Has anyone here seen Red Tails - 1 attachment

clairbear wrote in news:XnsA05E6162934C4clairbear@
216.196.97.142:

Every war film that fictionalizes the history of WW2 makes
it seem as if the war could not be won without them.


Agree wholeheartedly. My issue is that Hollyweird keeps
pumping out the garbage and the woefully uneducated sop
it up.

I'm sure that many of these fictionalized accounts are
entertaining. I just refuse to drop dime or trou for them.

Refused to see that code-talker movie since the treatment
had us believe that the Indians were as important, secret
and protected as the Manhattan Project. Jeepers people! The
truth is sooooo much more fascinating and entertaining.

On 5/25/2012 8:34 AM, clairbear wrote:

Every war film that fictionalizes the history of WW2 makes it seem as if
the war could not be won without them. Movies like the Big Red One, Go
For Broke(abuot the Nisei soldiers), Private ryan ans somany other make
it look like the war could not be won without a small group, But that is
just a plot device to make the heros of the movie seem more heroic.


In a way that's actually true.

It's just that there are a whole lot of those little groups.
And they all have a story.


But the wars would not have been won without them.

On Wed, 23 May 2012 01:02:01 -0400, clairbear wrote
(in article ):

Savageduck wrote in
news:2012052220422077923-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom:

On 2012-05-22 19:58:27 -0700, clairbear said:

Just curious if it is worth adding to my Bluray/DVD collection

image

I have only read some of the reviews and some other feed back, and what
I get is this movie does not do the Tuskegee Airmen justice. It seems
there is a lot of CGI effects and an over the top story line.

The 1995 PBS DVD "The Tuskegee Airmen" with Andre Braugher as Gen.
Benjamin O. Davis, Laurence Fishburne, and Cuba Gooding Jr. is
marginally better.


It did get kind of mixed reviews I don't think it was seen by a lot of
peopleI wonder if some of the reviewers expected more Historical movies
rarely hit the mark for accuracy

It wasn't particularly accurate.

It didn't mention some of the truly magnificent things that the 322nd FG did,
including being the first and until Desert Storm the only aerial unit to
receive a surrender from ground forces. The film also screwed up on a factual
basis: the bombers they escorted in the film were all B-17s; in real life,
four of the five heavy bomb groups they were responsible for covering flew
B-24s. The mission to Berlin wasn't the longest-range escort mission of the
war. It wasn't even the longest range mission in Europe. The 322nd _did_ lose
bombers to enemy fighters... just not very many, 26 in total, including three
on that mission to Berlin. The next lowest total was more than double the
losses that the 322nd allowed. They were very, very, VERY good, they just
weren't perfect. The 322nd were not the first to shoot down Me-262s; the
first Allied fighters to kill Me-262s were Canadian. Tempests, I think, but I
could be wrong about that. The 322nd _were_ the ones who got the _most_
Me-262s in one action, and at the lowest losses: they got four, for the loss
of five P-51s and a B-24, on that flight to Berlin.

The film-makers Hollywooded it up something awesome. Frankly, I thought that
it was insulting.

--
email to oshea dot j dot j at gmail dot com.

J.J. O'Shea wrote in
:

On Wed, 23 May 2012 01:02:01 -0400, clairbear wrote
(in article ):

Savageduck wrote in
news:2012052220422077923-savageduck1@REMOVESPAMmecom:

On 2012-05-22 19:58:27 -0700, clairbear said:

Just curious if it is worth adding to my Bluray/DVD collection

image

I have only read some of the reviews and some other feed back, and
what I get is this movie does not do the Tuskegee Airmen justice. It
seems there is a lot of CGI effects and an over the top story line.

The 1995 PBS DVD "The Tuskegee Airmen" with Andre Braugher as Gen.
Benjamin O. Davis, Laurence Fishburne, and Cuba Gooding Jr. is
marginally better.


It did get kind of mixed reviews I don't think it was seen by a lot
of peopleI wonder if some of the reviewers expected more Historical
movies rarely hit the mark for accuracy

It wasn't particularly accurate.

It didn't mention some of the truly magnificent things that the 322nd
FG did, including being the first and until Desert Storm the only
aerial unit to receive a surrender from ground forces. The film also
screwed up on a factual basis: the bombers they escorted in the film
were all B-17s; in real life, four of the five heavy bomb groups they
were responsible for covering flew B-24s. The mission to Berlin wasn't
the longest-range escort mission of the war. It wasn't even the
longest range mission in Europe. The 322nd _did_ lose bombers to enemy
fighters... just not very many, 26 in total, including three on that
mission to Berlin. The next lowest total was more than double the
losses that the 322nd allowed. They were very, very, VERY good, they
just weren't perfect. The 322nd were not the first to shoot down
Me-262s; the first Allied fighters to kill Me-262s were Canadian.
Tempests, I think, but I could be wrong about that. The 322nd _were_
the ones who got the _most_ Me-262s in one action, and at the lowest
losses: they got four, for the loss of five P-51s and a B-24, on that
flight to Berlin.

The film-makers Hollywooded it up something awesome. Frankly, I
thought that it was insulting.


in a two hour movie they cannot cover everything and when you make a
drama abou heroes sometimes you do gild the lily a bit But you wanna
talk a history movie that was an insult what about "peral Harbor" About
the only thing in that movie that was accurate was that is was the
japanese who did attack Peral Harbor

On 2012-05-28 20:06:17 -0700, clairbear said:

J.J. O'Shea wrote in
:

Le Snip

The film-makers Hollywooded it up something awesome. Frankly, I
thought that it was insulting.


in a two hour movie they cannot cover everything and when you make a
drama abou heroes sometimes you do gild the lily a bit But you wanna
talk a history movie that was an insult what about "peral Harbor" About
the only thing in that movie that was accurate was that is was the
japanese who did attack Peral Harbor

Yup If you are going to make a movie with a fictional story line
loosely based on history, then make it a good one. There have been
several great movies of the fictional variety based on historic events.
There have also been some great depictions of historic events, some
nothing more than glorifying stretches of the imagination, and some
which work on both the historic level and the story telling level.

David Lean has dealt with both types to produce "Bridge on The River
Kwai" a magnificently presented fictional tale based in history, and
"Lawrence of Arabia" a spectacular piece of history limited in its
scope by the medium. "Lawrence of Arabia" has issues due to embroidery
of the story, and omission of many details.

Kubrick's masterpiece on this genre is "Paths of Glory".

Then there are some of the post war movies which lacked in production
values told good stories and sometimes twisted facts to glorify the
victors. Of this group I give you the fiction on the fringe of historic
fact. "From Here to Eternity" and the two moral boosting British
efforts based purely on historic events and characters, "Reach for the
Sky" & "The Dambusters".

Then there is the historically factual tale of Frans Von Werra in "The
One Who Got Away" a great story regardless of loyalties which was well
presented by an English studio.

B&W does work for war movies, fiction & historic.

Both "Red Tails" and "Pearl Harbor" are failures of story telling and
historic documentary. What can be determined from both is, WWII took
place in color and CGI.


--
Regards,

Savageduck