Midway! Awesome movie! - Page 2 - 1911Forum
1911Forum
Advertise Here
Forum   Reviews   Rules   Legal   Site Supporters & Donations   Advertise


Go Back   1911Forum > >

Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #26  
Old 11-10-2019, 09:30 AM
Nitro.45 Nitro.45 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 6,437
Quote:
Originally Posted by scubadad View Post
I hope a bunch of millenials go to see to it so they can see what sacrifices were made by the greatest generation.
Like DSK said, they would think we were a bunch racists and should give the island back. They have no clue that PH just happened six months before that and would probably think that we caused it anyway. Screw that......powder river!
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 11-10-2019, 11:10 AM
scubadad scubadad is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro.45 View Post
Like DSK said, they would think we were a bunch racists and should give the island back. They have no clue that PH just happened six months before that and would probably think that we caused it anyway. Screw that......powder river!
This is why they need to watch. God knows they don 't teach real history anymore.

The Pearl Harbor movie was turned into a glorified love story but at least they showed the Japs attacking a bunch of sailors sitting in port not bothering anyone. Kids today need to learn about these things. If a hollywood cgi movie is what it takes then so be it.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 11-10-2019, 12:47 PM
dsk's Avatar
dsk dsk is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 70,252
The Ben Affleck movie was such an insult that I can't even watch it anymore, even though I'm a huge WW2 Pacific War fan. Besides the soap opera-worthy love triangle plot the historical inaccuracies were so bad it made me wonder if the morons who produced it even read anything about the Pearl Harbor attack. And then to see Alec Baldwin play Jimmy Doolittle...

If you haven't seen it yet I highly recommend the 1943 film Thirty Seconds Over Tokyo with Spencer Tracy and Van Johnson. Despite being an old black & white 1940s movie it is historically accurate and the flight scenes are terrific. Not boring and not overdone. You just have to put up with another sloppy love story, but the action in the second half makes it worth it.
__________________
Avoid the temptation to replace everything on your brand-new 1911 just to make it "better". Know what you're changing out and why. You may spend a lot of money fixing things that weren't broken to begin with. Shoot at least 500 rounds through it first, then decide what you don't like and want to improve. Regarding vintage 1911s, pre-1970 pistols are highly collectible in original, unaltered condition and should NEVER be refinished or modified as it completely ruins their monetary value.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 11-10-2019, 04:03 PM
warbird1 warbird1 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Heart of Dixie
Posts: 121
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtq View Post
"12 O'Clock High" is used in USAF professional military education for those reasons.
The Alabama DOC used it in advanced training classes also. Same reasons.
__________________
If I want it...I need it.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 11-10-2019, 05:25 PM
bradsvette bradsvette is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: South
Posts: 2,838
Just saw it. Excellent movie. Some of the casting was a bit suspect, but I enjoyed it none the less. FWIW, I would absolutely recommend it.
Reply With Quote
  #31  
Old 11-10-2019, 06:15 PM
dsk's Avatar
dsk dsk is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 70,252
I just saw it too. It did have a few technical inaccuracies but it wasn't the train wreck I feared it would be. Woody Harrelson was the wrong man for the part of Chester Nimitz, but to his credit he did try very hard to be Chester and not the stupid goon he usually is. They also tried to cram too much history into a two-hour movie and the pacing suffered for it, but overall it was very entertaining. I'd give it a B+ as a war flick, and honestly it was more accurate than Charlton Heston's film was.

Seeing those CGI Devastators though really made me wish somebody would hurry up and try to salvage one of the few remaining wrecks before it's too late.
__________________
Avoid the temptation to replace everything on your brand-new 1911 just to make it "better". Know what you're changing out and why. You may spend a lot of money fixing things that weren't broken to begin with. Shoot at least 500 rounds through it first, then decide what you don't like and want to improve. Regarding vintage 1911s, pre-1970 pistols are highly collectible in original, unaltered condition and should NEVER be refinished or modified as it completely ruins their monetary value.
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old 11-10-2019, 07:04 PM
bradsvette bradsvette is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: South
Posts: 2,838
That's exactly what I was thinking about Woody Harrelson as Chester Nimitz. Although, he looked very similar to the photograph of Nimitz shown at the end of the movie. I did like the movie. There wasn't a whole lot about being a Navy pilot, but I appreciated some of the leadership themes involving LCDR Best. I'd heard of him, but didn't realize what a tremendous man he was. Also, I liked how the Japanese spoke Japanese, and not English with a Japanese accent. FWIW, I agree with a B+.

