Best Naval Aviation movies

[Brett327]

I just watched Midway (2019), and I was very disappointed. I think the film was a very, very cheap studio production to make money (they basically took Michael bay's pearl harbor and went sequel mode on it) and then proceeded to go cheap CGI melodrama. Outside of the basic plot of the battle they spent absolutely minimal detail on historical accuracy, and instead opted for a really, really bad video game version of the battle of midway. I saw this coming from 50 miles away when Roland Emmerich was at the lead.

You were expecting that it would be good?

 

[Gatordev]

I finished 1917 last night. I'm sure there are many historical inaccuracies, but overall I enjoyed it. I was also pleasantly surprised I wasn't distracted by the overall gimmick of the movie, which was very well done.

 

[Sonog]

You were expecting that it would be good?

No, but I felt compelled to watch it.

 

[Brett327]

No, but I felt compelled to watch it.

I’ve been avoiding it for that reason. I want to watch, but know I’ll be disappointed. On the other hand, the Greyhound movie coming out with Tom Hanks looks like it’s going to be amazing.

 

[wink]

I still prefer the Charlton Heston version. Less CGI, better acting, and a little more focus on the strategic problems of both sides.

Less CGI? It was released in 1976.

 

[wiseguy04]

Less CGI? It was released in 1976.

I was being sarcastic. I hate CGI, nothing but a cheap tool for shitty Michael Bay movies. Love watching films that were around before that monstrosity existed.

 

[Pags]

I saw Midway and thought it was fine although I do think it should have been called DEC41-JUN42 since it covered a lot of the events that Enterprise, Best, and Waldron were involved in that led up to Midway. While it did cover a lot I thought that it did a decent job, at the big brush stroke level, of telling that story accurately. The CGI was fairly heavy but it was also pretty accurate; ships, ship camo, and markings seem to have been accurately done. Some of the flying stuff was nonsense but I guess it was an attempt to show how Best was, um, the best. The story is what it is, but like I said, was largely accurate. The character development could have been better handled and I think a few more minutes spent in the first 30min on character development would have strengthened the characters and thus strengthened the film. However, I can imagine that character development was a bit hard for real people who, in real life, were professionals who behaved as such. While it makes for good history, professionals conducting their business makes for boring movies because there's no drama. Nimitz and Spruance were historically low drama characters (after sinking four carriers Spruance went to bed) so it's kind of hard to stay accurate but still tell a dramatic story. I tend to think if you look a the movie as a high budget documentary it fairs a bit better. Mrs. Pags, who doesn't know the intricate details of the first 6mo of the war by rote, thought it was a decent story that she enjoyed.

I also enjoyed 1917. Better story than Midway and I felt that if people hadn't made such a big deal about the shooting style I would've never noticed it. Kind of like Alicia Silverstone's lazy eye; once you see it you can't unsee it. While 1917 may be inaccurate in that it wasn't an actual mission (just like Saving Private wasn't real), it's still faithfully supported by actual events such as the german tactical withdrawal during Operation Albrecht and the filmmakers attempts to accurately reproduce a WWI battlefield.

 

[Griz882]

I saw Midway and thought it was fine although I do think it should have been called DEC41-JUN42 since it covered a lot of the events that Enterprise, Best, and Waldron were involved in that led up to Midway. While it did cover a lot I thought that it did a decent job, at the big brush stroke level, of telling that story accurately. The CGI was fairly heavy but it was also pretty accurate; ships, ship camo, and markings seem to have been accurately done. Some of the flying stuff was nonsense but I guess it was an attempt to show how Best was, um, the best. The story is what it is, but like I said, was largely accurate. The character development could have been better handled and I think a few more minutes spent in the first 30min on character development would have strengthened the characters and thus strengthened the film. However, I can imagine that character development was a bit hard for real people who, in real life, were professionals who behaved as such. While it makes for good history, professionals conducting their business makes for boring movies because there's no drama. Nimitz and Spruance were historically low drama characters (after sinking four carriers Spruance went to bed) so it's kind of hard to stay accurate but still tell a dramatic story. I tend to think if you look a the movie as a high budget documentary it fairs a bit better. Mrs. Pags, who doesn't know the intricate details of the first 6mo of the war by rote, thought it was a decent story that she enjoyed.

