Watched this film tonight and wasn't overly impressed. It was ok, passable but another wasted opportunity. Apparently they had three P-51 Mustangs, one B-17 Flying Fortress and a C-47 and the rest was CGI, really good CGI, but CGI non-the-less.

They had to have the romance BS to keep the wives happy and a POW bit that felt tacked on and rushed in the films 2hr duration. Overall it had a feeling of being a TV movie, with cheesy, lack-lustre music and scripts and some acting was a little dodgy.

Not a lot of air combat in it really, but in the first dogfight they have the German ace performs some unreal manoeuver that defies every known law of gravity and flight that one of the Red Tails works out how he did it and then performs it with even more unbelievable physics.

I almost switched it off then but lasted through to the end.

The CGI was horrible Mace. The modeling and texturing was good, which thinking about it now is likely what you meant.
P51's flying around like housefies, formations too tight and silly looking. So that CGI - horrible.
Very silly dialogue, and a stupid cliche German villain.

Yes, another wasted opportunity.
To be fair, Lucas knew he was making a silly movie, but there really wasn't a reason to approach the subject matter
that way, and as a result he as another Shti burger on his resume.
Good job Fat Neck.

Yeah, I meant the CGI didn't jump out as CGI as they obviously duplicated the real aircraft but yes what you have stated was not good with it.

lol... funny, I agree... almost turned it off when they showed the Germans as "evil", and that unreal turn that even this simpleton knows is impossible... but i rented it and stayed.

I knew from day 1 that this movie was going to be made for entertainment and nothing more. There's nothing wrong with that really but people need to be mindful of the fact that anything made by Lucas (after THX-1138) is made purely for entertainment. To be fair to Lucas, the movie never made any pretense about being any kind of serious war film along the lines of a Tora, Tora, Tora or Platoon.

I bought it. Only because it was the easiest way to see it since I couldn't drag my (then) pregnant girlfriend to the theater to see it. I have watched like 3/4 of it but got too tired to finish it last night. It will probably get finished tomorrow when my girlfriend goes to a bachelorrette party. I'm babysitting so my 3 month old will watch it with me. Gotta teach him to love planes sooner or later.

Still can't find it anywhere here. They sell it on DVD too, don't they? Sure don't want to download the movie.

I can't watch anything having to do with WW2 Germany anymore because of that. They always make the Germans out to be cartoonish monsters.

In a similar way I find it painful to watch movies with aircraft in them. It just becomes too grating when you see something that's so obviously "not right".

Some days I wish I had never bothered to explore history and aviation beyond what they taught in school. It would make life a lot less irritating... Be one with the mass.

I recently gott the Battle. Of Britain (1969) DVD. There are some pretty good parts in the Movie.
Havn't seen RT yet but i don't expect much?

Correct, turn off your brain before you see Red Tails and you'll be ok. Compared to Red Tails, Battle of Britain is a cinematic masterpiece.

It is a George Lucas movie (not Steven Speilberg) so that should let you know what to expect right there.

The effort went into the special effects, the planes look good and the explosions are big -- really big.

You will have no problem figuring out who the bad guys are. (its a George Lucas film again)

And the hero is a great guy who does heroic stuff (its a George Lucas film)

The special effects are great. (you get the picture by now)

Buy extra popcorn and don't think too much, you will have fun.

I could tell from the trailer that the physics were going to be wacked out. I may still rent this just to check it out though.

I enjoyed Red Tails but mostly because I went into it thinking it would be terrible. The action is often ridiculous, the characterizations are shallow (but typical Hollywood) and the dialogue is sometimes cheesy but overall the movie is enjoyable retina candy. But heed what has already been said, leave your brain at the door; otherwise you'll be asking questions like, "Weren't Me262s armed with 30mm cannons with exploding shells? Shouldn't direct hits be doing more damage to metal and flesh?"

