Talk:Oh, Mr Porter!

Best known film?

The description of Oh, Mr. Porter as Hay's 'best known film' is a bit too subjective, IMHO. Figures in the trade papers suggest that Good Morning, Boys and Windbag the Sailor took considerably more money at the box office. IMHO this could use some rephrasing to make it clear that this is a value judgement applied by contemporary critics as distinct from an indication of the film's success at the time of its release.

The Ghost Train

The plot of the film was not new at the time. In 1931 The Ghost Train was made with a somewhat similar plot - gun-runners using the cover of a ghostly story to cover their activities.Peter Shearan 18:10, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

I can't find the quote but I believe Val guest once said he had written (at least a part of the) scripts for 'The Ghost Train' three times. As 'Oh Mr Porter' in 1937, The Arthur Askey version of 'The Ghost Train' in 1941 and 'The Runaway Bus' (Frankie Howerd and Margaret Rutherford) in 1955. All excellent films IMHO. 178.78.66.211 (talk) 21:59, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Oh, Mr Porter!. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071024092854/http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117793667.html?categoryid=31&cs=1&p=0 to http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117793667.html?categoryid=31&cs=1&p=0
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20071024092854/http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117793667.html?categoryid=31&cs=1&p=0 to http://www.variety.com/review/VE1117793667.html?categoryid=31&cs=1&p=0

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:13, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Opening credits.

In the article it says... "The title sequence uses scenes shot at a variety of locations on the Waterloo to Southampton railway line and also between Maze Hill and Greenwich in south-east London. According to John Huntley in his book Railways on Screen, "[t]he editor reversed his negative at one stage in preparing the title backgrounds, causing them to come out reversed on the final print".

This is clearly nonsense. By looking at the signals on the other line it's clear that the actual signals are facing towards the camera with the 'arm' of the semaphore pointing to the left therefore the film cannot possibly have been reversed. The film is not reversed left to right but it is reversed in time having been filmed from the back of a train, not the front, with the train travelling in the correct direction for the track. It's rather shocking that anybody could write a book about railways on screen and get something this basic so wrong. 178.78.66.211 (talk) 21:47, 19 October 2022 (UTC)

Passage now deleted for the above reasons. 178.78.66.211 (talk) 23:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)