MovieChat Forums > Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo Discussion > Where did the bombing footage come from?

Where did the bombing footage come from?

posted 16 years ago by hobnob53
20 replies | jump to latest

Anybody know where the footage of the bombing of Tokyo came from in this movie? In that scene there are many shots of the bomber flying across the city and past actual burning oil tanks and other facilities (I'm not talking about the rather obvious special effects work spliced in among real shots). In addition, the rear-projection film seen through the cockpit window as they fly to and through Tokyo looks clearly to be that city, and also includes some shots of damage from the bombing. It looks as if this is actual footage of the Doolittle raid. Any information?

Update: Okay, I checked the trivia section and it says the oil tank fire was in Oakland and that the filmmakers took quick advantage for a realistic shot by flying their plane and camera past the scene. But still -- in the rear projection scenes through the cockpit window there are buildings with Japanese writing on them, and the place doesn't look like Oakland. (In fact, if you've seen "Godzilla" '54 it looks like some of the same places in the real Tokyo.) So the question still remains: was any real footage from the raid used?

[–] Marlonius 16 years ago

There was some real footage of the planes staging on and launching from the Hornet used mixed in with soundstage and miniature effects footage.

As for the raid itself, some of the cockpit window footage is Southern California, other stuff is miniature. I have an old "Air Classics" magazine that does a retrospective on the filming of this movie that describes the large scale minatures used. They built huge cityscape sets in the Japanese architecture and "flew" the miniature B-25 through on wires. Watch closely, and you'll see that they even have smoke coming from the chimneys. All of this was done in miniature before computers were invented. Some shots of the same miniature landscape served as cockpit footage.

There is no surviving footage of the raid itself that I am aware of. Most of the planes ditched or were shot down. If I recall correctly, one made it into Russian territory and the crew was impounded by the Russians for the duration of the war, and only one made it to the Chinese landing strip they had intended to use.

[–] hobnob53 16 years ago

Yes, the real Hornet footage is pretty plain when compared to the sound stage and miniature stuff.

Even so, as I said above, some of the shots seen through the cockpit windows are plainly of real buildings, not miniatures (or Oakland!). If not from the raid itself, I suspect MGM might have gotten hold of old aerial footage of Tokyo from before the war -- some must have existed -- and used it for their background shots in those quick scenes. I see the scenes with the miniatures you mention but that's not what I'm referring to. All the effects work in this film is very obvious. (Note the tiny cars choking the streets in the miniature scenes -- not one is moving, and in any case there weren't that many cars in all of Japan in 1942!)

Anyway, I think you're right about the lack of any film from the raid itself, so I think old footage from Tokyo (or maybe some other Japanese city) is most likely used for those projection shots I refer to. You're basically correct about the fate of the planes, though maybe more than one made it to its Chinese landing site (I'm not sure of this). The plane that flew into the USSR landed in Vladivostok and the crew were indeed imprisoned by the Russians, who were not at war with Japan. But I think they escaped into Iran many months later, after being transferred to a camp in Central Asia. That transfer, and their escape, may have been winked at by the Soviets.

Thanks for your input, Marlonius!

[–] Marlonius 16 years ago

I'll have to read my magazine again and check out the film again too (I have it on DVD). If you're especially interested, I could scan in the magazine article and email it to you - drop me a PM if you are.

I think I know which buildings you mean - there are some that plainly have Oriental writing on their roofs. I say "Oriental" and not "Japanese" deliberately. They could be shots of some other city besides Tokyo as well. Film makers of the day weren't too specific about getting such details correct. For example, in this film the "Japanese" officers on the river boat seen during the escape section of the film after the raid are actually speaking Cantonese to each other. Clearly they were using local Chinese-American actors from Hong Kong.

This is one of my favourite movies, and I would have loved to see a quality remake before Pearl Harbor got ahold of it.

Cheers,

M.

[–] hobnob53 16 years ago

Hi Marlonius,

No need to trouble yourself about scanning the article, whatever you glean from it and relate here is more than sufficient. But thank you for the offer!

