What I learned from the Midway Movie

What I learned from the Midway Movie (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition

Message

oaltinyay -> What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/21/2019 7:58:27 PM)
1. USN navy used mostly SBD type fighter bombers during the Pacific War. These could outturn and outclimb a Zero. There were some other torpedo planes of unknown name but those were about a few in number. 2. Midway air group was made of "Vindicator" type SBDs - and about a dozen!! B26s ( not 4 as reported in official histories ) B26s - and certainly no F2Fs and B17s as reported in books. Also B26 dropped their torps from several thosand feet. 3. During the battle - No US navy fighter took active part - they did not even exist. 4. Japanese airforces used Zeroes for most things including surface naval attack - their 20 MM was a can opener and it was used to decimate the American BB force in the battleship row. There were of course Japanese Torpedo bombers but they attacked the US battleships head on during the PH attack. 5. Japanese were masters of low level ground attack as seen in their attack on the island. They bombed from a mere 20 feet thanks to their sturdy attack a/c that can withstand the blast. 6. SBD had a famous diving "shriek" that can be heard by the Japanese officers talking in their bridges even when the SBDs were 14.000 ft up. 7. Japanese ships were excellent AA platforms against any other aircraft types but against SBDs they were powerless which started diving from 10000 ft then levelled at 20 ft above the deck THEN dropped their bombs 8. US 500 pdr bombs were powerful enough to take out one third of a carrier alone but when they fell into the sea they made a lot of splash that soaked the Japanese AA crews badly.

Leandros -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/21/2019 8:12:27 PM)
So, as expected…? Fred

RogerJNeilson -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/21/2019 9:43:42 PM)
Slightly off topic but..... Recently the BBC screened a series of 7 episodes of The World on Fire. It was the early days of WW2 and began just prior to Danzig and Poland and ended just after Dunkirk. What was actually surprisingly good about it was the way they managed (don't know how) to have proper Pz1s and Pz 2s and Hanomags and the battledress and vehicles all looked pretty authentic. Also the street scenes looked right for the period. However after that anything went.... One character was in the Battle of the River Plate then later was on a rowboat at Dunkirk.... another was in the battle prior to WW2 for Danzig as a Polish soldier, then walked through Poland, encountered the Soviets, then next time you saw him he was in Belgium having walked across Germany with his mate, got to Dunkirk and despite being in civilian clothes was able to hop into another rowboat ahead of the troops queuing patiently. Another coloured trumpet player walked from Paris and managed to hop into another boat...... ho hum. Said sailor (after helping to get rid of the Graf Spee) was machine gunned at Dunkirk, arrived in a Paris hospital, was then picked up by a member of the resistance and despite severe machine gun wounds walked to Spain across a few forests - with no intervening high ground and in roughly 24 hours...... I could go on, and on and on........ Even when they get some stuff right they are just plain lazy or don't actually care...... Roger

spence -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 12:08:01 AM)
For someone familiar with military history in general and the Battle of Midway in particular there was nothing whatever to learn from the "Midway" movie however it was fun to watch. For persons graduating from high school in the last 30 years (or more) learning that the Japanese exist and that cell phones did not always exist may be quite the revelations.

Big B -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 3:54:29 AM)
+1 quote: ORIGINAL: spence For someone familiar with military history in general and the Battle of Midway in particular there was nothing whatever to learn from the "Midway" movie however it was fun to watch. For persons graduating from high school in the last 30 years (or more) learning that the Japanese exist and that cell phones did not always exist may be quite the revelations. Seriously guys, We all know that this is the of era comic book action, ...and for the people on this forum to comment on a modern movie about WW2 - is like university professors commenting on Jr High School papers...it's pretty low hanging fruit. I seriously want to ask at this point - "does anyone really think you're going to see movies like 'A Bridge Too Far' or 'The Longest Day' again?" Don't get me wrong - that would be wonderful for all of us, but those were another century and three generations ago.... it ain't gonna happen. My brother has been a screen writer since the 1980s and done some big movies. Consequently, I have had an insider view of back stage Hollywood for over 30 years. Today's writers and producers are literally children in their 20's and early 30's....people over 50 can barely get a screen play because they are condescendingly considered "too old" today in that industry. I guess I have much lower expectations for what the studios are willing to make, which was why I was stunned that Midway was made. Instead of wondering why we didn't see F4F Wildcats (not an essential part of the story they were telling) - I was amazed they actually bothered showed SBD's and TBDs. I mean, even 'Saving Private Ryan' was already a generation ago. Well, maybe I'm way off base, and they will make true to life comprehensive battle movies again, but since the WW2 generation is effectively gone - certainly not buying movie tickets anymore - what audience do they think will demand such movies again...that will be enough to pay for a block-buster movie? I'm just happy that Midway was even made, and pretty much straight up told a big story. Enough of my rant.