Last edited by bradsvette; 11-10-2019 at 07:07 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old 11-10-2019, 08:39 PM
dsk's Avatar
dsk dsk is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 70,252
BTW I have a strong suspicion that the reason why the Doolittle Raid was shown is because a Chinese film company helped bankroll the movie. I'm sure they wanted to include the part about the Chinese helping Doolittle get back home, plus mention the 250,000 or so Chinese who were murdered in Japanese reprisals as a way to make it appeal to a Chinese film audience. Otherwise it was a chapter in the movie that wasted a lot of run time and was unnecessary. It almost felt like inserting part of another movie into this one.
__________________
Avoid the temptation to replace everything on your brand-new 1911 just to make it "better". Know what you're changing out and why. You may spend a lot of money fixing things that weren't broken to begin with. Shoot at least 500 rounds through it first, then decide what you don't like and want to improve. Regarding vintage 1911s, pre-1970 pistols are highly collectible in original, unaltered condition and should NEVER be refinished or modified as it completely ruins their monetary value.
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old 11-10-2019, 09:32 PM
Tyrsman Tyrsman is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by larryf1952 View Post
I went to see the movie last night. My wife isn't into WWII history like I am, so I went alone. There was a decent number of people in the theater, but it wasn't crowded by any means. The thing that struck me the most was the fact that there literally wasn't anyone in the theater under 50 years old. I'd guess that 90% of the audience was in their 60's, like me. I was not surprised, but it did make me a bit sad that young people might take little interest in such a film.

I actually liked it as much or more than the 1976 version, because it didn't have that distracting sailor son/Japanese girl romance subplot getting in the way. As for the CGI, it was well done, but it wasn't A list, Star Wars blockbuster quality by any stretch. I noticed it mostly faltered during the Pear Harbor scenes. But, I went in with the intent to cut it some slack, knowing that it wasn't a major studio film (Lionsgate), and that it's getting awfully difficult to find real 78 year old warbirds to make WWII movies with...

For those who are intimately familiar with the history and chronology of the Midway battle and the early war in the Pacific, it'll be obvious that there are some things that were glossed over or omitted entirely. And, it was a little hard to keep track of where they were and which ship they were on from time to time.

But, the time goes quickly and I thought it was well worth the ticket price.
Young Americans are not really the target audience for this movie. The American audience is secondary to todayís Hollywood. The film is produced by Centropolis and financed by Chinese money and foreign sales arranged by AGC International. The Chinese are the target audience. Anything that shows the Japanese in a bad light is a money maker for the Chinese investors and great for the communist government maintaining control.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old 11-11-2019, 06:54 AM
Nitro.45 Nitro.45 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2015
Posts: 6,437
As far as young Americans NOT being the target audience, perhaps they should be. They should all be FORCED to watch several documentaries that show what true sacrifice for freedom really is. It might cut down on the amount of kneeling during the National Anthem and making Betsy Ross look like a criminal. These young ones have never been taught the price that has been paid for them to enjoy the luxury of shoving their face in a phone all day long.
Reply With Quote
  #36  
Old 11-11-2019, 08:02 AM
Tyrsman Tyrsman is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2019
Posts: 4
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro.45 View Post
As far as young Americans NOT being the target audience, perhaps they should be. They should all be FORCED to watch several documentaries that show what true sacrifice for freedom really is. It might cut down on the amount of kneeling during the National Anthem and making Betsy Ross look like a criminal. These young ones have never been taught the price that has been paid for them to enjoy the luxury of shoving their face in a phone all day long.
I agree, thatís exactly my feeling about 9-11 also. The coverage every year gets more sugar coated and politically correct. It should be mandatory that every staton and every website. Even HGtv etc. show the uncensored video that all us old guys saw live.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old 11-11-2019, 12:33 PM
condition_2 condition_2 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Michigan
Posts: 137
Thanks for the reviews and I've heard from a few friends that is was good. I hope to see it later today but my initial impressions from the trailer was "another horrible CGI film" like USS Indianapolis: Men of Courage with Nick Cage. I couldn't even finish watching that - but the CGI was not the only problem with that film.
__________________
Follow Me
NRA member - instructor - rso
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old 11-11-2019, 01:35 PM
parallax parallax is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: St. Louis, MO
Posts: 2,811
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro.45 View Post
The original was great.
Letís not turn this into a spoiler thread though.
Spoiler: The Japanese lose.
__________________
If you carry a gun, people will call you paranoid. Thatís ridiculous. If I have a gun, what in the hell do I have to be paranoid about? - Clint Smith

I'm all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let's start with typewriters. - Frank Lloyd Wright
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old 11-11-2019, 01:42 PM
HarryO45 HarryO45 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Home of the Infantry
Posts: 4,788
Great Story of the Intelligence Officer

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsk View Post
I plan to see it, but from what I've seen in the trailers the special effects are a bit overdone as is typical for war movies these days. I'll hold off on any formal criticism until I've actually seen it of course.
You should go see it. I thought it was great.