I also enjoyed 1917. Better story than Midway and I felt that if people hadn't made such a big deal about the shooting style I would've never noticed it. Kind of like Alicia Silverstone's lazy eye; once you see it you can't unsee it. While 1917 may be inaccurate in that it wasn't an actual mission (just like Saving Private wasn't real), it's still faithfully supported by actual events such as the german tactical withdrawal during Operation Albrecht and the filmmakers attempts to accurately reproduce a WWI battlefield.

I am inclined to agree. If you don't like CGI then don't watch movies about history...or movies at all in most cases. The story telling in Midway was broad but tried to stick to Dick Best's story as a "changing of the guard" from the pre-war Navy to the war fighting Navy. I think I noted earlier, it isn't award worthy, but it is a fun watch.

1917, on the other hand, was an exceptional film of remarkable historical accuracy in terms of gear, vehicles, and even aircraft. It was well acted and based on the actual battle at Poelcappelle although the characters (two lance corporals) were fictional. Great piece of film making.

 

[Pags]

1917, on the other hand, was an exceptional film of remarkable historical accuracy in terms of gear, vehicles, and even aircraft. It was well acted and based on the actual battle at Poelcappelle although the characters (two lance corporals) were fictional. Great piece of film making.

As I was watching 1917 last night I was trying to figure out the characters route and came across a Smithsonian article on the accuracy of 1917:

The True History Behind the '1917' Movie

A story shared by director Sam Mendes' grandfather, a veteran of the Western Front, inspired the new World War I film

www.smithsonianmag.com

I still can't quite figure out the route and maybe it's not actually important. I don't speak French so I'm not sure how to spell the town's name they were heading for. Maybe acouste? L'couste? Maybe some weird tommy-ism of a Belgian town? Wipers? White Sheet? Poelcapelle is on the north end of the Ypres salient which also puts them outside of the area that Operation Albrecht covered (I think). I believe Mendes grandfather was at Poelcapelle and that's where the story the movie was made came from. Although the "story" sounds more like Mendes' childhood recollection. Beginning trenches had blue clay which would indicate Ypres. End trenches were white chalk which is further south and in the area of Operation Albrecht. Canals and industrial town's sound like southern Belgium around Mons. But this is just bored reflection on an otherwise great movie. I personally imagine the filmmakers kept the location vague and incorporated thematic elements from the entire front to try and capture the full BEF experience.

 

[Sonog]

I saw Midway and thought it was fine although I do think it should have been called DEC41-JUN42 since it covered a lot of the events that Enterprise, Best, and Waldron were involved in that led up to Midway. While it did cover a lot I thought that it did a decent job, at the big brush stroke level, of telling that story accurately. The CGI was fairly heavy but it was also pretty accurate; ships, ship camo, and markings seem to have been accurately done. Some of the flying stuff was nonsense but I guess it was an attempt to show how Best was, um, the best. The story is what it is, but like I said, was largely accurate. The character development could have been better handled and I think a few more minutes spent in the first 30min on character development would have strengthened the characters and thus strengthened the film. However, I can imagine that character development was a bit hard for real people who, in real life, were professionals who behaved as such. While it makes for good history, professionals conducting their business makes for boring movies because there's no drama. Nimitz and Spruance were historically low drama characters (after sinking four carriers Spruance went to bed) so it's kind of hard to stay accurate but still tell a dramatic story. I tend to think if you look a the movie as a high budget documentary it fairs a bit better. Mrs. Pags, who doesn't know the intricate details of the first 6mo of the war by rote, thought it was a decent story that she enjoyed.