I'll have to re-watch the film too -- I can't remember what the "Japanese" officers on the boat were speaking. Chinese should be entirely distinct from Japanese even to a non-speaker of either (albeit one with a little knowledge), so that's a pretty crummy and cheap resort if Mervyn Leroy and Sam Zimbalist were so careless as to use Chinese speaking Chinese/Cantonese and trying to pass them off as Japanese! Of course, Hollywood studios couldn't avail themselves of real Japanese during the war as our government had interned them all (on the mainland at any rate, save those we allowed to fight in Europe as part of the 442nd Division), but while Koreans, Chinese and other Orientals could often pass as Japanese (the way a Brit might be cast as a German, or an Italian as a Greek, for example), either they spoke real (if accented and clearly non-native) Japanese, or else spoke "Japanese-accented" English for the audience's benefit.

I'm reminded of a bottom-budget sci-fi movie from 1954 called THE SNOW CREATURE, written, produced and directed by W. Lee Wilder (Billy's brother). In that one W. Lee was so chintzy and dismissive of his audience that in the scenes taking place in Nepal, he hired Japanese actors to portray Nepalese -- and had them speak Japanese! Hey, maybe he thought someone called them "Neps" and got confused. Anyway, those city shots do look to be Japanese rather than Chinese, but it's hard to tell given their fleeting appearance. We may never know for certain, certainly which city they're from.

I like this movie very much too, even though some of the characters are a bit too cliched and as usual they talk in ways that most real servicemen didn't. That said, I've always been struck by the fact that for a wartime propaganda piece this film takes a bit broader outlook than was typical for such movies. Note, for instance, the conversation between Van Johnson and Bob Mitchum on board ship, with Johnson musing about how he doesn't enjoy the idea of bombing women and children (to which Mitchum reacts with contempt, practically asking him how he'd gotten so unpatriotic). But the fact that the film shows things in more graphic detail than was hitherto seen in H'wood films about the war -- depicting the men's terrible injuries, showing war as decidedly unglamorous -- was a step forward in how such things would be handled in postwar films, more realistically and with at least a little nuance. All in all, for 1944, quite adult and unsentimental.

My favorite line is right near the end, when Spencer Tracy as Doolittle, just before leaving Johnson's hospital room, turns, asks him about his expected baby and mentions his own two sons in the service, and then says, "If my kids and all the other kids who are in this thing could fix it so that this really would be the last one -- that would be a big break for your kid, wouldn't it?" That one line summed up the hopes so common in that era, that this could really be the last war. A forlorn hope, of course, but rather poignant, and perhaps the best insight into the thinking of that time in any wartime film.

They could never remake this properly...and don't have to. So we can safely ignore claptrap like PEARL HARBOR and concentrate on good "war" films, from whatever era.

Thanks again for your post!

hob

[–] Marlonius 16 years ago

Hi Hob,

I agree, the film is surprisingly well rounded and unflinching for something produced during the war itself. There's a bit of cheese too, but not to an unforgivable level. I always laugh at the bombadier doing his drawing of Mom's Apple Pie while in flight, and the Navy guy offering the Army guy some chocolate.

Hilarious about the Snow Creature. I'll have to "not" check that one out.

I'm not a native Cantonese speaker myself by any means, but know enough to comprehend some basic phrases. My wife is a CBC (Canadian Born Chinese) and spotted the Cantonese in this film. I can hear it now too - basically, the "Japanese" on the boat say something that sounds phoenetically like "Fi-dee-lay", which means "hurry up."

For a recent example, the Mongolians in the "Flight of the Phoenix" remake also speak Cantonese. They say "M-sai gang" which means "don't be afraid" or "don't worry (about it)." Not much excuse for it here in a big budgeted modern picture. It was so obvious that I picked it up without my wife's help. We just looked at each other and laughed. But she was cool to keep watching because Dennis Quaid has nice abs.

On the other hand, Al Pacino speaks reasonable Cantonese in "The Devil's Advocate" when he is supposed to.

I love the story of the Doolittle Raid, and had long thought it could make a great modern redo. Unfortunately, P.H. did it poorly instead.

If you haven't seen "Dark Blue World" - a Czech film about the Battle of Britain - seek it out. It's one of the best war films I've seen for quite some time.

