Another distortion occurred because of the atypical system of command along the railway camps. The Japanese didn’t have sufficient troops to command all the POWs and so they left the Allied system of command in place, which put commanding officers in a very difficult position. John wanted Toosey to explore ‘the borderline between collaboration and sensible co-operation to achieve good results [and, by extension, to keep men alive]’ (BBC Written Archives Centre T56/203/1, Treatment, 1967/8: 31). He noted that Colonel, by then Brigadier Toosey, was ‘nothing at all like Nicholson’, and had been an outstanding and rational commanding officer, unlike his fictional counterpart (BBC archives). Unlike, Colonel Nicholson’, who would no doubt have been dubbed ‘Jap-happy’ by the men, ‘in all the dozens of camps up and down the River Kwai, Toosey became a legend: he was the man who could handle the Nips (Watt, 200: 196)’. In Julie Summer’s biography of her grandfather, The Colonel of Tamarkan, she notes that when Toosey saw the film at the cinema he had absolutely no notion that the character of Nicholson had ‘anything to do with him’: he had deemed the film ‘a good work of fiction’ (Summers, 2006: 347; 346-353). However, once comparisons were publically drawn and a series of angry articles and letters from former prisoners published, Toosey fully realised the position he was in: the mix between fact and fiction in the film was too close for comfort; although the bulk of it was pure fiction, certain scenes were distortions of events that had actually occurred. He eventually declined the invitation to appear in John’s documentary, as did Alec Guinness who, according to Summers, also realised that the film could not be defended. Neither Toosey nor Guinness informed John that this was their main reason for not appearing in John’s documentary, with Toosey using the excuse that he was unhappy with the reaction to Ian Watt’s 1968 Observer article, which very successfully pointed out the differences between fact and reality in the film. Toosey was being evasive; he actually felt Watt had said everything that needed to be said on the issue. Guinness eventually just declined to appear (Summers (2006: 351-352) and BBC Written Archives Centre T56/203/1: Philip Toosey letter to Anthony de Lotbiniere (3 September 1968) and Dennis Van Thal letter to Anthony de Lotbiniere (10 September 1968)).