The Great Train Robbery

Broadcast in two parts - "The Robber's Tale" and "The Copper's Tale" - THE GREAT TRAIN ROBBERY retells the famous events of August 1963 when over £2m. was stolen from a mail train traveling from Glasgow to London. The events have been extensively retold elsewhere, notably in Peter Yates' fictionalized version ROBBERY (1967) with Stanley Baker, or BUSTER (1988) a comedy-drama with Phil Collins as robber Buster Edwards. "The Robber's Tale" (dir. Julian Jarrold) focuses specifically on Bruce Reynolds (Luke Evans) as the brains behind the whole operation; the more celebrated crook Ronald Biggs (Jack Gordon) - who passed away the night the program received its first broadcast - receives scant attention. "The Copper's Tale" looks at the painstaking ways in which Tommy Butler (Jim Broadbent) went about investigating the case and bringing the criminals to justice. Stylistically speaking the production is very much in keeping with current British television costume dramas, with low-key, almost washed-out lighting, lots of period detail (for example, the obligatory London bus from the mid-Sixties) passing across the back of the frame, or a couple of young mothers pushing their prams round the park) and plenty of focus on character through shot/reverse shot sequences. The style is diffuse, with the emphasis placed on ambiance as much as plot. "The Robber's Tale" actually proves something of a disappointment; not a lot happens in terms of action, while some of the (predominantly youthful) cast simply do not seem convincing as mid- Sixties London hoodlums. Perhaps they might have done more research into the behavior, mannerisms and (most significantly) the argot of that period. "The Copper's Tale" is a lot better, not least because of the interplay - or should that be rivalry - between Butler and his immediate subordinate Frank Williams (Robert Glenister). Although ostensibly on the same side, they seem unable to form a united front, at least professionally. Butler might be a good cop, but he certainly lacks any management abilities.

I was born any a couple of months after the great train robbery, back in 1963. And I have always been fascinated by it. My dream would be to go on the actual place where it occurred, the Bridego Bridge. I possess nearly every document about it, footage archive and fiction material. The most memorable, of course, remains Peter Yates's ROBBERY, back in 1967, and the other movie starring the actor starring Derrick - sorry I don't remember his name. Some viewers said on IMDb that this feature was not flawless, concerning details specified to UK, for instances trains and cars from this very era. Well, I have never lived in UK, so...But concerning this film, the only thing that annoyed me was the BOAC company heist, at the beginning. These guys are supposed to be professional robbers with a criminal record as thick as a phone book, and they pull the heist without any gloves !!!! Because finger prints, see? Rubbish. For the rest, it is a terrific piece of work, and the character description is absolutely outstanding. I loved the very ending when Bruce Reynolds tells the hard boiled inspector from SY, who chased them in such a raging way all over the years, that he did not do this for money but for "camaraderie" as he actually said, using a french word meaning companionship, brotherhood among friends. An outstanding face to face between those two adversaries. An authentic masterpiece. But it could have shown the several escapes from jail of some of the great train robbers.

I managed to watch this on Amazon prime.

It's nothing to get overly excited about. The over the top cockney accents can get a bit annoying at times. And the acting from some is a bit wooden. But all that being said I did still really enjoy this. You just have to go in to it with the right attitude. Still well worth a watch if you are looking for something easy to follow to kill a few hours. Enjoy.

Since the story based on real events is known, I expect the film to be a little more than a purely chronological sequence of the plot. In addition to Luke Evans, the actors are not very prominent and join the monotone pattern. The film could have been more, but in the end it is a boring TV production in my eyes. And after all two long

I enjoyed this first episode although of course we all know the story. And an important part of the story is that it all happened in August of 1963. Now I was only 4 years old that year so cant quite remember what the summer of '63 was like but I would bet a large amount of money (maybe even 2.1 million pounds)on a couple of things...first there were probably leaves on the trees and secondly it is doubtful that there was snow on the ground and indeed falling in London...in the middle of August!!! What were the producers thinking? During the episode there are several captions giving the date...including the 8th August 1963. Why or why did they create a setting that looked like January or February! There wasn't even any attempt to produce a blue sky! A good film, well acted and written but ruined by the weather! Only in England!!!