Cheers,

M

[–] hobnob53 16 years ago

Hi Marlonius,

Have heard of, but not seen, DARK BLUE WORLD, and will try to catch it sometime.

One bit of business in 30 SECONDS I also like are the shots of each of the Ruptured Duck's crewmen as they approach the Japanese coast. One placid, one sneeringly vengeful, one curious, one alert, etc. -- again not only a realistic detail and a solid capsulization of each man's character, but a step away from the sort of monolithic reactions of servicemen in most wartime pictures -- the "Those dirty yellow...!" type reactions.

Ted Lawson as you no doubt know died just three months before the 50th anniversary reunion of the raiders in 1992. But Doolittle was still around, though too frail to attend. Are any of those guys left, do you know? 66 years later -- hard to believe. Like the song says, where did the twentieth century go?

I have a close friend who is Cantonese. A few years ago she and I watched BLOOD ALLEY (1955), which if you don't know it stars John Wayne as an American skipper freed from a Red Chinese prison by villagers who want him to pilot them to freedom in Hong Kong aboard a stolen ferryboat. My friend said Wayne's efforts at Chinese (Cantonese) were actually quite good -- she understood him fine and said his accent and pronunciation were pretty good. But she found the casting of Mike Mazurki and Anita Ekberg as Chinese peasants hilarious! (At least they spoke little Chinese in the film.) Character actor Paul Fix, on the other hand, playing a village elder, she found pretty convincing in his "Oriental" make-up.

Later,

hob

[–] Marlonius 16 years ago

Hi Hob,

I'm sure you'll love DBW, and it will probably end up being one of your new favourites. It's well acted and produced, and has some great Spitfire sequences.

About the raiders themselves, I'm not sure how many are left. They'd be pushing 90 at least by now. I have a Flying or Wings magazine published in 1992 for the 50th anniversary. I also read a book about the raid that was written around the same era, and a surprisingly large number of the pilots were still living at that time. Unfortunately, my data is about 16 years out of date, and alot can happen in that time. I should try to look it up on Wikipedia or something.

I've never been a John Wayne fan, but have to give him credit for putting the effort into speaking Cantonese. That's a pleasant surprise to hear.

For a truly horrible White Guy Playing Chinese Badly scene, check out Mickey Rooney in Breakfast at Tiffany's. Horrible.

Cheers,

Marlonius

[–] hobnob53 16 years ago

Yeah, the Mickster's turn as a goofy Japanese (not Chinese) was worse than anything filmed during the war! Granted that times have changed a lot even since 1961, but still, that was a pretty repugnant perf. But then, I'm one of about nine people on Earth who has never been especially enchanted by BREAKFAST. I found it sloppily plotted, dull in spots, slapsticky and silly in others, and in general nothing special at all, despite a handful of touching moments.

On the subject of Wayne, it took me years, but I finally began to appreciate him as an actor and even as a person. Nobody, not even John Wayne, is simply a one-dimensional being, and the more I learned of him the more complex he became. Same with his acting: watch many of his films, follow the development of his career, and he's really pretty good after all. Hey, he had to have something to have lasted half a century. I can't agree with most of his politics and many other things, but at least I understand him better and find other aspects to him and his acting that surprise and interest me. BLOOD ALLEY is basically just an action picture, with all the real Chinese mere extras, but it's enjoyable and in a few parts rather sad.

Cheers and Pimm's!

hob

[–] Marlonius 16 years ago

I just checked out Wikipedia - apparently 6 original Doolittle raiders were able to attend the 66th anniversary this year. There's a pretty good writeup on it there.

I'm not a Breakfast at Tiffany's fan either. Apparently it's a high water mark for Audrey Hepburn. Typically, I seek out the classics and this film is on many "greatest film" lists, however the Mickey Rooney character alone was enough to ruin it for me. I had forgotten what race he was supposed to be playing though. The Judo instructor bit on the Flintstones was less offensive.

I doubt I'll ever be a John Wayne fan. In many ways, I feel sorry for John Wayne the man. It seems to me that he wanted to evolve his style and performances more than he was allowed to. I suppose I'll check out True Grit someday.

