(N/D)igger the dog.

melb

So, one of the great films of all time is being remade... "The Dambusters"

At the start Peter Jackson wanted to keep as close as possible to the original script which included keeping the dog named ******. However, studio execs succeeded in changing the dogs name to Digger.

Whats the AHers thoughts on this?

grizzly

Can't stop progress.

Dyr

My uncle had a dog called ******.

jester77

Reminds me of this...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KNMzZMwbPFA

bonerm

They should change the dogs name to Nagger if they're gonna change it at all.

orourkeda

Me Bollix

TheVoodoo

My dog is called Asterix.

amacca

melb wrote: »

So, one of the great films of all time is being remade... "The Dambusters"

At the start Peter Jackson wanted to keep as close as possible to the original script which included keeping the dog named ******. However, studio execs succeeded in changing the dogs name to Digger.

Whats the AHers thoughts on this?

this debate has been had before...they should rename the dog "african american"

bonerm

FYI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QgePEO7GUtE

sbsquarepants

When i was a kid there where a couple of dogs in the neighbourhood called nígger, seems fúcking mental now!:D
I don't think it even occured to people it might be insulting or racist.

Craptacular

I'm fine with it as long as they rename the dams hams, the operation from Chastise to Scold, the commander from Guy Gibson to Person Gibson and change the enemy from Germans to Orcs. Actually, instead of dropping bombs they should drop food parcels.

There's nothing wrong with rewriting history to avoid offending people.

Dymo

Well it would be great to keep the historical references, BUT this would cause too much offense and not PC to do so

Sanjuro

melb wrote: »

Whats the AHers thoughts on this?

It's so far down the list of things to get your knickers in a twist about that I think I almost passed out from apathy.

amacca

Sanjuro wrote: »

It's so far down the list of things to get your knickers in a twist about that I think I almost passed out from apathy.

but you just couldn't care enough to even bother to do that?

Sinfonia

I think it is racist. I think it is history.

melb

Following on from that-do/did people think this video is/was funny?

stmol32

Sinfonia wrote: »

I think it is racist. I think it is history.

Rubbish... it's history.
Yeah but then again it is racist

Min

All they needed was a black rapper in the army owning the dog.

JohnMarston

TheVoodoo wrote: »

My dog is called Asterix.

Mine is Dogmatix

Sinfonia

Min wrote: »

All they needed was a black rapper in the army owning the dog.

God, I read that as "pwning" the dog.. I need to get out more

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Seeing as it was a true story, and the dog was really called that, I can't see why they should change it. Surely people have enough sense to realize that its set in a different time, and attitudes towards race have thankfully changed.

Biggins

Aaa... it could have been worse.
If an extreme enough republican existed and funded the film, they might have demanded the dog be called Obama!

In serious though, its a sign of the ever moving times.
I've seen that film a few times and in all honestly, I never kopped it or gave it a second thought.
Just goes to show how some things can slip under the radar of consciousness.
Again, in honesty, I agree that it should be changed.

CardBordWindow

I know a guy who used to have a gundog called N*gger. Anytime the dog went missing, he'd be seen walking through fields with a shotgun shouting 'Here N*gger!!'

Not the most PC thing to be doing.

KungPao

As it's a remake I don't see the point in putting in such an offensive word. It's just not required.

However I hate when older films and programmes are dubbed/censored, e.g. Only Fools and Horses having unPC words and dubbed over and smoking removed from cartoons from decades ago etc.

They were products of their time and I want to enjoy it as originally made.

dpe

I'm only surprised that the remake doesn't have the Americans carrying out the mission. Changing the name of the dog is no big deal by comparison.

Sin_J

KungPao wrote: »

As it's a remake I don't see the point in putting in such an offensive word. It's just not required.

But it is required. It's not just a remake of a film, like Ocean's 11 or the Italian Job.

It is a remake of a film based on historical fact. The dog existed and that was it's name.

It's altering history to make it more palatable, which is crap imo.

Biggins

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

...Surely people have enough sense to realize that its set in a different time, and attitudes towards race have thankfully changed.