warspite1 -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 4:36:08 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3 Slightly off topic but..... Recently the BBC screened a series of 7 episodes of The World on Fire. It was the early days of WW2 and began just prior to Danzig and Poland and ended just after Dunkirk. What was actually surprisingly good about it was the way they managed (don't know how) to have proper Pz1s and Pz 2s and Hanomags and the battledress and vehicles all looked pretty authentic. Also the street scenes looked right for the period. However after that anything went.... One character was in the Battle of the River Plate then later was on a rowboat at Dunkirk.... another was in the battle prior to WW2 for Danzig as a Polish soldier, then walked through Poland, encountered the Soviets, then next time you saw him he was in Belgium having walked across Germany with his mate, got to Dunkirk and despite being in civilian clothes was able to hop into another rowboat ahead of the troops queuing patiently. Another coloured trumpet player walked from Paris and managed to hop into another boat...... ho hum. Said sailor (after helping to get rid of the Graf Spee) was machine gunned at Dunkirk, arrived in a Paris hospital, was then picked up by a member of the resistance and despite severe machine gun wounds walked to Spain across a few forests - with no intervening high ground and in roughly 24 hours...... I could go on, and on and on........ Even when they get some stuff right they are just plain lazy or don't actually care...... Roger warspite1 I did a mini review of World On Fire in the "What program/film/documentary are you watching now?" thread in the General Discussion forum. You’ve mentioned a lot of what I noticed too. Re your comment on the River Plate, I did a comment on that episode a few weeks before: Episode 3. Mmmm the characters in this series are interesting and the Harry/Kasia/Lois story is entertaining so its worth sticking with but the attention to detail is pretty shocking. So Lois' brother joins the navy sometime (a few weeks) after Poland is invaded - and after a double quick basic training, is then apparently teleported to the South Atlantic so he can join HMS Exeter.... The scriptwriters are either youngsters or are simply writing for the social media generation. The radio broadcasts that Graf Spee is being hunted off Argentina (the British didn't even know the identity of Graf Spee at that time) and mentions HMS Exeter as looking for her! Immediately after the battle, with the cruiser on fire from stem to stern, the whole of Britain (except Sean Bean) knows she's been 'hit'. Next there'll be podcasts from the Western Front..... And of course investigating broadcaster Helen Hunt seems to have all the info on the T4 program, names, places and even gets to speak to the guy in charge..... Come on guys - there's some good material here but please stop treating the audience like imbeciles..... For those interested here are my thoughts at the end of the series: The seven-part first series of the BBC’s World on Fire came to an end last night (a second series has been confirmed). I have to say it was a bit of a mixed bag, but overall it pleasing to have something WWII related to watch. At its best it was brilliant, but there were a few not so good moments….large parts of episode 5 were a bit of a shocker…. Best of all was that the writers remembered the importance of writing characters that the audience cares about. In this they succeeded with a number of characters and the storylines they were given (even if historical accuracy was perhaps stretched…..). Best of all were Shhhhaauauunnn Bbeaannn (Douglas) and Lesley Manville (Robina). This actor/actress combo were simply the class of the field, giving the show a degree of gravitas and a lesson in how to act and assisted by a nice story line. Robina was in danger of being a little too much of a caricature, but this formidable actress pulled it off. Bean, who allegedly checked with the director that Douglas wasn’t to be killed off, played his part to perfection and one couldn’t help but have massive sympathy for this wreck of a man (courtesy of the trenches of WWI). I loved (and hated!) the end where they parted – both seemingly wanting to say something to the other, but missing the opportunity…… watch this space (I hope). These two were given some excellent scenes and Robina and Jan (Harry’s little brother in law) at the school was a feel good moment. Their offspring – Lois (Douglas) and Harry (Robina) – gave equally good account of themselves, as did Kasia (Harry’s Polish wife), Jan and Vernon (Lois’ intended and RAF pilot). I like how she changed her mind on him and the subject of marriage and why - very nicely done. There were some annoying aspects, but these didn’t spoil the show too much. As mentioned previously, there seemed to be too much willingness to make this WWII for the social media generation – information seemed to be available on tap, including which ships were hunting Graf Spee, and what happened to the Exeter before the crew of the Exeter probably had time to realise….. Everything seemed to have to happen at double speed – and they would have been better having more characters to share the work. Instead Douglas’ son Tom joins up after the start of war, has a quick basic training, is teleported to the South Atlantic, comes back after the River Plate in time to head for Dunkirk where he’s wounded, patched up and then assisted by the resistance who have already got an escape route to Spain planned…. Meanwhile SOE is up and running and Harry is parachuted into Poland in July 1940 for an implausible mission (and I’m not sure what aircraft could have done that or where it was supposed to have landed…..) even more so was the fact that he met up with…… his wife! Natch. It perhaps goes with the times that the German family in the film are all anti-Nazi – although probably acceptable as a counter to the majority of Germans we come across who are good old fashioned bad guys. The only character that really grates (but is no doubt necessary to sell to this production to the US) is Helen Hunt’s Nancy. For one thing she’s had too much facial work - she really doesn’t look good. There to tell the story of what is going on, she sticks her nose into the Nazi T4 Euthanasia program – of course! So in summary, a reasonable first series and it’s welcome news that it will return. Let’s hope they get to dial back the storylines to keep within more historically accurate boundaries. [image]local://upfiles/28156/B6008A4EDCBC464EA39CAFC38D7002D1.jpg[/image]