I also enjoyed 1917. Better story than Midway and I felt that if people hadn't made such a big deal about the shooting style I would've never noticed it. Kind of like Alicia Silverstone's lazy eye; once you see it you can't unsee it. While 1917 may be inaccurate in that it wasn't an actual mission (just like Saving Private wasn't real), it's still faithfully supported by actual events such as the german tactical withdrawal during Operation Albrecht and the filmmakers attempts to accurately reproduce a WWI battlefield.

CGI is unavoidable, but its HOW its used that bothered me. No depth or realism to it. When every plane swoops to 20 feet off the deck while strafing it doesn't even feel like they're there. Its like a bad cgi movie about attacking seagulls.

Leaving the CGI alone though, there was no tension built up in the battle. The stakes were non existent. A good film maker would've made the audience feel the stress from getting low on fuel. The desperation of searching for the Japanese fleet. How truly difficult it was to hit a moving target in a dive through a flak barrage. The superiority of the Zero. Remember how the dog fight sequences felt in Dunkirk? Fucking amazing right?

 

[Griz882]

A cloudy Sunday here in the nation’s capital so I am geeking out on “The Final Countdown,” now free with Amazon Prime. Love seeing all the different naval aircraft including a Vigilante at the very beginning. VA-82 and VA-86 Corsairs, VF-84 Tomcats, VA-35 Intruders, VAQ-134 Prowlers, VS-24 Vikings, HS-9 Sea Kings, and of course VFP-63 Crusaders!

it is fun to see a carrier filled with a diversity of aircraft...but I do admit that having a Native American weather officer named Black Could was a bit insensitive.

 

[wink]

weather officer named Black Could was a bit insensitive.

I dunno. Today sure. It is an old movie. During same period our squadron had dudes with call signs Nip ( or the formal, Nipper) for the Japanese-American dude and Chico for the El Paso born Mexican-American. In another unit our Mexican American CPO frequently reminded people he was a wetback until he made Chief and subsequently became a Spaniard. All were proud of their heritage and call signs. Nip once wore a Rising Sun head band when flying into Barbers Point.

 

[Griz882]

I dunno. Today sure. It is an old movie. During same period our squadron had dudes with call signs Nip ( or the formal, Nipper) for the Japanese-American dude and Chico for the El Paso born Mexican-American. In another unit our Mexican American CPO frequently reminded people he was a wetback until he made Chief and subsequently became a Spaniard. All were proud of their heritage and call signs. Nip once wore a Rising Sun head band when flying into Barbers Point.

Understood, but I have found that as get older my vision of the past gets clearer. Besides @wink some of are “woke!”

 

[707guy]

A cloudy Sunday here in the nation’s capital so I am geeking out on “The Final Countdown,” now free with Amazon Prime. Love seeing all the different naval aircraft including a Vigilante at the very beginning. VA-82 and VA-86 Corsairs, VF-84 Tomcats, VA-35 Intruders, VAQ-134 Prowlers, VS-24 Vikings, HS-9 Sea Kings, and of course VFP-63 Crusaders!

it is fun to see a carrier filled with a diversity of aircraft...but I do admit that having a Native American weather officer named Black Could was a bit insensitive.

When cable was "new" I watched that movie every time it was on. Years later when I checked into VFA-15 fresh out of apprenticeship training I found out we were in Air Wing 8.

 

[Griz882]

I dunno. Today sure. It is an old movie. During same period our squadron had dudes with call signs Nip ( or the formal, Nipper) for the Japanese-American dude and Chico for the El Paso born Mexican-American. In another unit our Mexican American CPO frequently reminded people he was a wetback until he made Chief and subsequently became a Spaniard. All were proud of their heritage and call signs. Nip once wore a Rising Sun head band when flying into Barbers Point.

The Jolly Rogers just shot down two Nips! Err...uhhh..sorry, Japanese airmen.