it...

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 10:37 p.m. CST

    Why the KK hate? Because...

    by Orbots Commander

    King Kong was a ninety minute movie stretched out to three hours and padded with boring filler. Only thing that made it watchable was Watts and some of the effects. One of the few brightspots was that T-Rex fight.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 10:56 p.m. CST

    PJ made Kong not for the people

    by dirtsandwich

    but because it was something he&#39;d been wanting to do all his life. LOTR and Kong being prior art were good choices for films to do. And were done right. Sure there are some things that really didn&#39;t move the story forward in Kong, but its still one of my favs. Gee did any of you Kong haters like WOTW? That was a real fucking disappointment.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 11:03 p.m. CST

    King Kong bombed?....

    by inevitability

    Mhmmm.... Box Office worldwide: $549,216,896

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 11:10 p.m. CST

    The only good thing...

    by Harysuxafat1

    is getting to see more realistic WWII air combat. That&#39;s probably the only good here.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 11:11 p.m. CST

    Those numbers are quite good for a film.

    by dirtsandwich

    You just fell into the hype with all the other cookie cutter static heads. It did over 200 million in the states. Hollywood makes sequels to stupid movies that makes less than 100 million. If your expecting a PJ movie to do a billion $ like a dumb fuck ass crack sniffer, then YEAH! it bombed. WTF!!

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 11:17 p.m. CST

    Thanks dirt.

    by Orbots Commander

    Now that you tell me that Jackson only makes movies for himself and not an audience I&#39;ll know to not bother going to see any more in the future, seeing as they&#39;re for his eyes only and all.

  • Aug. 31, 2006, 11:48 p.m. CST

    Why people think King Kong sucked

    by performingmonkey

    Here&#39;s some reasons - a) No matter how great the visuals are and how much depth Peter added to the original Kong story, it&#39;s still a big ape/dino/monster movie, and everyone is now acustomed to ripping the shit out of movies of this nature (Godzilla &#39;97 and Spielberg&#39;s The Lost World are responsible). b) After all the whining about the extra long length of Return of the King, what does Peter do? turn in a 3 hour movie as though he&#39;s saying &#39;fuck you&#39; to the audience. c) Most people know the story already (shooting a film, go to island, dinos/Kong on island, capture Kong, chaos in NY, gets shot by planes off ESB) and because Peter didn&#39;t deviate from this at all, except to add stuff like a new relationship between Kong and Ann, there&#39;s no real tension or wonder (please note, this is different for little kids, who definitely get more out of this movie than us older people (I&#39;m 23)). d) A lot of stuff that filled out the 3 hours shouldn&#39;t have made it past the third draft, I&#39;m talking about the Hayes/Jimmy scenes, the overlong Venture voyage. e) It seems Jackson was a little confused about what type of movie this was going to be. He spends like 30 minutes building up tension before they reach the island as though it&#39;s going to be more of a horror, then after Kong takes Ann it turns into a light-hearted CG romp for a while (where people can seemingly outrun Brontosaurs and not get crushed by 10 of the fuckers falling all around them), the T-Rex sequence is so over the top that neither Kong or Ann seem in any REAL danger (the fight in the original Kong feels more brutal). f) Yes, we can accept that there is an understanding between Kong and Ann, but there really doesn&#39;t need to be ten minute scenes of them looking at each other with nothing going on. This happens like three times when it should only happen once. g) The end line &#39;It was beauty killed the beast&#39; makes little sense in Peter&#39;s version because Denham is much more responsible. h) There&#39;s just general hate toward Jackson after LOTR&#39;s success. i) No-one can sit still for longer than 89 minutes anymore. j) This felt like the extended version rather than the theatrical cut. With DVD the way it is, Peter should have put out a cut 30 minutes shorter knowing that EVERYONE who wanted to see those extra 30 minutes would buy the DVD just like they bought the LOTR extended DVDs, thus making everyone happy.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 12:15 a.m. CST

    Original Work...

    by Da Fitter

    Come on Peter. Don&#39;t be afraid to do a new idea! Enough remakes and adaptations. New idea, plot, characters, story. Please. You won&#39;t be entered into the hall of revered directors until you do.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 12:26 a.m. CST

    People are just to momentary these days.