CaptBeefheart -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 5:46:28 AM)
Big B: I recall some of your other rants about Hollywood. It's great hearing the inside stuff. Let's face it, Hollywood doesn't make movies for our demographic any more. If we want good war-related entertainment we either play this game or we read an AAR. That and Korean cable has a channel that plays 1950s-70s Westerns and war movies. I'll be skipping through the Korean infomercials after a night with the lads and there will be Connery big as life hanging out at the 1st Airborne HQ in Oosterbeek, and Ryan O'Neill sounding like a whingeing boy scout (I had forgotten how bad of an actor that guy is--shameful that he played Gavin). Ah, what was my point? Maybe that we're a bunch of geezers but can still find entertainment in strange places. Cheers, CB

Big B -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 6:27:16 AM)
Thank you CaptBeefheart, someone gets it! We over 50 or 60+ aren't really old (in our existence) but for the corporate world of "Hollywood" we don't exist...which is why they do block buster movies about 'Wakanda'....? It may astound most of you that our current Attorney General William Barr was trying to get a movie made about Leyte Gulf a few years ago, my brother was involved in the project as a writer - which is how I knew about it. But the studios canned it in pre-production because he wanted to do a pretty straight-up 60's style movie, and they wouldn't invest in it. That's an example of why I say - support the Midway type movies if you want to keep this type of genre alive... Otherwise look forward to the MCU B quote: ORIGINAL: CaptBeefheart Big B: I recall some of your other rants about Hollywood. It's great hearing the inside stuff. Let's face it, Hollywood doesn't make movies for our demographic any more. If we want good war-related entertainment we either play this game or we read an AAR. That and Korean cable has a channel that plays 1950s-70s Westerns and war movies. I'll be skipping through the Korean infomercials after a night with the lads and there will be Connery big as life hanging out at the 1st Airborne HQ in Oosterbeek, and Ryan O'Neill sounding like a whingeing boy scout (I had forgotten how bad of an actor that guy is--shameful that he played Gavin). Ah, what was my point? Maybe that we're a bunch of geezers but can still find entertainment in strange places. Cheers, CB

Encircled -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 8:45:40 AM)
If its Braveheart levels of historically absurdity, its going to be a very hard watch. Big shout out to Sean Bean for actually doing something and not dying in it btw!