And never mind the fact that the whole thing feels WWI. I mean from the fact the pilots recognized each other in the air just like that, even tough "Preaty Boy's" aircraft never had any distinctive markings, they always knew it was him. And they had to chasse him to find the enemies base, i think by WWII recon had that preaty much covered, attacking a airfield wasn't so much a question of knowing where they were, but getting past by CAP flight's and flak and get there only to have most planes scrambled, not that it did't happen and it didn't work, it did, and was used by eighter side on a number of ocasions, but just don't think the "where" to have been the biggest problem.
All in all it was like watching "flyboys" and bad as that was, I think it was way better.

I saw in the theaters and liked it, bought the blu-ray the day it came out. Is it as good as Battle of Britain...no but is it entertaining? heck yeah! It has the feel of some of the older WWII flying movies that came out in the 50's a la "Flying Leathernecks" or "Fighter Squadron" same cheesy and uber-patriotic dialogue, but much better dogfight sequences. Lucas mentioned that this was the feel he was aiming for and to make something that would inspire kids. If this movie inspires more minorities to get involved in aviation, then I think he succeeded.

For those that don't know there was also a companion documentary released called "Double Victory", I'd recommend checking that out as well, a lot of information about the Tuskegee Airman that really hasn't been talked about before like why the bomber group never made it overseas during the war.

I rather enjoyed "Flyboys", BTW.

Did anyone see "Red Baron", it had a decent plot, but it was no "Tora Tora Tora" either. The special effects in R.B. were over the top and it was not even a Hollywood film. But I am glad they made it and I've seen it a few times now.

I think after "Tora Tora Tora", the Hollywood community got together and decided to never ever under any circumstances make an expensive realistic and historical aviation war movie again.

Memphis Belle? Flight of the Intruder? neither were cheap and both were really good IMHO. I think we (real world pilots I'm speaking to specifically) have just become a bunch of snobs when it comes to aviation movies, we complain that there aren't enough but when one does come along, we then complain if they are 100% realistic, unfortunately we cant have it both ways..

I can't say I blame them if that was the case since Tora, Tora, Tora did lose money at the box office. However, as far as quality film-making goes, the film is first rate. It just goes to show that great film-making isn't always appreciated by the masses.

I can't dispute your point at all. After all, only a tiny percentage of movie audiences are composes of current or former pilots. Hollywood movies for the most part are made for the mainstream.

Any movie that has the line, "Foolish black man...now you will die!" cannot be taken seriously. But, as has been mentioned, Lucas wasn't going for serious. I'd rather have serious.
What I want to see is a "Band Of Brothers," or "Saving Private Ryan" style film about a 9th Air Force Thunderbolt squadron. Gritty, realistic. I don't want people coming out of the theaters thinking, "Wow, flying combat was exciting and fun back then!" I want them to think, "How the hell did they go out and do that every day?"

And please, I'm sorry , but The Red Baron was friggin' awful.

You are right, there have been some great films, but they are few and far between. As far as realism goes, Hollywood is about selling dreams and a bit of "enhancement", is often part of that. But how far it goes is up to the director and the producers.

That said, I can enjoy a movie based on nothing more than real planes flying through the air. One of my favorites "Strategic Air Command" is nothing more than a paper thin plot and glory shots of SAC bombers flying through the clouds, and I've watched that twice in a row on occasion.

Basically, the only aviation movies that disappoint me are the ones where the planes hardly leave the ground. In those cases, the plot and acting have to be first rate.

"Basically, the only aviation movies that disappoint me are the ones where the planes hardly leave the ground. In those cases, the plot and acting have to be first rate."

Like "Twelve O'clock High."

That is exactly the film I was thinking about!

Why do you say that?

When it comes to WW1 aviation films, nothing comes anywhere near "The Blue Max".

"Pretty Boy's" plane had the yellow nose that they recognized as the flight leader. Even his ME-262 later had a yellow nose.

It wasn't a horrible movie, but I definately liked HBO's "Tuskeegee Airmen" better.

I'll have to watch again, but when they escorted the bombers to Berlin didn't they say they needed external fuel tanks to make the trip? I'm not sure if I saw any fuel tanks.

So it's a bad move. I am wondering how bad is it better or worse then Perl harbor (that had one or two redeeming features) ?