    by dirtsandwich

    I can see being a pee-pants and not being able to sit through a long movie , but come-on, tickets keep going up and people bitch because its to long. Just like the morons that bitch about the price of pop and popcorn but waste half of it. Fine, take your average same old shit 90 minute brain dead movie. JC&#39;s Aliens didn&#39;t have any aliens for about an hour and did anyone whine about that? And his up coming movie Avatar isn&#39;t made for you either, you self-centered fucks. He&#39;s making a movie to his likings. This is what he would want to see. JC is actually hoping the 3D movies he&#39;s backing so much prevents piracy. Tons of directors make movies THEY would like to see and hope you will like it too. The true innovators in movies try and give the audience something new, cool and different. Not all are going to like it. And the ones that make longer films and put a lot in the film are more at risk of getting it criticized by people. More room for mistakes. All these directors could go back to boring school and learn how to make short 90 minute 1 weekend money makers that just leap frog one movie after the other. Fuck, if I made a movie, I&#39;m gonna make what I&#39;d like to see. Not what Orbots Commander likes.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 12:30 a.m. CST

    I agree that he needs to

    by dirtsandwich

    write some new shit. Just like M Knight cornered himself with his twist endings PJ is gonna be known for not writing anything of his own. Just like the Britneys of the music world.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 12:41 a.m. CST

    all these "stop remaking stuff jackson" posts

    by slappy jones

    are a bit silly. he isn&#39;t directing this film. he is just the producer so what else has he remade besides kong? LOTR wasn&#39;t really a remake unless you were quite happy if no one ever made a film version again and bashkis was the only film we had. I liked kong myself..thought is was fucking mental and enjoyed it when I saw it but he has hardly mage a career out of remakes and again he isn;t even directing this film.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 12:44 a.m. CST

    I&#39;d like to see what PJ can do with original material..

    by ScarranHalfBreed

    ...I know he made some good original horror stuff in his early career, but everything he does nowadays are three hour long remakes or adaptations. I&#39;d love to see him get his hands on something small and quiet and wholly original.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 12:46 a.m. CST

    Jesus, I&#39;m typing before I read the Talkbacks again...

    by ScarranHalfBreed

    ...I&#39;ve gotta stop doing that.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 12:46 a.m. CST

    Peter Jackson is the new Jonathan Demme

    by beamish13

    my, how the once mighty fall...

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 12:52 a.m. CST

    by indivisibleman

    PJ is PRODUCING. He&#39;s not directing this. There&#39;s a big difference. Having said that, I can&#39;t imagine a huge audience for this film.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 1:27 a.m. CST

    Tim Burton has done some movies based from prior art.

    by dirtsandwich

    POTA, which sucked cow cock. CATCF, which I thought was really well done, Sleepy Hollow, Batmans and Pee Wee&#39;s Big Adventure.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 1:35 a.m. CST

    More Like Peter Jackson the new Spielberg

    by Kraken

    Back in his golden producing days when we got Poltergiest, Back to the Future, Goonies, Gremlins, Innterspace, Animaniacs! I&#39;m excited to see Peter producing all these great looking projects. 2007-2010 is going to be very cool on a lot of levels.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 1:46 a.m. CST

    Can you imagine this movie...

    by Harysuxafat1

    with PJ directing? A three fucking hour flight of pilots and crewmen fondling each other and tickle fighting while looking longingly at each other until their plane drops a big ball of explosives then a 30 minute montage of them getting medals and shit like that. Outstanding film making right there.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 2:19 a.m. CST

    Titanic was 194 minutes or 3:23 hrs

    by dirtsandwich

    So what&#39;s the big deal. And it all takes place on a ship. Kong has a boat trip, and island, and then the whole NY sequence. And it&#39;s 20 minutes shorter.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 3:10 a.m. CST

    The British and WWII

    by pammybabe

    I&#39;m just glad Britain is being put back into WWII. Too many people nowadays seem to think Britain played a minor supporting role in WWII. Watching modern film you would honestly think we had a tiny army and just provided occasional support to the Americans. In fact, Britain had a larger military force than America for most of the war. At the beginning of the war Britain still had the worlds biggest navy. I should also point out the massive contribution that Empire and Commonwealth troops made to this. An awful lot of the damn busters were from Canada,Australia and New Zeland. There are some great stories involving British forces just waiting to be made into films. The problem is that Hollywood won&#39;t finance thes kinds of war films unless there are Americans in it.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 4:10 a.m. CST