oaltinyay -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 9:02:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3 Slightly off topic but..... Recently the BBC screened a series of 7 episodes of The World on Fire. It was the early days of WW2 and began just prior to Danzig and Poland and ended just after Dunkirk. What was actually surprisingly good about it was the way they managed (don't know how) to have proper Pz1s and Pz 2s and Hanomags and the battledress and vehicles all looked pretty authentic. Also the street scenes looked right for the period. However after that anything went.... One character was in the Battle of the River Plate then later was on a rowboat at Dunkirk.... another was in the battle prior to WW2 for Danzig as a Polish soldier, then walked through Poland, encountered the Soviets, then next time you saw him he was in Belgium having walked across Germany with his mate, got to Dunkirk and despite being in civilian clothes was able to hop into another rowboat ahead of the troops queuing patiently. Another coloured trumpet player walked from Paris and managed to hop into another boat...... ho hum. Said sailor (after helping to get rid of the Graf Spee) was machine gunned at Dunkirk, arrived in a Paris hospital, was then picked up by a member of the resistance and despite severe machine gun wounds walked to Spain across a few forests - with no intervening high ground and in roughly 24 hours...... I could go on, and on and on........ Even when they get some stuff right they are just plain lazy or don't actually care...... Roger No doubt ze supersoldaten off tzat gangzter Winston...

oaltinyay -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 9:08:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Encircled If its Braveheart levels of historically absurdity, its going to be a very hard watch. Big shout out to Sean Bean for actually doing something and not dying in it btw! Not like that but - as if the script writers just read some bits of detail about the battle ( Arashi sighting , the water supply message etc )and connected them together with strings. It just didnt click....

Macclan5 -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 12:00:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Big B I seriously want to ask at this point - "does anyone really think you're going to see movies like 'A Bridge Too Far' or 'The Longest Day' again?" That is a very insightful comment - question. Who knows ? World War 2 has been so thoroughly covered in a cinematic sense that the movies being made - especially and heavily influenced since HBO Band of Brothers have been to portray heroic bravery and sacrifice at the "individual level". Richard Winters / Desmond Doss / John Basilone / and currently Dick Best. At least that is my personal observation about the focus of Midway (Hacksaw Ridge/etc/etc) Sweeping narratives with multiple stars portraying campaigns are no longer vogue. Some of the sweeping narrative type scripts have been written of the Vietnam War. Almost nothing of the Korean War. Perhaps in time the 1st Gulf War will be treated to a more sweeping narrative ?? I am unsure if Producers: 1) No longer think sweeping narrative have any appeal 2) Too expensive with the salaries of a star laden cast - although Marvel's the Avengers seems to suggest it is possible 3) Some combination of the above or other reasons I cannot fathom.

Trugrit -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 1:02:55 PM)
Don’t try and learn from the Midway movie. Hollywood is Hollywood. They are in the entertainment business. I love westerns. When I was a kid I once asked my dad: “Dad, can a six-gun shoot 20 times without a reload?” Dad said “It just looks that way if it is in a movie” I still love westerns. Movies can be destructive. Young Marines get hurt in a bar fight. They don’t understand why they got a broken jaw Because that never happened to John Wayne in a movie. He just got up and was fine. I does not work that way in real life. Enough said. Get this book to learn: Shattered Sword: The Untold Story of the Battle of Midway. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/34658.Shattered_Sword

castor troy -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 1:44:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: oaltinyay 1. USN navy used mostly SBD type fighter bombers during the Pacific War. These could outturn and outclimb a Zero. There were some other torpedo planes of unknown name but those were about a few in number. 2. Midway air group was made of "Vindicator" type SBDs - and about a dozen!! B26s ( not 4 as reported in official histories ) B26s - and certainly no F2Fs and B17s as reported in books. Also B26 dropped their torps from several thosand feet. 3. During the battle - No US navy fighter took active part - they did not even exist. 4. Japanese airforces used Zeroes for most things including surface naval attack - their 20 MM was a can opener and it was used to decimate the American BB force in the battleship row. There were of course Japanese Torpedo bombers but they attacked the US battleships head on during the PH attack. 5. Japanese were masters of low level ground attack as seen in their attack on the island. They bombed from a mere 20 feet thanks to their sturdy attack a/c that can withstand the blast. 6. SBD had a famous diving "shriek" that can be heard by the Japanese officers talking in their bridges even when the SBDs were 14.000 ft up. 7. Japanese ships were excellent AA platforms against any other aircraft types but against SBDs they were powerless which started diving from 10000 ft then levelled at 20 ft above the deck THEN dropped their bombs 8. US 500 pdr bombs were powerful enough to take out one third of a carrier alone but when they fell into the sea they made a lot of splash that soaked the Japanese AA crews badly. Welcome Mr. Emmerich! Please stop making movies... Read a comment of an interview with Emmerich where he stated he would never get an Oscar. Surprise?