Cheers,

Marlonius

PS: what does "Pimms" mean?

[–] hobnob53 16 years ago

Six isn't bad for 66! Your info seems to indicate that more are still alive, but unable to attend. One day none will be left, and more of our history will be confined solely to books and films. Hard to grasp that that generation we grew up so familiar with is passing so quickly from the scene now. Who is it that has been "chosen" to be the last surviving veteran of WWII ever? Somewhere that last person lives among us, and in another 20-25 years there will be news reports of the passing of the last WWII vet...just as we have seen this year the deaths of the last remaining veterans of WWI from France, Germany, Austria(-Hungary), and with just one US vet alive as of this date (7/24/08), and perhaps 10 others in the entire world. Strange to think that out of the countless millions who fought both world wars, one man was predestined to be the very last survivor of each...as of every war. Of course we know this academically, but to be confronted with the reality is bizarre, unsettling, and moving.

I've always been struck by TIFFANY'S being considered such an important film for Audrey. She certainly gave many better performances and in far better films than BAT. I think much of it was because she was deemed a fashion icon for the dress she wore in the opening sequences. Not enough of a reason to make a cultural statement out of a piece of ridiculous fluff. (By the way, the announcer in the film's trailer refers to the book's author as "Truman Capoat" -- the best I can spell the way he pronounced it -- instead of Ca-PO-tee. Hilarious.)

Actually, I don't think Wayne ever aspired to much more than what he achieved -- which, in the scheme of things, wasn't bad. He once said, "I've played John Wayne for forty years, and I've done all right, haven't I?" and on another occasion rebuffed a critic with "I've done twenty [or whatever] films for John Ford, and he's not exactly a bum, is he?" Both statements rather defensive in tone, to be sure, but it showed he was comfortable with his screen persona -- perhaps too much so -- not challenging himself enough. But he disliked the occasional steps out of character he made, such as (to continue the Oriental theme here) THE BARBARIAN AND THE GEISHA (1958), in which he played Townsend Harris, America's first minister to Japan in the 1850s. The film was directed by John Huston, who thought casting Wayne would broaden the movie's appeal and make it something different for its star as well. But it flopped, because of its esoteric subject matter and because of what was seen as Wayne's miscasting. In fact, the movie's not bad at all, and Wayne is perfectly acceptable, though it's also clear he was uncomfortable in the part; in later years he always referred to the film as "that damned Japanese thing", but viewing it today it, and he, are pretty good.

Wayne actually gave very good performances in such films as STAGECOACH, THE LONG VOYAGE HOME, THEY WERE EXPENDABLE, RED RIVER (especially), SHE WORE A YELLOW RIBBON, THE QUIET MAN, THE HIGH AND THE MIGHTY, THE SEARCHERS, RIO BRAVO and many others. He had an Oscar nomination for SANDS OF IWO JIMA 20 years before winning for TRUE GRIT. GRIT is certainly far from his best performance -- good, engaging -- but his Oscar was clearly more in recognition of his huge place in the film industry, and of his career, than for his particular performance in that film. (Hardly a unique situation in Hollywood history.) Even in his lesser films he was good, though he too often stayed within his comfort range, but the same can be said for many, many other stars. As I said somewhere above, the more I've watched and studied JW's career and work, the more I've grown to appreciate and like both his acting and the man...despite his appearing in films I didn't like, and his politics, which I surely disagreed with. There's more to him than a superficial glance at his films would suggest.

