New WW2 Movie: Red Tails

Well, if the producers come out extolling the story of the Tuskegee airmen, and then proceed to get it wrong.... it's not very entertaining.

 

I don't know if that is strictly true. For example, how could anyone call "Schindler's List" entertaining? But "Schindler's List" was a compelling story and an excellent film.

I just didn't find "Red Tails" very entertaining because I did not think it was a very well made film. And I find that disappointing because I think the story that forms the basis of the film is quite compelling.

 

Reminds me of the classic line in Altman's 'Gosford Park' where Maggie Smith says, to the Hollywood producer who uses the same line : -

'...but - none of us shall SEE it !'

 

Reading some of these reviews made me feel kinda sorry for some of you!

Dissing the film because some of the character development was on the shy side? Yes, but some characters were very well developed.
Stilted German accent on the villain? Get over it. The rest of the cast had great, appropriate accents.
A couple scenes were more suited to a comic book..... OK, but most of the movie was very well done.
The planes, vehicles, uniforms, and sets were outstanding.
The graphics were amazing.
But, most importantly:

The movie conveyed how African American pilots overcame discrimination to make a grand contribution to the war effort - that comes through loud and clear.
"People applauded at the end." That's Very loud and clear.

Yes, the movie wasn't perfect for all the reasons that "The Glass is half empty crowd" noted.
But the positive message telling a story that desperately needed to be told outweighs the few zits.
I loved it; and thought it's one of the better WWII movies out there.

 

The graphics were unrealistic, which for a WWII flick equals crap. Reality matters, even CGI can get reality right. But not if the airwar over Europe is going to be treated like a squadron of X-Wings attacking the Death Star.

If you dare to make a movie based on historical fact, GET THE FACTS RIGHT! That also means the setting, and what aircraft could and couldn't do.

 

One trailer I saw was set against "rap music". Extremely turned off by it to say the least. Is the movie peppered with that noise? If so, then going to see it falls under the "no can do" category. I really have a hard time referring to rap as music and noise is nicest thing that I can think to call it.

 

Who knew? I posted in the other thread about this movie about a local tie to one of the Tuskegee Airmen, unfortunately it related to an obit as the gentleman passed away a little over a week ago. Today there is an article about another local tie to a different Tuskegee Airman who attended our local university. From our local paper:

"Major Charles 'Charlie' B. Hall not only flew with the African-American fighter pilot unit over the skies of Europe during WW II - he was, in fact, the first African-American to shoot down an enemy plane in combat.

Hall later received national recognition via the Distinguished Flying Cross after shooting down two German fighters on one mission with the 99th Fighter Squadron, part of the 'Red Tails,' known for the distinctive paint markings on their airplanes."

Amazing. There are several famous people who have gone through this university, one of which is a currently prominent quarterback that we hear about all of the time - but I've never heard anyone mention Major Hall. That's too bad.

If nothing else, this movie has brought these two local connections to light. I'm grateful for that.

 

I had no intention of seeing this film on the big screen but I'm begining to change my opinion. I watched an interview with Cuba Gooding, Jr yesterday and he seems to be a class act.

 

They could have sent a positive message AND made a good movie. Frankly, a quality script with high quality acting and dialogue would have been a far better monument to the Tuskegee Airmen then what I saw. The "message" behind Pearl Harbor was good--resiliency--but all anyone remembers is how awful the movie was. The same will be true here.

The sad thing is that the producers already had a template for this movie. It's called "Glory". Now that is a superb movie with damn fine message.

 

January 24th, 2012 07:15 PM

#15​

RabidAlien
Member

Join DateMar 2011LocationHurst, TxPosts623Salute!102Saluted 64 Times in 40 Posts​

[h=2] Re: New WW2 Movie: Red Tails[/h]

Good review, Andy. I'm not looking for this to be incredibly historically accurate, I'm going to go in the theater expecting nothing more than an over-CGI'd action flick set in an historic timeframe using historic figures to sorta-kinda dance around an historic subject. ​

That about nails it as far as historical accuracy ( http://acepilots.com/usaaf_tusk.html )-but to this I would add "the combat air sequences are incredible and should be seen on the big screen," and "for all the dancing around hard facts this flick does do this incredible history some justice." My wife and I were both of the opinion that her late WWII airman father would have been headed out the door during the first few minutes when the fortresses were breaking apart and the men inside screaming.
Are they going to be releasing this one in 3D? If so they had better provide air sickness bags!

