Dog name

lol... that's funny. I appreciate a little humor here, instead of the finger pointing and ranting entries about racism, etc. After all, this is a thread about the dog's name!

"Is it THAT integral to the movie to even have the dog at all?"

Have you actually watched the film at all, because it doesn't sound like it.

The code word for destroying the Möhne dam was the dog's name, N****r. That's not done for artistic purposes, it's done because that is what actually happened.

I'd call the code word for destroying the Möhne dam fairly integral, wouldn't you?

I saw the C4 broadcast the other day and I was furious at the way the word was dubbed out.

I am a staunch liberal and I think censorship is as dangerous as racism, one evil should not be used to combat another.

It is sad that C4, which has always been a great defender of freedom of speech and has always put up a great fight against censorship, gave in on this.

to reply to thompsom88998899's question

"I do have to ask though...Is it THAT integral to the movie to even have the dog at all?"

I asked the same thing the other day, the annoying censorship only highlighted the 'sub-plot' about the dog.

I couldn't figure out if it was a corny reference to show how they were all defending a British right to be eccentric - lets face it, taking your pet to work is fairly unusual, but in the middle of a war it's bit weird.

Maybe it was trying to show something about Gibson's character - that he was a bit of a maverick, and as with most mavericks there is a thin line between genius and madness (the sort of madness that makes you take on a highly dangerous mission). The fact that, in a very diciplined environment of an airbase, his dog was allowed to wander about unchecked showed that he could do what he liked because his leadership qualities were so respected. The fact that he gets on with the mission without showing personal emotion is stereotypically British(in 50's movies at least).

He was portrayed as a slightly lonely person - he had to avoid getting too personally involved with his men (in order to maintain authority and because there was such a high turnover). So maybe the dog was there, as his constant companian, to highlight the loneliness of leadership. In the final scene, where he walks off to write letters, he did seem a very lonely figure without his companion by his side. That is one of those great movie scenes that have stuck with me since childhood.

Also, there is the British thing about caring more about animals than people. When that film was shown in 1955 you could imagine most of the
cinema audience being in tears when the dog dies. Yet a few minutes later, when they see 100+men going off on a near-suicide mission, possibly to kill 100s or 1000s of civilians, the audience are stirred up to patriotic fervour.

So maybe the dog's sub-plot is used for this display of irony ? It's a bit like Saving Pt Ryan, where we see unlimited death for half an hour and then the rest of the film is about one person - a message that humanity is important even during mass-murder.

When watching the film this time I was struck by how powerful the scene was when the trucks carry the men across the airfield to the Lancasters and the stirring theme music is played in full. I don't think that scene would be half as powerful without the sentimental doggie sub-plot only a minute earlier.