(May I tell you a revealing Wayne story? Carl Foreman was a screenwriter whose career collapsed in 1952 when he was called before HUAC and subsequently blacklisted for his past membership in the Communist Party. Wayne visited Foreman and asked him to remove his name from the credits of HIGH NOON, in order not to hurt Gary Cooper's chances of winning an Oscar for that film. Wayne and Foreman had an open, courteous meeting, and while Foreman refused to remove his name -- and Cooper won anyway -- Foreman always said that Wayne regarded his blacklisting as unfair, that while he approved purging real Communists he recognized that there were unintended injustices, and that in any case he had nothing personal against Foreman, just a practical concern, and that his views were honest. Foreman contrasted this with the actions of the great fighting liberal producer Stanley Kramer, who booted Foreman off the NOON set as soon as trouble came along, and forever after refused to speak to Foreman or help him in any way -- also in contrast to the conservative Cooper, who disliked HUAC and stuck by Foreman until Cooper's own career was threatened, and which Foreman appreciated. Foreman moved to the UK where he eventually became a major writer-producer (THE MOUSE THAT ROARED, THE GUNS OF NAVARONE, BORN FREE, YOUNG WINSTON); his wife couldn't stand the impoverished Britain of the early 50s and divorced him, but Foreman remarried and had a second family. Years later, when in Hollywood, Foreman and his English wife and children were at a restaurant when Wayne walked in. Foreman went over to him, they chatted amicably, and then Foreman introduced Wayne to his "new" family. They still disagreed about the blacklist and HUAC, but each man understood the other and respected him. On that same trip, Foreman ran into Kramer in an elevator at Columbia -- and Kramer sweated through its descent, unable to speak to or even look at Foreman, whom he had undercut in 1952 after years of mutual work and supposed friendship. Just an interesting look at a more complex and unexpected side of Wayne's character...as well as some others'.)

Oh, Pimm's? My girlfriend and I were drinking Pimm's -- she works for the company that makes it -- and when I saw your salutation "Cheers", I just thought I'd add a Pimm's to make the cheers more cordial...so to speak.

Cheers!

hob

[–] Marlonius 16 years ago

Interesting stuff on John Wayne, to be sure. I've heard he was principaled - it seems most people, critics and fans alike seem to agree on that. I'm not that knowledgeable about him, but it was said on Biography that he was at some time in his career feeling pigeon holed. Later he came to accept his lot a little more. It was a neat segment on him, and there was some rare footage of him as the "singin cowboy" from his very early career.

Funny that you have such thoughts about losing a generation, WRT the WW II vets gradually fading away. I have similar thoughts about everyone, and when I see a really old, frail person, I always wonder what they were like when they were young, would we have been friends, etc. When I was about 20 there was an episode in my life that probably influenced my thinking in this department. I was standing in line to see a movie (Lawrence of Arabia, restored - this was about 15 years ago)...anyway, this elderly woman in line behind me kept staring at me and couldn't seem to stop. It got a little uncomfortable, and finally she had to tell me that I was the spitting image of her brother who had died in WW II. I guess for her seeing me there that day was like seeing him reincarnated. It was definitely a weird sensation for me, and a startling demostration of the inevitability of my own growing old and dying. (Ha, but only if I'm lucky...that woman's brother never got the chance.)

Pimm's...must be a beverage local to you. I can't say I've ever heard of it. I think I'll look it up.

Cheers,

M.

[–] hobnob53 16 years ago

I have had similar thoughts, about how quickly life does go by, and its various stages (and our status in each stage!). When I was a teen people used to tell me that life goes by very fast, but that I wouldn't believe them then and only realize it too late. In fact, as I told them, I did believe them, and damned if we weren't all right! I'm of the boomer generation so grew up knowing many people (mostly fathers of friends) who were in the war -- even I think of it as "the war", even though I was born years after it -- and the movies I watched were mainly from the 40s and 50s and 60s, when WWII vets were young(ish) and still running things, and plentiful. It's bizarre and sad to realize these guys are all suddenly in their 80s and 90s -- of the 16 million men who served in the US armed forces in the war, only about 3 million remain. I knew a number of WWI vets as a kid -- one of my grandfathers was in The Great War -- but was used to seeing them as old men. It's unnerving to see WWII vets, who as I said I knew, or was used to thinking of, as men in their 30s and 40s and 50s, now the age of the WWI vets I knew as a little kid.

Same thing with actors -- the major stars who came along during or after WWII are almost all gone now. Oddly, one of the few who's still with us is Van Johnson, our star, who'll turn 92 on August 25. Hope writing this doesn't jinx him.

Pimm's is an English drink, exported all over the world. Best in hot weather climates. May I ask, Marlonius, where do you live? I'm outside of New York City.

hob

[–] Marlonius 16 years ago

Hi Hob,

I too have had similar experiences: I remember being a boy scout and seeing lots of WWI and WWII vets in the annual Remembrance Day parade as a kid in the early 80s. I'm sure most of them have passed on now.