Lets be honest. Sadly some won't have that sense and/or just wish to make an issue out of it for the sake of creating a drama to push their own possible agenda.

Sin_J wrote: »

...It's altering history to make it more palatable, which is crap imo.

True to some great extent.
Its a tough call to make in some cases.

Guill

The film should reflect the racism that was prevelant at the time, The dogs name should be Ni*ger as it originaly was and everyone should take offence to it and still watch the movie.

Badgermonkey

Hank meets the Wu-Tang clan.

http://splicd.com/mYrL4AgJPDM/189/303

The King of Moo

If the dog were fictional then I'd have no problem changing it, but the fact that's it a real, historical dog complicates things.
I'm usually dead set against changing historical things in films, but in this case I don't mind. It's not like the dog being called "N*gger" is crucial to the plot. Now if they changed it to the Americans blowing up the dams, or removed all references to the Nazis, then I'd be annoyed.

Logical Fallacy

Kind of weird as lots of war films will use the derogatory term of the day for the enemy...so racism is only bad if you can't kill the subject I guess.

flyton5

The original film was dubbed in America when it was released. The dogs name was dubbed "Trigger".


/thread

melb

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Kind of weird as lots of war films will use the derogatory term of the day for the enemy...so racism is only bad if you can't kill the subject I guess.

Should we not be able to look at these films/shows in their original version and be big enough to admit that people back then were racist but leave the fims/shows as they were as a reminder of how things were and how far we've come?

Guill

Was the dog even black?

Logical Fallacy

melb wrote: »

Should we not be able to look at these films/shows in their original version and be big enough to admit that people back then were racist but leave the fims/shows as they were as a reminder of how things were and how far we've come?

Of course we should....i am unsure where i implied we shouldn't.

wandatowell

was the original film any good?

Kevin Duffy

Sin_J wrote: »

But it is required. It's not just a remake of a film, like Ocean's 11 or the Italian Job.

It is a remake of a film based on historical fact. The dog existed and that was it's name.

It's altering history to make it more palatable, which is crap imo.

But it's not required at all. If the dog had been called Spot and it was changed to Fido, that wouldn't change the fact the the movie is/was about coming up with an innovative way to bomb dams and damage German war capability while accepting thousands of civilian and allied POW casualties. It's not a film about a dog.

I think Jackson is a brilliant director, but the handwringing about faith to the original, truth and historical accuracy is slightly ridiculous IMO.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Guill wrote: »

Was the dog even black?

Yes.

Biggins

wandatowell wrote: »

was the original film any good?

Yes.

Sin_J

The King of Moo wrote: »

I'm usually dead set against changing historical things in films, but in this case I don't mind. It's not like the dog being called "N*gger" is crucial to the plot. Now if they changed it to the Americans blowing up the dams, or removed all references to the Nazis, then I'd be annoyed.

Kevin Duffy wrote: »

But it's not required at all. If the dog had been called Spot and it was changed to Fido, that wouldn't change the fact the the movie is/was about coming up with an innovative way to bomb dams and damage German war capability while accepting thousands of civilian and allied POW casualties. It's not a film about a dog.

No the film is not about a dog, but the dogs name does highlight something important. It's the start of a slippery slope of small changes that could eventually lead to the Americans blowing up the dams in another version of the film. It stops being about the history and is just about an entertaining story, but propping itself up on the fact that it is a factually historical film.

Let's say that in 20 years they decide to remake it again, but decide that the cast isn't racially diverse enough, or there isn't enough women in the film so lets make one of the pilots a woman.

If they want to deviate from history then call the film something else, change the story how they want it and and just say that it was "inspired" by the events.

The original was certainly dramatised but it did follow the history pretty well.

Guill

So the dog was black and called Nig*er in the original and there was no out cry? The Original is seen as a good film.

What would be the issue with the remakers calling the dog Nig*er??

Biggins

Guill wrote: »

So the dog was black and called Nig*er in the original and there was no out cry? The Original is seen as a good film.