warspite1 -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 5:46:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Encircled If its Braveheart levels of historically absurdity, its going to be a very hard watch. Big shout out to Sean Bean for actually doing something and not dying in it btw! warspite1 I think you should at least give it a go - as said at least its a bit of WWII to watch. Strangely perhaps, it wasn't the historical inaccuracy that had me considering giving up (that just presented varying degrees of mild irritation) - it was when the story just flopped - and episode 5 was the only time I felt that way. Depends what floats your boat of course but so long as the characters are interesting and they make you want to invest in their story and their fate - whether good or bad - that to me is the art of great story telling. If they keep the story lines so interesting then I can even excuse the Elephant Man, sorry I mean Helen Hunt, being allowed to snoop into the inner workings of the T4 program (her botox, or whatever it is, is really bad) or professional northerner Shhhaaauuunnnn Bbbbeeaaaannn listening to the wireless for a running commentary on what ships are posted in the South Atlantic and what enemy ships they are searching for...... In fact I demand the last episode of Season 7 sees Robina and Douglas get it on - despite the fact it would probably be absurd if they did given their class, financial position, outlook on life, political conviction and.... just about everything else [sm=00001746.gif] Helen! Ever considered growing old gracefully love? [image]local://upfiles/28156/65824FDF4B8F4395BA8D7E102D53CBAF.jpg[/image]

Enforcer -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/22/2019 6:39:51 PM)
LOL this is funny and yet so true!

BBfanboy -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/23/2019 3:56:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: Encircled If its Braveheart levels of historically absurdity, its going to be a very hard watch. Big shout out to Sean Bean for actually doing something and not dying in it btw! warspite1 I think you should at least give it a go - as said at least its a bit of WWII to watch. Strangely perhaps, it wasn't the historical inaccuracy that had me considering giving up (that just presented varying degrees of mild irritation) - it was when the story just flopped - and episode 5 was the only time I felt that way. Depends what floats your boat of course but so long as the characters are interesting and they make you want to invest in their story and their fate - whether good or bad - that to me is the art of great story telling. If they keep the story lines so interesting then I can even excuse the Elephant Man, sorry I mean Helen Hunt, being allowed to snoop into the inner workings of the T4 program (her botox, or whatever it is, is really bad) or professional northerner Shhhaaauuunnnn Bbbbeeaaaannn listening to the wireless for a running commentary on what ships are posted in the South Atlantic and what enemy ships they are searching for...... In fact I demand the last episode of Season 7 sees Robina and Douglas get it on - despite the fact it would probably be absurd if they did given their class, financial position, outlook on life, political conviction and.... just about everything else [sm=00001746.gif] Helen! Ever considered growing old gracefully love? [image]local://upfiles/28156/65824FDF4B8F4395BA8D7E102D53CBAF.jpg[/image] If you want a good, well-acted, plausibly accurate WWII story look up the made for TV movies "The Winds of War" and the sequel "War and Remembrance" based on Herman Wouk's excellent books. Robert Mitchum is the central character - a USN officer who gets around between Europe (pre-December 1941) and the Pacific theatre and Washington DC (where he has direct access to FDR). His family and his lover's family are swept up in the Holocaust or escape from it. He loses a son at Midway. So the theme of a central character having involvement in many momentous events is held, but it all seems plausible during these movies. Been a long time since I've seen them so there is likely much more that could be said of them.

jdsrae -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/23/2019 5:55:59 AM)
Talking of Sean Bean, what the Pacific War genre could do with next is a Richard Sharpe style series, with an Aussie main character of course. Apart from his regimental duty coming up through the ranks of the 8th Division, as luck has it he escapes capture at Singapore, and from then on just happens to be the liaison officer attached to key allied units from Burma to the Aleutians, always arriving just in time to find himself caught up in the middle of every big battle, finally scamming his way onto the deck of USS Missouri for the surrender ceremony in Tokyo Bay. I don’t have a lead actor in mind yet, but if I ever do an allied AAR I might flesh this out a bit more.