I'll have to look for Pimm's next time I'm in a liquor store. I'm a pretty infrequent consumer, so it may very well be available here. I'm in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada.

We're pretty far off topic here, but I don't think anyone minds!

Cheers,

M.

[–] hobnob53 16 years ago

Your Remembrance Day, our Veteran's Day. How quaint "Armistice Day" sounds.

I should think you'd find Pimm's even in Edmonton, despite the city's decided lack of tropical features...so unlike, say, London, site of the liquor's invention. But if you buy a bottle, it must be drunk mixed with 7-Up and with one or two unpeeled slices of cucumber. That's the basic recipe.

I thought you might hail from our "northern neighbor". How do all of you put up with us, as in, U.S.? I like my country, of course, but we can be a handful at times. Not that we don't do some things right, like bomb Tokyo when the need arises.

See you later. (And stay off Greyhound buses!)

hob

[–] Marlonius 16 years ago

Hi hob,

How could you tell I was Canadian? I'm guessing there must have been some Canadianized spellings in there somewhere among my earlier posts that you recognized. Canadian English tends to be a hybrid of U.S. and Britain - we spell things like colour, honour and harbour with the "u" as they do in the U.K., but use "z" instead of "s" in words like "organized" as you do in the U.S.A...but we still pronounce it "zed" not "zee".

Or maybe I just said "eh" in one of my posts and blew my cover.

How do we "put up" with th U.S.? Is that a serious question?

I hate to tar an entire group with one brush, so I personally don't engage in any American bashing. I've seen it done though and heard comments. I think a lot of it is the Canadian inferiority complex and not a true reflection of the U.S. at all. This is just my opinion though. We're very insecure here and I think a lot of the bashing is the small dog barking syndrome and a bit of jealousy.

For example, Canadian actors and entertainers aren't considered successful until they've made it in the States. It's as though we can't judge them to be good unless we get the okay from you. Only then are we proud of them. "He's Canadian you know", we'll say.

I do believe though that in general Americans don't know very much about the world outside their borders, and tend to be very USA-centric in their thoughts. I had an American friend ask me if I knew the reason that they drive on the "wrong" side of the road in the U.K.. I laughed and said "do you mean the 'left' side of the road?". It's sometimes annoying or frustrating, but usually amusing too.

At the end of the day, the USA is Canada's best ally and biggest trading partner.

Nice job on Tokyo by the way!

Cheers,

M.

[–] hobnob53 16 years ago

Hi M,

I thought you were Canadian because (a) you are very civil, and (b) you sign off "cheers". Oh, and (c), no, you don't use British spellings that I've noticed, at least not in sufficient quantity to mark you as a Brit. Besides, anyone from the UK would have known what Pimm's is. Ergo, hence and therefore (my favorite law firm), you were likely a Canadian.

How's that for a deduction, eh?

Canadians may have an inferiority complex vis-a-vis us, but we have an enormous one ourselves vis-a-vis everybody, carfeully masked behind the swaggering braggaoccio of what the French call a "hyper-power". (That's why we retaliated with "Freedom Fries", "Freedom Poodles" and "Freedom Ticklers".)

But I'm not sure our approval of anything means, well, anything. Performers? Look at Wayne and Schuster. I'm only sorry the Canadian government mandated daytime driving lights and switched to the metric system. Otherwise, you've got a country which in my opinion is in most respects a whole lot nicer than ours, "power" notwithstanding.

Oh, I think it's past due you guys invaded St. Pierre and Miquelon and corrected the oversight of 245 years ago. We'll send a trawler for support, and to evacuate the cod.

And as for Tokyo, hey, any time.

Kampai!

hob

[–] Marlonius 16 years ago

Hey...that's some nice deducing!

On the behalf of all Canadians, allow me this opportunity to apologize for the export of Celine Dion and Bryan Adams. None of us expected them to get so out of hand so fast and we're all quite embarassed by it all. Sorry!

