aussietobe

DID YOU SAY DAVID WALLIAMS BLACKING HIMSELF FOR A RACIAL CHARACTATURE??? DOES THAT MAKE YOU ASHAMEDE TO BE LIVING IN ENGLAND??????


Oh, the hypocracy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

aussietobe

WHY???????? Is being black bad in some way? Because that is what you are implying.

kporte

It may surprise you but black people do not apply the colouring, it is natural.

aussietobe

As a history teacher, I have no problem with the film Gallipoli. The idea of the film was to get across the absolute horror of war and the catastrophic waste of precious human life. They picked two Ausse characters as the protaganists, so f###ng what! How many war films have been told from the British point of view, or the American point of view. They don't get slammed, because there is one rule for Australia, and one for everyone else.

aussietobe

It is the PC brigade on here who are actually racist. 1. They say that Australians cannot blacken their face and pretend to be black people because it is racist. They ignore examples from the UK and America where the exact same thing has occurred. 2. To blacken your face is racist because having a black face is bad in some way.

iamthecreaturefromuranus

If it even had a passing resemblance to the real facts of the campaign in the Dardanelles then that would be fair enough... but it's not even close.

The idea of the film was NOT to get across the horror of war... it was to get across Murdoch's view of a Republican Australia by picking on an important point in Australia's history and turning it into an anti-British rant.

If you really believe that that film had ANY basis in fact then you are a ****ing useless history teacher... and I speak from a platform of a 50 year old man who got to speak to his grandfather for 15 years who actually served in the Dardanelles with the Lancashire Regiments, who, as I'm sure sure you know, being a history teacher, were the ones who won all the VC's during the landings while the Australians sat on their arses round the corner after landing almost unopposed.

Australia's view of Gallipoli and the fact that the 20,000 Brits who died there might as well have not existed is one of the few things that REALLY pisses me off about Australian centric view of history. If that's a view you perpetuate then you should sit down and review you role as a history teacher.

kporte

You are talking rubbish. "Blackface" is racist whoever does it. I have never said differently. Blackening your face is racist because of historical conotations of ridicule and persecution.
Most racists will shout down the so called PC brigade because they don't enjoy being outed as bigots........

kporte

It was historically inaccurate. They placed the blame on Brits for an Aussie stuff up. Let me know where you teach........

aussietobe

Sorry, darl, its a FILM based on a historical event, and like all cultures, Australia is entitled to present what happened from their point of view. It is not a documentary. Truth be told, Australians willingly sacrificed themselves in WW1 to help defend the Mother Country, Britain. Maybe the VC's were won by the Brits because it was Britain handing them out? You only have to see the list of Australian soldiers killed at Gallipoli to understand that they were involved in the fighting. 8709 Australians were killed, nearly 25 per cent of allied losses. Australia had a smaller brigade, but Australia only had 4 million people circa 1915, and the Australians were volunteers. As part of my history studies (and yes I did not know much about Australian history before I arrived here) and Australian soldiers were highly regarded. They were seen as brave, adventurous, foolhardy even, and larrikins who did not always respect their superiors. The fact is that men of the West Australian Light Horse were sent out in waves from their trenches to attack Turkish positions protected by machine guns and were cut down to a rate of 90 per cent, just like the film depicted. ALL soldiers were treated like cannon fodder, not just the Australians. However Australians were fighting a war of other countries making, which made their sacrifice all the more harrowing: and that is what the film is portraying.

aussietobe

I seem to be the only who understands that Gallipoli was a film, and I am afraid that the entire IDEA of Gallopili was a stuff up, and do you know whose idea it was, our esteemed Winston Churchill.

mr mover

And most Aussies would,nt give CRAP about what you think.................mm

iamthecreaturefromuranus

Yes, it's a FILM. I had noticed. The trouble with the film is that it's now accepted as historical FACT by many Australians. I'm not sure how many Australians even know that the British and French were there as well.

If you truly want to be able to teach this as history then you really need to read up on it. Try to avoid the revisionist history that's taken place over the years. Try here http://www.gallipoli-association.org and then try reading about the Lancashire Fusiliers attack at W beach. See if you still think they won those VC's because it was the British handling them out. To be honest that sort of slur from somebody who claims to be a history teacher is appalling

To say that Australians were "fighting a war of other countries making" would not have been how the men of the ANZAC's saw it. They were British first and foremost, who just happened to live in another part of the world.

kporte

A History teacher? mmmm

aussietobe

Yes and my kids in the last two years have been plus 3 in their exam results. For your information, I teach my students about bias and how all films and most other historical sources etc are constructs of the cultural and historical biases people have. You clearly believe that Gallipoli should somehow include the Brits and French, well have you ever written a screenplay? Didn't think so. The fact is that you only include information that is relevant to the plot and development of characters. You have taken umbrage because the "evil" character in the film is the British general who sent the Aussie troops needlessly to their deaths. That General represents the British Empire as a metaphor. And, unfortunately, Britain was an empire and WW1 was about nationalism and imperialism more than anything else, and Britain is guilty of that. THe world has moved on from this, and so has Britain, which is great. I show my kids the film Gallipoli in year 10 when they are learning about Australian conflicts because it gets them engaged and I believe gives them an understanding of Australia in that era, and the realities of war. The students are taught that ANZACs were part of an allied landing force, including French and British soldiers. I don't think the students even get that the "bad guy" is British. It is, in fact, a powerful and moving film, if they want to study Gallipoli in more depth they do in year 12 history. I don't show the film to year 12's as there is not enough time in the curriculum and most have seen it anyway. I really do think you are being precious and condescending, and quite frankly, to want Australians to present the British viewpoint in their films is quite frankly stupid and imperial.

Eastend Girl

I can't be asked to watch the sketch but I think the fact that they were impersonating the Jackson 5 (with MJ so recently gone) was the issue before the racism kicked in. Secondly I don't think you can compare David Walliams blacking up as his character is not real like the Jacksons.