What would be the issue with the remakers calling the dog Nig*er??

One word mainly to sum it up, America.

Logical Fallacy

wandatowell wrote: »

was the original film any good?

Yeah it's alright. Very "Biggles".

stovelid

When we first moved to Ireland in the early 80s, a family on our street had a black Alsatian called nigger. Who often bit children on a whim with complete impunity.

A happier, altogether more carefree time, it was.

Meleftone

They are still going to have to use the N word as The mission codes (transmitted in morse) were: Goner, meaning "bomb dropped"; N****r, meaning that the Möhne was breached and; Dinghy meaning that the Eder was breached. They used N****r as the dog was killed the morning of the mission.

The King of Moo

Sin_J wrote: »

No the film is not about a dog, but the dogs name does highlight something important. It's the start of a slippery slope of small changes that could eventually lead to the Americans blowing up the dams in another version of the film. It stops being about the history and is just about an entertaining story, but propping itself up on the fact that it is a factually historical film.

Let's say that in 20 years they decide to remake it again, but decide that the cast isn't racially diverse enough, or there isn't enough women in the film so lets make one of the pilots a woman.

If they want to deviate from history then call the film something else, change the story how they want it and and just say that it was "inspired" by the events.

The original was certainly dramatised but it did follow the history pretty well.

I'd love if they didn't change his name because people were mature enough to accept that that's how things were at the time, but unfortunately I think there'd be a huge outcry if they kept the name (and not just from black people) and I can understand Peter Jackson changing the name to avoid that.
However I do agree that it's part of a larger trend to sanitise history in films.
For example, from what I'd seen so far, Captain America seemed to be trying to remove as many references to Nazism as possible (remember when the Allies fought H.Y.D.R.A in the 40s?) in the trailers at least, though I did see a poster (limited edition for a small number of people, I think) with Captain America punching Hitler, so hopefully it won't be a complete erasure of the Nazis.

Pherekydes

Sinfonia wrote: »

I think it is racist. I think it is history.

Would Blackie be as bad? Darkie? Snowy? Whitey? Is Madra Rua racist against Red Indians?

Racism is the belief that one race is superior to another, while this [dog's name] just refers to the dog's colour [presumably].

Lando Griffin

Cant change history when its set in stone.

mikemac

Eeny meany miney mo
Catch a ní*** by the toe
If he squeals let him go
Eeny meany miney mo

Me and my friends were racist 4 and 5 year olds :eek:
As that's what we used

This rewriting is constantly going on, with Famous Five and Secret Seven
Many of us read Enid Blython with golliwogs and rough common folk and the coloured people.
They were written back in the 50's but buy a new edition today and it's been edited

Kevin Duffy

Pherekydes wrote: »

Would Blackie be as bad? Darkie? Snowy? Whitey? Is Madra Rua racist against Red Indians?

Racism is the belief that one race is superior to another, while this [dog's name] just refers to the dog's colour [presumably].

Blackie refers to a colour and was in times past a little used to refer to black people, in an ignorant way. Ditto darkie. Snowy not used in the same way that I've ever known. Whitey comparable to blackie or darkie, but has passed into comic use.

Ni**er has passed into an order of hatefulness that's just not comparable to the others.

Maybe as a compromise Snoop Dog could play the part. He and Guy Gibson could go for walks and he could offer his opinion on the bombings - "What do you think mah niggah?". The codewords for success could be shcizlle, pizzle and nizzle. Or something.

Biggins

You have to wonder once n a while at all the changes we have made in terms of political correctness.
For example...

"N'igger was out playing the back garden when he suddenly escaped by jumping over the wall.
He ran into next doors garden. Then there was a chink! A latch on a door opened and a Chinese woman ran out holding on to her pussy tightly (she liked to stroke her pussy and had been doing so).
She didn't want N'igger to get the Gollywog that was laying in the grass. It was left there by her daughter Frigid, before she went to school.
She hoped too that N'igger wouldn't jump on the Christmas tree. Her husband would be returning home soon with a fairy!"

I suppose its all about timing and context!