Encircled -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/23/2019 3:47:03 PM)
Nowt wrong with being a professional Northerner!

jagsdomain -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/23/2019 6:26:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Big B +1 quote: ORIGINAL: spence For someone familiar with military history in general and the Battle of Midway in particular there was nothing whatever to learn from the "Midway" movie however it was fun to watch. For persons graduating from high school in the last 30 years (or more) learning that the Japanese exist and that cell phones did not always exist may be quite the revelations. Seriously guys, We all know that this is the of era comic book action, ...and for the people on this forum to comment on a modern movie about WW2 - is like university professors commenting on Jr High School papers...it's pretty low hanging fruit. I seriously want to ask at this point - "does anyone really think you're going to see movies like 'A Bridge Too Far' or 'The Longest Day' again?" Don't get me wrong - that would be wonderful for all of us, but those were another century and three generations ago.... it ain't gonna happen. My brother has been a screen writer since the 1980s and done some big movies. Consequently, I have had an insider view of back stage Hollywood for over 30 years. Today's writers and producers are literally children in their 20's and early 30's....people over 50 can barely get a screen play because they are condescendingly considered "too old" today in that industry. I guess I have much lower expectations for what the studios are willing to make, which was why I was stunned that Midway was made. Instead of wondering why we didn't see F4F Wildcats (not an essential part of the story they were telling) - I was amazed they actually bothered showed SBD's and TBDs. I mean, even 'Saving Private Ryan' was already a generation ago. Well, maybe I'm way off base, and they will make true to life comprehensive battle movies again, but since the WW2 generation is effectively gone - certainly not buying movie tickets anymore - what audience do they think will demand such movies again...that will be enough to pay for a block-buster movie? I'm just happy that Midway was even made, and pretty much straight up told a big story. Enough of my rant. Agree 100 percent. I am glad the movie was made and it might spark an interest in people that did not know it even happened. Gettysburgh did that for me, I watch it today and get a but angry over how much was left out but with out it started my dive into civil war history and that would never have happened wothout the movie. I was more conserend that the movie was going from Pearl to Midway, thats alot of ground to cover. The story was basicly about Dick Best and he stuck with that narrative, I really loved the movie. He added some wonderful bits like the meeting between the Navy and the Army. Showing casualty of war when there was no battle. Brudo Guido. I thought the acting was solid and the music worked. As to screen play writers. I worked in Hollywerid years ago. The were directors and writers that did not know who Hichcock was or John Wayne. Probably way JJ remade SW because he never watched the first ones. The reason I think there was no F4F was narrative and cost. Because the story was about Dick Best they did not have to have fighter. Plus they did not have to spend the money on making a fighter battle.

warspite1 -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/23/2019 6:32:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Encircled Nowt wrong with being a professional Northerner! warspite1 Aye, 'appen as maybe [;)]

Anachro -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/25/2019 5:40:42 PM)
Just saw this thread. Most of the criticism in the OP post strikes me as petty, but par for the course of any Hollywood war movie. I'm less interested in that than I am in how the movie does as a cohesive, if simplistic, depiction of the battle itself.

TOMLABEL -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (11/30/2019 1:42:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Big B Seriously guys, We all know that this is the of era comic book action, ...and for the people on this forum to comment on a modern movie about WW2 - is like university professors commenting on Jr High School papers...it's pretty low hanging fruit. I seriously want to ask at this point - "does anyone really think you're going to see movies like 'A Bridge Too Far' or 'The Longest Day' again?" ... ... I'm just happy that Midway was even made, and pretty much straight up told a big story. Enough of my rant. Well said, B. I enjoyed the Midway movie and was surprised as well that it was even considered. I was impressed by the CGI work on the ship details, etc. It was well done. I think you are spot on with your comments here. TOMLABEL

rkr1958 -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (12/2/2019 12:02:42 AM)
Here's a movie I highly recommend. Not "based on a true story" but is a "true story". Against the Sun.

fcooke -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (12/2/2019 11:55:04 AM)
Seems interesting - where did that TBD ditch?