Great job of telling the story of Midway, mixing the home-front, the humanity in war, the tactical and strategic levels - good balance.

I thought the best part of the story was the evolution of the Intelligence Officer - the Actor nails what an Intel Officer is supposed to do. I predict it will be well received by that community.

Question: could the planes of the day really attack from those angles? and pull out of it? Would they fly in a formation in a dive like that? they were really close together.
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old 11-11-2019, 01:46 PM
AustinWiseGuy AustinWiseGuy is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: God Bless Texas
Posts: 301
Quote:
Originally Posted by larryf1952 View Post
The thing that struck me the most was the fact that there literally wasn't anyone in the theater under 50 years old. I'd guess that 90% of the audience was in their 60's, like me.

But, the time goes quickly and I thought it was well worth the ticket price.
Roger this. The theater was full of older guys but I didn't mind. Not a whole lot of texting and talking. I can appreciate that. The time did go quickly.

The CGI was spot on for me. You can't do this type of movie without it. And it made sense that it wasn't the kind of movie to go deep on dialog or character development. It was based on the general portrait of the battle and, at least for me, seeing Hollywood do our military history at least an honorable story, I was pleased and thought it well worth the time.

One point (being cautious for those who've yet seen it) it gave me chills thinking what our pilots contended with.

Now - next up: I really wish someone would recreate the Battle of Leyte Gulf!!!!!
__________________
NRA - Patriot Life Member / Benefactor
Member: Gun Owners of America
Member: TX State Rifle Association
Captain, Sons of the American Revolution
Reply With Quote
  #41  
Old 11-11-2019, 03:11 PM
Ranger566 Ranger566 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 1,381
Just enjoyed seeing it. Three cheers for my Navy bretheran.

WARNING! Be careful not to step on the expended shell casings in the aisles of the theater on your way out..........................and I never saw one weapon malfunction!!
__________________
RLTW
U.S. Army, (Retired)
Vietnam Veteran
Agent Orange---the gift that keeps on giving.
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 11-11-2019, 03:14 PM
HarryO45 HarryO45 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Home of the Infantry
Posts: 4,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ranger566 View Post
I never saw one weapon malfunction!!
Yea - the Glock had yet to be invented.
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 11-11-2019, 03:44 PM
Frank Vaccaro Frank Vaccaro is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: S.W. Montana
Posts: 1,311
I may have to see it.
__________________
U.S.A. RIDE FOR THE BRAND OR LEAVE!
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 11-11-2019, 04:02 PM
bradsvette bradsvette is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: South
Posts: 2,838
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryO45 View Post
You should go see it. I thought it was great.

Question: could the planes of the day really attack from those angles? and pull out of it? Would they fly in a formation in a dive like that? they were really close together.
Hi Harry. I flew fighters (F-14s) in the Navy 40 years later than the Hellcats in Midway, and then A-10s in the ANG after a service transfer, so I can't speak with absolute authority, but I believe I can get pretty close to what was happening.

The dive angles depicted in the movie were pretty accurate. The dive bombers in that day had big dive-breaks, similar to speed-brakes in modern terminology, although speed brakes are typically just for slowing down with modern fighters, and to increase descent angle and rate with civilian aircraft. Those steep dive angles enhanced the probability of a hit on the target. When exactly they released the bomb depended on airspeed, rate of descent, and altitude remaining. I doubt that skimming the surface of the sea was normal ops on the pullout, but even today you'll see modern fighters hit the ground or water due to target fixation. Todays fighters can release in almost any attitude and altitude and the computer will have already figured out the release point and let the weapon go when appropriate. And that's for unguided weapons, which are pretty much ancient history nowadays. Today's guided weapons lock onto the target using a variety of methods, radar, TV, IR, etc., and will hit it dead on with relentless, incredible certainty.

As far as flying in formation during the dive, if your aiming reticle is malfunctioning, you fly with the lead and release when he does. I'm guessing that back in the day they'd want greater separation throughout the attack than was depicted in the movie to avoid being targeted and shot, unless a new pilot wanted target guidance from the leader, but visually it looks cool and thus they were shown to be very close.
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 11-11-2019, 04:14 PM
Wolf11B Wolf11B is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Posts: 8
Saw it yesterday, and I enjoyed it. Yes it does have those hollywood moments in it but that is to be expected in this current time. Was happy it wasn't a Pearl Harbor sequel, follows mostly the men of USS Enterprise in particular Richard "Dick" Best. For a hollywood movie was surprised by how they had many facts big and little ones in it. I went to see it with the intend of being disappointed but walked out impressed for it being a hollywood movie.
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 11-11-2019, 04:21 PM
tim7139 tim7139 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 120
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nitro.45 View Post
The original was great.
Letís not turn this into a spoiler thread though. I want to go see it, effects or not.
Spoiler thread?
They speak Japanese in your town?
__________________
A reasonable man conforms to the world around him, an unreasonable man expects the world to conform to him, therefore all progress is made by unreasonable men.

