Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: West Los Angeles and Rancho Palos Verdes
13,583 posts, read 15,662,103 times
Reputation: 14049
Advertisements
Any day of the week I'd rather see actors in a cockpit mock-up in front of a blue screen than this horrible looking fake CGI stuff. CGI works for space movies, but the lighting on Earth is too complex for the technology thus far.
It is like they took the Charleston Heston fake parts from the 1976 docudrama Midway and went Pearl Harbor with it.
I made a copy of Midway for myself where I edited out all the Heston and his kid snoozefest scenes. With those gone it is a very enjoyable film, one I've watched many times. I saw it originally in the theater, but it was way better when it came out on home video. The reason is that on the big screen the quality difference between the newly filmed scenes and the combat archive footage, was extremely blatant and annoying. On TV those differences are no where nearly as apparent.
But, yeah, this new one has the feel of all of Pearl Harbor's excesses. Pearl Harbor was an instructive movie in that it makes it clear that the main Japanese error was attacking with 350 planes, but assigning 250 of them exclusively to pursuing Affleck and Hartnett all over the island. And before this film, I had never known that WW II era fighters possessed all of the turning characteristics of the X-Fighters from Star Wars.
sounds better than "pearl harbor". The director tried to make it as realistic as possible,without any existing aircraft or ships from the period, they built replicas,and used CGI as little as possible...…..it sounds like they try to follow the true events also.
Location: West Los Angeles and Rancho Palos Verdes
13,583 posts, read 15,662,103 times
Reputation: 14049
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffdoorgunner
sounds better than "pearl harbor". The director tried to make it as realistic as possible,without any existing aircraft or ships from the period, they built replicas,and used CGI as little as possible...…..it sounds like they try to follow the true events also.
By adding in depictions of Pearl Harbor and the Doolittle Raid, they aren't leaving time for a full development of the Midway battle. The trailer runs 2.29, and the Midway scenes don't start until 1.32. The same proportions in the film would mean only 40% of it is about Midway.
The trailer shows 3 planes diving down on the Japanese aircraft carrier Akagi, identifiable as such by the island structure on the port side and the shape of the flight deck. In the real battle, 3 planes -- not 2, not 4 -- dove on the Akagi. Another scene shows a U.S. plane buzzing a Japanese battleship of the Kongo class. In the real battle, a U.S. plane flew so low over the battleship Haruna (of the Kongo class) that their antennae hit each other.
So, based on what I've seen so far, I'm cautiously optimistic that they've made an effort to get the history right. I'm looking forward to this movie.
I’ve seen the original Midway several times over the years and enjoyed the film. Special effects would seem somewhat crude compared newer CGI technology. Can recall in the late 70’s taking a tour of the Universal back lot and seeing some of the props used in the original movie.
The original "Midway" used the Cerwin-Vega "Sensurround" effect to give impact to the explosions and other loud, bottom-end noises.
My father's review of the movie was just, "It was too damn loud."
The trailer shows 3 planes diving down on the Japanese aircraft carrier Akagi, identifiable as such by the island structure on the port side and the shape of the flight deck. In the real battle, 3 planes -- not 2, not 4 -- dove on the Akagi. Another scene shows a U.S. plane buzzing a Japanese battleship of the Kongo class. In the real battle, a U.S. plane flew so low over the battleship Haruna (of the Kongo class) that their antennae hit each other.
So, based on what I've seen so far, I'm cautiously optimistic that they've made an effort to get the history right. I'm looking forward to this movie.
I also noticed that there was a scene depicting the attempted high level bombing of the Japanese fleet by B-17s. That actually happened, although all of the bombs missed. It wasn't depicted in the Heston flick.
Location: West Los Angeles and Rancho Palos Verdes
13,583 posts, read 15,662,103 times
Reputation: 14049
Remember that show Dogfights on The History Channel? I'd rather they did this, rather than a movie with actors, acting in these CGI environments, which looks just plain goofy to me.
Looks horrible, another "Pearl Harbor" maybe with unnecessary side and love stories. Looks like almost all the movie was done with horrid CGI, looks almost like a video game. What a way to 'honor' the memory of the battle.
The earlier "Midway" film from the 1970s was excellent. I saw it at a Drive-In.
I had older relatives, WWII Veterans in the South Pacific, who were still alive when I saw the 1970s version.
I enjoyed listening to accounts of WWII in that region. He didn't like "Pearl Harbor" from 2001.
He apparently thought it was too sensational. It had those lame side plots (love triangle).
But he definitely liked "Flags of our Fathers".
Historically, the Japanese Navy's senior leadership made a huge error at Midway much like at the Guadacanal. Thank God they lost and my relatives came home. But they felt bad many of their friends and relatives did not - RIP WWII US Veterans KIA.
I don't want to watch the new "Midway" version. It makes me miss my relatives (WWII Veterans) who passed away from that era.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