    Pity a British Director would never make this

    by ROBE

    Modern British Directors are only interested in anti-British arthouse movies. Doing any movie that is remotely patriotic is a PC crime to them.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 4:47 a.m. CST

    Lovely Bones to start shooting

    by Fried_Puppy

    According to stuff.co.nz, shooting for The Lovely Bones is confirmed for later this year... http://stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3778579a1860,00.html

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 5:28 a.m. CST

    This sounds great.

    by CoursinLarry

    And King Kong was great.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 5:35 a.m. CST

    This makes me seethe with anger

    by Lost Prophet

    I hated this when the Daily Mail reported it months ago. I cannot think of anything the world needs less than a remake (and bet you any money the change history and make it an American raid) of this classic movie. I would rather watch the old Carling Black Label add that spoofed it than a bastardised version of this classic original. I can see it now: Look- Peter Jackson presents "the Dam Busters" starring Aidrian Brody, Josh Hartnett, Naomi Watts and featuring Jack Black as Barnes Wallace. This gripping tale of how America single handedly crippled the German steel industry is inspired by true events. Opening 2008- full running time 194 minutes. Dog now called Rover.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 5:37 a.m. CST

    and while I am on the topic

    by Lost Prophet

    what the fuck was "visceral" about the original movie. Buy the twat a dictionary. God damn it this pisses me off

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 6:08 a.m. CST

    Wow. This TB could be condensed to 3 posts.

    by scrumdiddly

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 6:59 a.m. CST

    The Lovely Bones to be filmed after Halo & Dambusters

    by Miami Mofo

    From http://stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3782894a1860,00.html dated September 1st: "Jackson said Halo was likely to start shooting early next year -- and was possible Halo and Dambusters could be shot about the same time. The Lovely Bones, for which he expected a draft script to be completed next week, would be filmed later."

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 7:39 a.m. CST

    Interesting that PJ is producing more than directing.

    by minderbinder

    Does he have anything on his plate other than Lovely Bones? And when will that happen?

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 7:52 a.m. CST

    Jackson&#39;s movie&#39;s have one motivation ....

    by Ringwearer9

    ... take something have affection for, and fuck with it, because he doesn&#39;t really understand their affection for it. Because he&#39;s a stunted little troll.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 7:53 a.m. CST

    Wow, people have really turned on Jackson.

    by minderbinder

    Seriously, he follows up the best trilogy ever made with a movie that&#39;s a bit long and indulgent, and all of a sudden he&#39;s the guy who raped your mom? Give the hyperbole a rest. I can see why some didn&#39;t like Kong (I thought it was flawed, a missed opportunity), but you have to admit that it was amazing from a technical and artistic standpoint, and even if there were some scenes that were cheesy and didn&#39;t quite work, there was a LOT of stuff in it that was really entertaining. Personally, I think the ending (once they get to new york) was absolutely perfect, if the whole movie was that good, we&#39;d have been looking at another best picture nomination. And the remake whining? "Jackson wants to remake everything?" So far he&#39;s directed exactly ONE remake. One. If this one happens, it will be two that he has produced. And still just one that he directed. I just want to see him direct more stuff, don&#39;t really care what it is as long as he nails it.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 7:57 a.m. CST

    I&#39;m not complaining about the number of remakes

    by Lost Prophet

    I am only specifically pissed about this one. I feel livid with rage over it. Kong was shit BTW

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 8:05 a.m. CST

    For comparison, I count 5 remakes on Spielbergs IMDB...

    by minderbinder

    producer (including executive producer) list. And that&#39;s not including Young Sherlock Holmes and Tiny Toons. Whatever happens with this movie, Rivers gets the credit or the blame, Jackson is just helping get the wheels turning. Seriously, do you guys consider Spielberg a hack because he was a producer on Joe Versus the Volcano?