George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 11-11-2019, 04:26 PM
HarryO45 HarryO45 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Home of the Infantry
Posts: 4,788
Quote:
Originally Posted by bradsvette View Post
Hi Harry. I flew fighters (F-14s) in the Navy 40 years later than the Hellcats in Midway, and then A-10s in the ANG after a service transfer, so I can't speak with absolute authority, but I believe I can get pretty close to what was happening.

The dive angles depicted in the movie were pretty accurate. The dive bombers in that day had big dive-breaks, similar to speed-brakes in modern terminology, although speed brakes are typically just for slowing down with modern fighters, and to increase descent angle and rate with civilian aircraft. Those steep dive angles enhanced the probability of a hit on the target. When exactly they released the bomb depended on airspeed, rate of descent, and altitude remaining. I doubt that skimming the surface of the sea was normal ops on the pullout, but even today you'll see modern fighters hit the ground or water due to target fixation. Todays fighters can release in almost any attitude and altitude and the computer will have already figured out the release point and let the weapon go when appropriate. And that's for unguided weapons, which are pretty much ancient history nowadays. Today's guided weapons lock onto the target using a variety of methods, radar, TV, IR, etc., and will hit it dead on with relentless, incredible certainty.

As far as flying in formation during the dive, if your aiming reticle is malfunctioning, you fly with the lead and release when he does. I'm guessing that back in the day they'd want greater separation throughout the attack than was depicted in the movie to avoid being targeted and shot, unless a new pilot wanted target guidance from the leader, but visually it looks cool and thus they were shown to be very close.
I was hoping to get your input. Have you seen the movie? because they get pretty low at near vertical (not sure that is the right word), but in the movie, they call out the altitude as they are descending / attacking, i am not sure i remember the exact altitude that they released the bombs, but i thought it was really low. of course that is why i asked, cause i have idea what that must have been like.

As an Infantryman we would not clump together... but those pilots did in the movie. They were flying pretty close together during the attack. Seemed to me that it let the enemy gunners could focus on one area. I cant imagine why they would do that? but I guess you kinda address that when you talk target guidance - I think I remember B17s in Europe doing that (and that case, it makes sense to me), but what if the leader goes down first - in dive bomber operations - seems to be a whole different thing? Anyway I am glad to hear your input... it was a good movie, and I liked it.

thanks for all your service, but especially your time in the A10s.
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 11-11-2019, 04:40 PM
bradsvette bradsvette is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: South
Posts: 2,838
Harry, thanks for your service too! Yes, my wife and I saw it yesterday and we really enjoyed it. Those nearly vertical dive angles were SOP back in the day. The dive brakes kept the speed down to a manageable level and regulated the rate of descent. I'm guessing the back-seater called out the altitudes because the pilot was focusing on the target. They had to attack from directly above, unless skip-bombing or delivering a torpedo, and yes they were vulnerable.

Today, fighters would attack from different directions to confuse AAA and SAMs. Of course, jamming aircraft would have already blanketed their electronics with noise and other types of jamming, and anti-radar weapons would have already been used to take out those radar guided AAA and SAMs. But that's "best case," and as you know, it rarely is.
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 11-11-2019, 04:54 PM
FNISHR FNISHR is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Johnson City, Tennessee
Posts: 2,834
Quote:
Originally Posted by dsk View Post
No doubt they'll look at all those white racist American pilots oppressing the minority Japanese and wondering why we didn't just do the right thing and give Midway Island to them.

Not long ago I was watching a documentary on the first Gulf War, and they talked about the "highway of death" where US airplanes bombed and strafed the crap out of the Iraqi Army as it fled Kuwait. It turned out the planes were eventually called off because they were causing so much carnage the US government feared a negative public backlash against it. Apparently in this day and age you're not allowed to beat the living snot out of your enemy because it's considered unfair.
I think the term they prefer is "disproportionate". Let's see here: they commit the rape of Nanking, and we are supposed to be gentle.
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 11-11-2019, 04:56 PM
FNISHR FNISHR is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Johnson City, Tennessee
Posts: 2,834
BTW, the film was a rush!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:40 AM.


NOTICE TO USERS OF THIS SITE: By continuing to use this site, you certify that you have read and agree to abide by the Legal Terms of Use. All information, data, text or other materials ("Content") posted to this site by any users are the sole responsibility of those users. 1911Forum does not guarantee the accuracy, integrity, or quality of such Content.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimisation provided by DragonByte SEO (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity v2.2.2 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 2015 1911Forum.com, LLC. All Rights Reserved