I've given up waiting for a good WW2 movie that doesn't make me cringe when I watch it.

What's happened to The Dambusters,is that still a going concern?

It's a different kind of movie, really: Pearl Harbor was primarily a romantic drama set during the war. Comparing Red Tails to Fly Boys is much closer to the mark, both in style and substance.

Red Tails was like a kids film, it wouldn't look out of place with a Disney logo at the beginning.

Red Tails or the TV version of the same story ? I felt the TV film to be better. It dealt with the Racial tensions of the time, not in any great Depth, and bespoke of a Segregated Armed Force.

I'm pretty sure Mace is referring to the recent film.

I think Mace hit it on the nogen. A Disney Logo would at least catagorize the movie as something other than historically accurate. My nephew was up for the weekend and I watched it with him on Saturday. If it pretended to be historically acurate, then I could see the hub bub regarding the disdain for Red Tails. I don't think that was what Lucas was striving for so I'll give him a pass on that, though he could have found a better script writer. I wasn't overly enthralled with it, but I did find it mildly entertaining.

What I regret about the movie is I don't feel that I know anything more about the Red Tails and the men of Tuskeegee than I did before watching the film. The story deserves better, and so do the men who served.

This is exactly why I liked the HBO movie "Tuskeegee Airmen". It went a lot more indepth into the training, characters, and the hardships of segregation in the 40s. Plus there was no silly love story involved...lol.

Cuba Gooding was in the original. I wonder how he compares the two movies? I personally liked the HBO movie more. I thought Lithgow was a bit stereotypical, but on the whole it handled important parts of the story much better. I saw a fluff piece with Gooding touting the release of Red Tails. He may have been tired, but to me he looked unenthused about the production.


EDIT: A story as compelling and as important as the Tuskegee airmen could conceivably be done as well done as Glory was.

You're absolutely right. Maybe Edward Zwick should have done it instead of George Lucas?

This is the ONLY MOVIE where you will see them Crash Land a B-17 for the film!
In the opening 10 minutes, a crippled B-17 comes in, gear up, and belly-lands in the field. Take THAT, CGI!

Of course, considering that "12 O'Clock High" came out in 1949, it was much easier to get a hold of a surplus B-17 to do a stunt like that.

Halfway through watching this and it is awful, just awful. Basically one big "yippie kay yay!" and treats war like a lark. That might have worked 30 years ago as a movie, but today I think most halfway intelligent viewers expect something a little less childish. Overall, it's so dumb that it makes the last three star wars movies look like high art. WTF is up with George Lucas movies (either those he produces, writes, and/or directs)- does he have the sensibility of a 12 year old boy?


Might not make it any further. Heck, even the CGI isn't that good- very smooth looking, and not at all gritty like beat up warplanes would likely look. I really can't think of how they could have made this any worse.

Historical question- were white fighter pilots really that cavalier about bomber protection as depicted at the start of the film, flying off to chase bandits and leaving the bombers unprotected? That lack of discipline seems surprising, if so. It would have just taken clear orders to stay with the bombers at all costs to rectify that, no?


Edit-

Actually I think it's more a matter of Lucas and co. being intent on making movies with an overdone and heavyhanded 1930's sensibility, all swashbuckling and "gee whiz"
I don't think that plays well almost 100 years later. It comes across as childish in a way that I find distracting. Grow up, George, and join the rest of us in 2012!

Absolutely agree with you Pepper. The whole 1930's vibe may have worked well for the original Star Wars but then again that's sci-fi and not a war movie that is supposed to be based on historical events.

And if Lucas was trying to make Red Tails appeal to a wide audience, he even failed in that respect since the film only made a very modest amount at the box office.

What I'm having a problem with wrapping my head around is, Lucas keeped saying that "Hollywood is still racist" for not giving him the money to make "Red Tails", so he had to make it himself. Did Hollywood actually make a right call for the oppisite reason? To me it did feel a little racist against whites. /shrugs

I got a totally different vibe from "Tuskegee Airmen". The feeling of overcoming adversity in the face of racism. You root for the "underdog". In "Red Tails" all I felt was "entitlement".