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 8:13 a.m. CST

    "take something have affection for, and fuck with it"

    by minderbinder

    Couldn&#39;t that be applied to ANY movie based on other material. A "purist" fan of Gone with the Wind, or Godfather, or Wizard of Oz, or Jaws books could say that as long as it didn&#39;t follow the original EXACTLY. And with something like Harry Potter, the first couple movies had people complaining the films didn&#39;t fuck with the original material ENOUGH. You just can&#39;t win. By the way, you seem to have missed it, but Jackson isn&#39;t directing this, he&#39;s just producing.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 8:20 a.m. CST

    Too Soon

    by snappy

    Why bother remaking / reimagining this film? The original at least was "of its time", showing plucky British ingenuity and spirit pitted against the mighty German war machine. How can you make that film and do it any better than the original? All PJ will do is overlay modern sensibilities & filmmaking conventions onto the story & consequently bring nothing new to it, other than more convincing effects. If you must remake it, at least leave the music alone. Daa-da-da-da-dada-da-da-daa-da-da-da-dada-daa

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 9:02 a.m. CST

    So Jackson&#39;s only producing it...

    by JacksParasites

    Does that mean it won&#39;t be 8 hours long?

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 9:14 a.m. CST

    Jackson....Please Stop Wasting Time, MAKE THE HOBBIT!!

    by The Ender

    Shit man! Ian Mckellan isn&#39;t getting any younger, get out there and Make The Hobbit Before it is too late!! It&#39;s all I want Peter....besides Halo to be awesome.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 9:47 a.m. CST

    Joe vs the Volcano Rocks!

    by Saluki

    Way underrated flick right there. The art design alone is worth the watch. This project does nothing for me, but Halo might be interesting enough. Maybe. Not a lot of original design there to be honest, but Epic Sci-Fi is always welcome.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 9:51 a.m. CST

    Joe vs the volcano

    by Lost Prophet

    sucks the sweat off a dead man&#39;s balls.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 10:47 a.m. CST

    Lovely Bones

    by Stollentroll

    will suck big time. The story is extremly cheesy, how can PJ possibly consider to direct this? Even King Kong 2 could possibly be more fun!

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 10:55 a.m. CST

    This isn&#39;t a remake

    by Vi

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 11 a.m. CST

    what is it then?

    by Lost Prophet

    if it looks like a remake, sounds like a remake, then chances are it is a remake.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 11:05 a.m. CST

    Is there a director out there that doesn&#39;t get trashed

    by dirtsandwich

    here on these forums? One mention of M Knight and he&#39;s shredded from asshole to eyeball. JC gets ripped for to many water docs and taking to fucking long on a feature length flic. PJ gets shit on for making long films. I&#39;ll rip on SS for fucking up WOTW. I like Zemeckis (Creepy looking characters in Polar Express). Does anyone have any crap to say about these guys? Or Michael Mann? Frank Darabont (Where&#39;s The Thing II Frank?) Ron Howard for being a puss on Da Vinci (Oh...don&#39;t want to hurt anyone&#39;s feelings...boo hooo!)Ridley Scott? Sam Raimi? Robert Rodriguez (drop the old 50&#39;s 3D. There&#39;s a new 3D out). Martin Scorsese? Bryan Singer? Quentin Tarantino? Oliver Stone?

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 12:07 p.m. CST

    I liked Jackson better when he was a fat hobbit

    by TheBaxter

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 1:27 p.m. CST

    lovely bones

    by Henry Jones Jr.

    Whenever I read that movie title, it makes me think of bbq spare ribs. Of course, that makes me think of beer. Now I&#39;m hungry and thirsty...

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 4:53 p.m. CST

    The Hobbit 2 : JuggFuckle

    by The Ender

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 6:50 p.m. CST

    George Lucas has already remade The Dambusters!

    by Schnorbitz

    Come on, the last third of A New Hope is exactly the same as the last third of The Dambusters, complete with flying down a trench, enemy fire, other craft apart from our hero&#39;s getting blown up, "it just impacted on the surface" and a specacular explosion at the end. One day I&#39;m going to edit the soundtrack of one to the pictures of the other... btw, I heard they&#39;re going to rename the dog "Trigger". I must admit, the line that goes something like "I&#39;ve put half a pint on the floor for Nigger" is a bit embarrassing these days.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 8:39 p.m. CST

    Don&#39;t blame Hollywood if they "Hollywoodize" this

    by readingwriter

    Jackson&#39;s not American, so that&#39;d be "Kiweeing" on the facts, or "New Zzzzzzzlanding" it.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 9:34 p.m. CST

    Pete&#39;s just producing, but...

    by Rakafraker

    I&#39;m sure he wouldn&#39;t put his name on it if he didn&#39;t think it was worth his time and money. I&#39;d see it just to see how close he does the 3rd reel to SW ANH&#39;s 3rd reel. ALSO - Pete, I know you read these tb&#39;s. I&#39;m cool with Halo, I don&#39;t know enough about Lovely Bones, but I (along with literally millions of others) am DYING to see what you&#39;ll do with The Hobbit. Please don&#39;t let Ralph Bakshi&#39;s animated mess be the definative version.

