British Lion

[medusala]

LOL royalty.

possibly the only good thing the french ever did in their miserable history was to nobble their inbred royals.

pity he english didn't do the same

As pointed out above the French getting rid of their monarchy was a disaster.

The same in England.

Ditto Spain, Russia, Germany, Greece and Italy in the 20th century.

 

[Total_Juddshanks]

Useless fact for the day- one of the interesting things about the British Lions is in strict, old school heraldric terms, they aren't actually lions, they're leopards.

In continental heraldry, lions have to be rampant (ie rearing up and going for you) if they are depicted passant (ie walking, as the british lions are) they are actually leopards, because there is no such thing as a lion passant. Napoleon was apparently very big on this distinction, which is why he used to talk about driving the british leopard in spain back into the sea.

If you don't quite get this, that's cool, neither do I, but I think it's rather like the thing on the Simpsons where they use painted horses to represent cows in the radioactive man movie.

 

[Sloth]

I think the lion dates back to roman times, they used it quite a bit.

Anyway, I'd love to see a big Braveheart style film of the battle of Hastings, I've started to flesh out a screenpaly called Conquest. I've been to both Battle (where the battle was fought) and Beyeaux (home of the tapestry). awesome history

 

[acker]

Indeed.

James Stewart should have been King, not William of Orange.

Mary should have been Queen, not Elizabeth.

Your confusing yourself with 2 different Mary's

1st Mary : Queen Mary (Catholic) the eldest daughter of King Henry the 8th and his 1st wife Queen Catherine ex of Spain; she was Queen of England after her brother Edward the 6th (see below)

2nd Mary : Mary Queen of Scot's (Catholic) and grandaughter of King Henry the 8th's sister Princess Margaret and James the 4th King of Scotland and daughter of James the 5th the son and King of Scotland.

Then after the 1st Mary : Queen Elizabeth (Anglican) the 1st the next daughter of King Henry the 8th and daughter of his 2nd wife Anne Boleyn; she was Queen of England after her brother King Edward the 6th and her older sister Queen Mary the 1st died.

The big war against Spain she fought was against her older half sister Queen Mary's 1st cousin Phillip of Spain. Who was also her (Mary's) husband, and after her death he tried unsuccesfully to marry Elizabeth.

Then sent the Spanish Amarda to wipe the Pom's off the face of the Earth, as one often does after they don't get their own way at a nightclub.

But of course he did not count on a biased bowls playing Sir Frances Drake or a hyped up on the new weed Tobacco Sir Walter Raliegh to run amoc on gameday, burning empty ships and sending them downwind into the trapped Spanish Fleet.

And before both of them Edward the 6th (Anglican) the son of Henry the 8th and his 3rd wife Jane Seymour was monarch ..but he died.

Then after the childless Elizabeth passed the throne to the (Catholic) James (Stewart) the 6th (King of Scotland) and the 1st (King of England) unified throne took over after Elizabeth the 1st. The son of Mary Queen of Scott's who had her head chopped off during her rule.

Then their was peace in the quickly becoming Protestant ex Catholic kingdom until a combination of Anglican and Puritans backed a hostile takeover of the Catholics as Monarchs eventualy led by a non Royal....Oliver Cromwell

Lots of Lions but still plenty of "Fleur-de-lis" (French influence) on that coat of arms.

 

[Roylion]

Anyway, I'd love to see a big Braveheart style film of the battle of Hastings, I've started to flesh out a screenpaly called Conquest. I've been to both Battle (where the battle was fought) and Beyeaux (home of the tapestry). awesome history

I agree wholeheartedly.

I'm surprised Hollywood has ignored the story behind the Battle of Hastings.

It's a terrific true story with plenty of drama and action centered around two strong characters in William the Bastard and Harold Godwinsson. Harold seems to be almost the archetypal flawed, tortured hero who vacillates between doing his duty (after the old King Edward the Confessor dies) and naked ambition. He makes a fateful decision to break a sacred oath that he was forced to take (some might say tricked into) and in doing so destroys himself and his family, as well as condemning his countrymen to years of subjugation and degradation.

It has the makings of an epic picture, with the climax coming, as the final showdown between the two at Hastings (imagine the final battle scenes!) teeters on the brink. That is until Harold's chance 'tragic' death, which occurs just as the exhausted English (or more correctly Anglo-Danes) were about to hold on for a win against all the odds.

 

[Sloth]

I agree wholeheartedly.

I'm surprised Hollywood has ignored the story behind the Battle of Hastings.

It's a terrific true story with plenty of drama and action centered around two strong characters in William the Bastard and Harold Godwinsson. Harold seems to be almost the archetypal flawed, tortured hero who vacillates between doing his duty (after the old King Edward the Confessor dies) and naked ambition. He makes a fateful decision to break a sacred oath that he was forced to take (some might say tricked into) and in doing so destroys himself and his family, as well as condemning his countrymen to years of subjugation and degradation.