As far as the flying goes... I've seen better movies here using Cliffs of Dover, etc. That have had me on the edge of my seat. Hats off to these "film makers".

From a purely business/money making perspective, the film studios absolutely made the right call. This had nothing to do with Red Tails being centered around black characters. This had everything to do the fact that Red Tails was centered on military aviation. The box office performance history of films centered on military aviation ranges from medicore to dreadful. The only real breakout summer blockbuster film based on military aviation to date is "Top Gun".

I saw Red Tails in the theatre and the majority of the audience was black. It made for a really interesting experience as many were there to celebrate their heritage, and several were there for the entertainment. I'm sure several were there because they were proud of the Tuskegee Airmen (and rightly so!). But what I found most interesting was that the community feeling that was shared amongst the audience, regardless of why they were there. When the Tuskegee Airmen were in the bar and the bomber pilot calls one of them the "N" word, boy did you feel the air in the theatre grow cold. They all new it was a movie, and it was being realistic in the sense that that was what was happening at the time--but still you can feel the tension and anger in the air.

It was very counterbalanced when the one pilot came back and said a line about "colored people" back to the bomber pilots whom they had just saved--and it was not only gratifying, but hilarious! Everyone on the theatre laughed.

It was an interesting perspective indeed!

v6,
boNes

Haven't seen either, and the Lucas one sounds like a cartoon, so I'm not too motivated to pick it up, but as for the TV version, as stated above, then this would be exactly the one I would avoid, and for exactly the above reason. I'm so sick of looking at racial topic this and racial topic that, had it up to my eyeballs.

I could live the of my life without being force-fed any more racial education anything and thusly live the rest of my life as a good, happy, moral and non-racist man. But alas I won't even remotely get my wish.

I can understand your point of view but I think it is possible for a film to bring up the racial/discriminatory issues of a specific historical time without being heavy handed and sanctimonious. Take "Glory" for example.

Ohh come on, lucas is as racist as they come. Jar Jar binks was a complete piss take on the mental attitudes of forum moderators........

..... Did no one else see that ????

I just want to know one thing --- that move that "pretty boy" did, and that the tuskegee airman later learned, is that even possible? I'm surprised no one pulled the BF3 "jump out of the cockpit and fire a rocket launcher" trick was not used.

In Tora they filmed a B17 crash landing , jammed gear, shot was used in the film.

Double take THAT CGI !

That shot of the B-17 doing the crash landing was stock footage though. You can clearly tell.

ahh ok..its been a long time since i have seen it.


Grabbed the below from the web , so in the movie does a 17 do a one wheel touch and go or similar ? Like i said , its been many many years since i have last seen it.


TORA TORA TORA CRASH

Here is a little reading to do about the "maneuver" The only thing I've found so far that ties them together.

http://www.cgarena.com/newsworld/redtails-lightwave.php towards the end of the page.

http://www.elknet.pl/acestory/candelaria/candelaria.htm

Here's the "Dogfights" clip that they were talking about that shows the maneuvre.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-mdCm5z2RpI8/dogfights_p_51_richard_candelaria/

Well what's the verdict? A one off move that can only be used as a last ditch effert or a usable maneuver. What's 6 G's nowdays.

From what I understood, the trick was to keep the plane nice and slow and use the upward move to stall the aircraft, taking a snapshot at the enemy fighter as you nose back down. As to the ability to consistently replicate the move, or the ease of recovery after the stall, I have no idea. Perhaps those that fly the DCS P-51 can try and test?

The maneuver may be real but the way it is presented looks all wrong, of course the God's eye view maybe is what makes it look so implausible. In Il-2 1946 I have seen the bat turn maneuver performed by 109's and always thought it was BS, Fighters just don't fly like an Extra 300 and stalling a Mustang would be a bad idea, spins require way to much altitude to recover from.

Was that move a spin or just a stall and using the rudder to control your nose-down direction to aim the guns?