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 9:59 p.m. CST

    Re: Dog&#39;s name

    by Mace Tofu

    He could change it to Nigga but I&#39;m sure they won&#39;t go with the original lol

  • Sept. 1, 2006, 10:58 p.m. CST

    Lancasters?? Are you shitting me?!?

    by kingsgambit

    I thought they flew DeHaviland Mosquitoes? Man, an Avro Lancaster is a big mother fucker. That&#39;s some crazy shit to be flying down a canyon. I guess maybe they used the Mosquitoes later...the &#39;wooden wonder&#39; was perfectly built for that. My hat was off to them before, but now...wow. Just wow.

  • Sept. 2, 2006, 1:49 a.m. CST

    LostProphet

    by Vi

    Are two movies about the same event in history "remakes" of each other? I suppose &#39;Pearl Harbor&#39; was a "remake" of &#39;Tora Tora Tora&#39; to you. Ain&#39;t hatin&#39; just sayin&#39;.

  • Sept. 2, 2006, 2:02 a.m. CST

    Dam Busters Game

    by MrDandy

    I used to play a Dam Busters flight-sim for my Colecovision. Pretty crude graphics, but there was a lot to keep track of. You had to plot a course on the strategic map to a dam, with a correct approach over the lake. Then you had to switch between forward and rear gunners to survive the flight to the dam. There were Me109s, flak guns and AA ballons to deal with. Sometimes an engine would catch fire and you&#39;d have to extinguish it and throttle that one back. When you got over the water you had to descend to the perfect altitude by lining up 2 spotlights on the water just right. It was hard to drop that dang bomb just right, I don&#39;t think I ever did it. How&#39;s that for obscure?

  • Sept. 3, 2006, 2:39 p.m. CST

    They should add snakes in these motherfucking planes

    by Marsellus

    That&#39;d be cool. And ridiculous, too, I admit. But cool.

  • Sept. 3, 2006, 6:44 p.m. CST

    Peter Jackson: The Lord of the Remakes

    by Gorrister

    I think Jackson has decided to niche himself as the go-to guy for anything and everything "remake".

  • Sept. 3, 2006, 6:56 p.m. CST

    Barnes Wallis will be spinning in his grave

    by Mr Clarke

    Sorry couldn&#39;t resist.

  • Sept. 4, 2006, 5:54 a.m. CST

    no, the source event can be the same

    by Lost Prophet

    but they are different films. This, on the other hand is obviously a remake. For the record, the dog&#39;s name could easily stay the same. it is a period piece, based on real events and that was the actual name of the dog. therefore, although it is wince inducing now, it is completely legit to keep the name the same. Me- I&#39;d change it, the last thing I would want is audience snickering/ taking offence at a racist connotation instead of watching the film. But then, I wouldn&#39;t remake it.

  • Sept. 4, 2006, 6:56 p.m. CST

    I saw a fly by...

    by DrX

    I remember a good few years ago watching a lancaster do a commemorative flight over the ladybower and derwent dams on the edge of Sheffield. They used to do their practice runs over the dams in the Peak District dontcha know. The engines sounded like bees...

  • Sept. 5, 2006, 4:37 a.m. CST

    Jackson a Bigot??

    by yodalovesyou

    What is it with Peter Jackson and his fondness for racist source material? first LOTR with its aryan supermen are our superiors and ugly = evil attitude. then came King Kong with its mindless savages and uncle Tom black guy. Now he&#39;s doing Dam Busters with its un-pc named Dog. plus there was his outrage at Brokeback Mountain being nominated for an oscar and not Kong (they&#39;re both pretty tedious to me).

  • Sept. 5, 2006, 7:58 p.m. CST

    You people are hopeless.

    by Tinfang

    Can&#39;t wait to see this. Piss on all you Jackson haters.