It has the makings of an epic picture, with the climax coming, as the final showdown between the two at Hastings (imagine the final battle scenes!) teeters on the brink. That is until Harold's chance 'tragic' death, which occurs just as the exhausted English (or more correctly Anglo-Danes) were about to hold on for a win against all the odds.

Here's my tag for the film:

The last time England was invaded was 1066. It was the second invasion to land on her shores within a week. The first was dispatched after a hard fought battle. The second became known as the Battle of Hastings. It would change the world...
CONQUEST​

 

[freo heave ho]

I agree wholeheartedly.

I'm surprised Hollywood has ignored the story behind the Battle of Hastings.

It's a terrific true story with plenty of drama and action centered around two strong characters in William the Bastard and Harold Godwinsson. Harold seems to be almost the archetypal flawed, tortured hero who vacillates between doing his duty (after the old King Edward the Confessor dies) and naked ambition. He makes a fateful decision to break a sacred oath that he was forced to take (some might say tricked into) and in doing so destroys himself and his family, as well as condemning his countrymen to years of subjugation and degradation.

It has the makings of an epic picture, with the climax coming, as the final showdown between the two at Hastings (imagine the final battle scenes!) teeters on the brink. That is until Harold's chance 'tragic' death, which occurs just as the exhausted English (or more correctly Anglo-Danes) were about to hold on for a win against all the odds.

I'm not surprised Hollywood hasn't taken up the story.

You haven't told us who were the goodies and who were the baddies.

You might have to make William the conqueror American to get your story told.

 

[acker]

I agree wholeheartedly.

I'm surprised Hollywood has ignored the story behind the Battle of Hastings.

.

Maybe we should be greatful because they also ignored Oliver Cromwell starving people into submission.

 

[Sloth]

Maybe we should be greatful because they also ignored Oliver Cromwell starving people into submission.

The story of Cromwell....hmmmm maybe something along the lines of Downfall

 

[Roylion]

Maybe we should be greatful because they also ignored Oliver Cromwell starving people into submission.

At least Cromwell's life and career has been attempted by Hollywood. "Cromwell" was released in 1970 starring Richard Harris as Cromwell, Alex Guinness as Charles I and Timothy Dalton as Rupert of the Rhine. There's a few historical inaccuracies of course, but that's par for the course.

 

[medusala]

A timely article in the Times

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/ben_macintyre/article5970627.ece

The escape from Stalag Luft III is one of the greatest stories of the Second World War, an enduring example of raw courage and ingenuity. The story of the making of The Great Escape, by contrast, is an enduring example of the way that Hollywood can twist history to meet the requirements of American patriotism and the demands of pampered actors.

The problem with the true story of the escape, from Hollywood’s point of view, was that it involved no Americans. True, the camp had contained American prisoners, but all of these were moved out before the escape took place. The director, John Sturges (who also made The Magnificent Seven), was told by his Hollywood bosses to write American heroes into the script or abandon the project. The resulting film not only included fictional American characters, but was also dominated by them: Steve McQueen, James Garner, James Coburn and Charles Bronson.

McQueen, who played The Cooler King, insisted that his role be even bigger, with a scene in which he could show off his motorcycling skills. The fictional motorbike escape scene was created, with a growling Triumph 650 — which was not built until 1963. Bud Elkins, McQueen’s stunt double, performed the more dangerous jumps.

This, then, was the Hollywood take on history: an event that never took place, involving an American who was not there, played by a double, on a motorbike that had not yet been invented. No wonder the veterans booed the Steve McQueen character at the 65th anniversary gathering in Zagán.

American film-makers have been invading and occupying feats of British heroism ever since the war, although Churchill himself did his best to repel the invasion. Britain’s wartime Prime Minister strongly objected to Objective Burma! (1945), starring Errol Flynn, because it installed American heroes in a conflict waged by British, Indian and Commonwealth troops.

The film even prompted an editorial in The Times: “It is essential both for the enemy and the allies to understand how it came about that the war was won . . . nations should know and appreciate the efforts other countries than their own made to the common cause.” The film was withdrawn from release here and only reached cinemas in 1952, accompanied by an apology.

Steven Spielberg’s Saving Private Ryan has been criticised for depicting Tom Hanks and his American soldiers battling the crack 2nd SS “Das Reich” Panzer tank division, when that conflict was actually fought by British and Canadian troops 100 miles to the east.

Undoubtedly the most egregious example of America’s cultural colonisation of the best war stories is U-571 (2000), which depicts American submariners stealing the Enigma code machine from a German U-boat. The capture and breaking of the Enigma code was carried out by the British, before America had even entered the war.

While Hollywood misrepresents history, it also confers immortality. The Great Escape may not be great history but it is a great film. It may Americanise and edit the facts but without it one of the most remarkable episodes in wartime history might languish virtually unknown.