 

This one hour documentary does a much better job of laying a ground work of truth about the Tuskegee Airmen than this Red Tails movie does. Of course, it lacks the "box office" draw of gee-whiz Computer Generated stuff, and only deals with the history of them.

Goto:

Hulu - WWII: History Remembered: Freedom Flyers of Tuskegee

 

Clint; AND...well the Tuskegees were some extremely bright individuals-The Red Tails of the film come off as well... of average intelligence. I think Lucas did this so as to appeal to mass audiences (face it-jocks have more box office draw than nerds). Hollywoodisms aside, I recommend this film solely on account of the incredible aerial scenes.

 

Has anyone noticed that the movies with the BEST aerial scenes, didn't use CGI?

Dambusters
Tora, Tora, Tora
Battle of Britain
12 O'Clock High
... to name a handful

 

I think they all just got left in the dust-at least in terms of sheer mass.

 

Can't say I remember any outstanding aerial scenes from Tora Tora Tora, with the exception of the torpedo bombing "Kates" on their runs. Still, adding some modern CGI to Tora Tora Tora would not necessarily be a "bad" thing. Maybe then the "Val" dive bombers would...you know...actually dive bomb.

 

I like the fact that when the RAF Lancaster pilots flew at the authentic 60ft over water, the 'rushes' looked disappointing.

So they went back and did it at 30ft for the cameras. I guess with CGI you'd just wind the mouse down a few clicks or whatever but I always enjoy watching those Lancs knowing that they're really 'having a go'.......

 

The 1930 movie "Hell's Angels" probable had the most realistic aerial dogfighting scenes ever filmed. Check it out.
As to the movies mentioned above, they used the best special effects available coupled with flying scenes as allowed by the availability of suitable aircraft.
But a couple of models and mockups and cockpit scenes filmed in front of a backdrop won't cut it for today's audiences, and the number of flying P40's and B17s don't allow for much creativity today. So CGI must be used to render the desired effect. Stop living in the past and embrace reality; I'm sure people made similar complaints when they saw Gregory Peck "flying" in front of a backdrop.

Red Tails used CGI to recreate some awesome massed combat scenes.

The other item of note is that nowhere in any of the trailers or other adverts does it say that Red Tails is a "documentary."
Those of you who go to the movies and expect "documentaries" for everything must have had a really hard time dealing with Shrek, huh?

 

What? Shrek wasn't based on a true story? DAMMIT!!!!! Next yer gonna tell me that....oh....the Tooth Fairy doesn't exist, huh?

*snerk*

I think its been pretty well established that this version is nothing more than a "turn your braincell off and be entertained" action flick. Folks are just a tad pissed that the producers didnt' try to get a little bit closer to reality. One of the drawbacks to watching a movie based on a subject you know quite a bit about.

 

That said it's probably a lot closer than a couple of films I can name (but won't as they'd likely throw this thread way off track) were even though the latter claimed to be. (hint the directors initials are same as a popular candy.)

 

The point trying to be made, is that CGI isn't reality, and doesn't reproduce reality. It's attack on the Death Star with WWII CGI aircraft.

No, they created complete fiction, unrelated to real combat.

Band of Brothers, The Pacific, Flags of our Fathers, nor Letters From Iwo Jima had documentary applied either, and yet look how much better they are. Just because you CAN do a thing, doesn't mean you SHOULD do a thing. If you look at ANY combat footage of aerial combat, stills or film, you NEVER see the kind of mass crap RT shows. Even combat footage shows the bombers spaced further apart.