I like daytime running lights and the metric system too. I've heard Americans make fun of us before for the lights, but I don't get it. I thought you were on board by now, actually. The lights simply make one's car more visible to others. We sure get noticed when we drive below the 49th with them, that's for sure! Metric is great too - it's a system based on the most plentiful quantity on Earth - water. What's not to like? Besides, everything is divisible by 10 so it's very easy. I have to admit though...I'm 6'1" and 185 lb. I'd have to check what it says on my driver's lisence to know what that is in cm and kg. Some Metric things just never took, even with Canadians.

But in all seriousness, I think that the embarassing elements, such as those espousing the merits of renaming a popular junk food "Freedom Fries", are just a vocal minority. Unfortunately for the rest of you, they're the ones that get on T.V. the most. Personally, I prefer to judge people on their individual merits. Except for Belgians.

I'm impressed of your knowledge of St. Pierre et Miquelon. I would estimate that 80% of Canadians don't know what/where these islands are. I have no malice or ill will toward the people that live there, but you're completely correct from a purely objective tactical/economic standpoint: it's a terrible oversight to have allowed a (defeated no less) foreign nation to maintain any kind of sovereign territory within our own. Because of these tiny islands, they have defensible claims on the cod stocks as you mention as well as offshore oil resources, should any be found within the boundary. Oops.

Anyway, as I said, nice knowledge of Canadian/French trivia/geology.

Cheers,

M.

[–] hobnob53 16 years ago

Don't fret yourself over Celine. We did, after all, get Captain Kirk thanks to you.

Actually, a lot of cars here do boast, if that's the word, daytime running lights, especially vehicles of foreign origin (Japanese, German, etc.). My two-year-old Subaru has them, my first car ever to do so, and they are convenient from a driver's standpoint -- when dusk falls, if you forget to turn on your lights -- as I've seen twice in the past week -- at least you've got some lighting on. But frankly I do find them confusing and unclarifying on other cars during the day, when I can see them just fine. (State laws require lights be put on in rain, snow, fog, etc., so in those instances drivers who fail to obey those requirements can be rescued from their foolishness if they have daytime lights: so that's good.) But the days are past when we could identify a Canadian driver merely by seeing his lights on in the day!

Interesting cinematic sidelight in the vicinity of St. Pierre: Back in 1940-41, director Michael Powell had come to Canada to film 49th Parallel, the movie about a group of stranded Nazi sailors from a sunken U-boat fleeing across Canada to reach the still-neutral US. Anyway, they built a fake submarine for the scenes of the prowling U-boat, many of those scenes shot in the Gulf of St. Lawrence. When they'd finished much of the filming they towed the craft into a harbor in Newfoundland (not St. John's), and it was then the trouble began: it seems everyone from Powell on down had forgotten that at the time Newfoundland was not a part of Canada, but was a separate Dominion in the British Empire. The Dominion government immediately impounded the sub and demanded payment of an import tax. It took a transatlantic phone call from Powell to no less than Winston Churchill to get the Newfie government to relent and release the sub in the interests of the war effort. Guess the fishing was poor that year and they needed the income. But I can just imagine Winston, in the midst of the Blitz and with Britain standing alone against a seemingly victorious Germany, having to take time out to demand the return of a plywood submarine being used in a movie!

Of course, territorially speaking, our mutual border has its little anomaly. Look at your southern (our northern) border along the Manitoba-Ontario border with Minnesota -- that little triangular jag of land jutting up in Lake of the Woods. It's basically a small peninsula, part of Minnesota, but bordering solely on Manitoba (though clearly carved out of Ontario); the only access and services are through Canada, but the couple hundred people there are Americans in American territory. Another inexplicable goof courtesy 19th-century cartographers. But I don't suppose anyone in Minnesota is inclined to give it back.

We've certainly journeyed a long way from Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo! Except for my mention of my Subaru, of course.

Later, my friend!

hob

[–] haventoo 16 years ago

The specific footage you speak of was shot by Doolittle's raiders. If you few much documentary footage from WWII you will see those shots over and over. They're real (except the Oakland and miniature shots.)

[–] hobnob53 16 years ago

Thank you, haventoo. Much of the footage did look real, except as you noted.