obvert -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (12/2/2019 2:25:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TOMLABEL quote: ORIGINAL: Big B Seriously guys, We all know that this is the of era comic book action, ...and for the people on this forum to comment on a modern movie about WW2 - is like university professors commenting on Jr High School papers...it's pretty low hanging fruit. I seriously want to ask at this point - "does anyone really think you're going to see movies like 'A Bridge Too Far' or 'The Longest Day' again?" ... ... I'm just happy that Midway was even made, and pretty much straight up told a big story. Enough of my rant. Well said, B. I enjoyed the Midway movie and was surprised as well that it was even considered. I was impressed by the CGI work on the ship details, etc. It was well done. I think you are spot on with your comments here. TOMLABEL I finally saw it. Movies made in Hollywood don't have to be badly made films with poor film-making decisions. War films made in Hollywood today don't have to be action films. Somehow the genre of action has been applied to historical war films. War action can be done seriously and somewhat accurately and still be entertaining, make money and win awards (Saving Private Ryan, Dunkirk). My problem with this film is exactly what I thought it would be. It has nothing to do with the generation of viewers, but more with poor decision making. To see the innaccuracies during battle scenes that were completely superfluous to the enjoyment of an average young viewer is where I just say it's bad film making. I'm sorry but I do expect more and know it's possible. We will see other good WW2 films, and they will be more accurate. My view is they will be more authentic and more powerful, popular and award-winning as well.

rkr1958 -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (12/2/2019 3:34:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: fcooke Seems interesting - where did that TBD ditch? They ditched in the South Pacific. They survived for 34-days and traveled over 1000 miles in their tiny life raft. They eventually reached land in the Pukapuka atoll. Here's a picture of the (actual) crew shortly after "rescue". quote: Bombardier Tony Pastula, pilot Harold Dixon, and radioman Gene Aldrich (left to right), Read more at https://www.airspacemag.com/military-aviation/stranded-at-sea-2255498/#FJddhHzEXv7L7QoV.99 [image]local://upfiles/31901/B57E7C32EC5C4479AA9B64F27E90EA03.jpg[/image]

rkr1958 -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (12/12/2019 10:33:41 PM)
Check out BOM's November newsletter. http://www.midway42.org/Backissues/2019/20191101.aspx It includes a reference to WITP-AE. quote: War in The Pacific by Matrix I have both versions of the game (the basic game and the Admiral’s Edition), and have to admit I’ve only the Admiral’s Edition once or twice as it is rather intimidating because of all the additional information the player is bombarded with during the game. Also, while the former does not include some information for simplification and game playability, the latter seems to add more into the game. Also, the older edition no longer plays on Windows 7 or 10, but the Admiral’s Edition has been adapted for use on both

dr.hal -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (12/12/2019 11:38:26 PM)
I've just seen this thread so I'm a bit late for an input. However in relation to war films in general one thing is certain, they are expensive and there is a driving need to make a profit (which is certainly understandable). But realism/historical accuracy is not necessarily the enemy of profit. Back in the 70s with Tora Tora Tora (TTT), the producers made an extraordinary effort to obtain realism as well as suspense (thus audience draw, thus profit). Now TTT didn't make much of a profit as I recall, however my point is that it CAN be done. Back then the film used t-13 trainers, I believe, to "act" as certain aircraft which was understandable an acceptable compromise rather than build replica aircraft. However today we have computer graphics that can replicate ANYTHING and it costs as much to replicate a Devastator, SBD or Zero as it does to do a t-13. So today, more so than in the 70s, films can make accurate and historical graphics at the same cost as making very inaccurate graphics. Additionally, most films hire "expert advisors" such as ex-military officers, historians, etc. Hiring knowledgeable ones is about the same cost as hiring bad ones (another illustration that comes to mind is the TV series "Pacific" in which the USMC movie actors in the Guadalcanal scenes were using Springfield bolt action rifles, which is a small thing but ACCURATE rather than going with a more familiar weapon such as the M-1). It just takes a bit more effort. YET, in modern war films I don't see this effort being made. I've not seen Midway and I'm not sure I'm going to. However one thing that would draw this movie viewer in a heartbeat is if I read in this thread or other reviews, that the movie was historically accurate to fault! If movie makers can get the eyelids of a T-Rex to look so "realistic" for it's Jurassic series then I think they could do the same for a Kate or SBD......

geofflambert -> RE: What I learned from the Midway Movie (12/13/2019 12:57:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Big B I seriously want to ask at this point - "does anyone really think you're going to see movies like 'A Bridge Too Far' or 'The Longest Day' again?" General Gavin was terribly miscast with Ryan O'Neal. That still burns me.

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.015625