Entertainment
Sponsored by

**** Midway *****

22,401 Views | 163 Replies | Last: 5 yr ago by oragator
Geriatric Punk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I got one of those Alpine flip screen decks in my Mustang in the mid 2000s. Never forget using Pearl Harbor on DVD to test the system. It may been all explosions and no substance (and Cuba Gooding needed a bigger part...he's way better than Ben Affleck now...), but the sound design was a lot of fun. You could really see how low your subs could go and the stereo mastering was a good time.
Life's an endless party, not a punch card.
agracer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
hunter2012 said:



Also I am very in on this movie. Hard to know how the special FX will play in but Midway was a decisive battle that immediately turned the Pacific towards America's favor. If the results of the battle flipped we would have been on the defensive for many months and maybe even could have lost Hawaii, losing all foothold in the Pacific. Midway both decided who would have air/sea superiority in the Pacific and laid out the naval doctrine that is still in place today(that carriers project a nation's power). Unless if it is straight cartoony, I will look forward to seeing this one.
Hawaii was never ever really threatened. While many in 1941/42 were worried about it, the Japanese did not have the manpower, troop transports or supplies available to pull off an invasion of Hawaii, let alone keep it garrisoned and supplied for more than a few weeks, at best.

Even if the US had lost the battle, they would have won the war. The Japanese simply did not have the manpower, or materials to fight and win a long war with the US. Here is a good synopsis of why Japan was doomed from the start.

http://www.combinedfleet.com/economic.htm

Quote:

In other words, even if it had lost catastrophically at the Battle of Midway, the United States Navy still would have broken even with Japan in carriers and naval air power by about September 1943. Nine months later, by the middle of 1944, the U.S. Navy would have enjoyed a nearly two-to-one superiority in carrier aircraft capacity! Not only that, but with her newer, better aircraft designs, the U.S. Navy would have enjoyed not only a substantial numeric, but also a critical qualitative advantage as well, starting in late 1943. All this is not to say that losing the Battle of Midway would not have been a serious blow to American fortunes! For instance, the war would almost certainly have been protracted if the U.S. had been unable to mount some sort of a credible counter-stroke in the Solomons during the latter half of 1942. Without carrier-based air power of some sort there would not have been much hope of doing so, meaning that we would most likely have lost the Solomons. However, the long-term implications are clear: the United States could afford to make good losses that the Japanese simply could not. Furthermore, this comparison does not reflect the fact that the United States actually slowed down its carrier building program in late 1944, as it became increasingly evident that there was less need for them. Had the U.S. lost at Midway, it seems likely that those additional carriers (3 Midway-class and 6 more Essex-Class CVs, plus the Saipan-class CVLs) would have been brought on line more quickly. In a macro-economic sense, then, the Battle of Midway was really a non-event. There was no need for the U.S. to seek a single, decisive battle which would 'Doom Japan' -- Japan was doomed by its very decision to make war.


Raiderjay
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Original move was awesome, one of my top 10 all time and a great score....... I can't imagine this being anything but a total disaster.....
ro828
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is the only place where you can depend on three pages (and counting) about a movie that hasn't been released yet.

It seems popular to sneer at PEARL HARBOR, but Mrs. Ro and I both thoroughly enjoyed it. I'll grant that it was too long: it was like a double feature of PEARL HARBOR and THIRTY SECONDS OVER TOKYO. But still, it was great and had a strong patriotic message.
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Pearl Harbor is a fun watch.
AgMarauder04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Luke Smith said:

FightinTexasAg15 said:

The CGI and effects don't look very good. It looks too cartoony/video gamey.

Also, gotta love the super serious lines of WELL WASHINGTON IS WRONG


I love a good war movie, but this doesn't look great.


Throw in Nick Jonas and Mandy Moore and what can go wrong


You might get to see Nick Jonas have weights tied to his feet and tossed overboard by the Japanese.
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Seeing this in trailers before Spiderman...this movie is going to be awful, but I'll still see it because WWII
AgMarauder04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Don't care about "crappy CGI" or if it's a "good" movie. I love the Pacific war. I can't wait. I'll love this movie.
KidDoc
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PatAg said:

Seeing this in trailers before Spiderman...this movie is going to be awful, but I'll still see it because WWII
This is my thought exactly!

Also if you haven't watched WW2 in color on Netflix it is awesome.

No material on this site is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. See full Medical Disclaimer.
agracer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The second trailer actually makes it look worse ....



I find this comment in the comments section on YouTube LOL worthy though!!

Quote:

Joe Francis2 days ago

Considering how things turned out, would the Japanese in Oregon really have been such a bad thing? Just a thought.


PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This was actually a great idea for a movie to remake. But it needed to be made/written by talented people.
JABQ04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I still have zero expectations about this movie. I'll see it, but I'm not expecting much.
schmendeler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
still no reviews, it looks like. so I guess this one is a confirmed stinker?
schmendeler
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
36% on Rotten Tomatoes

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/midway_2019/
LoudestWHOOP!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The original Midway was my first movie memory.
The Zero hitting the tower is quite a memory at that age.
This sounds like it is coming from the same Hollywood that ruined Star Wars.
Cinco Ranch Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't give a crap about Rotten Tomatoes or any lack of advanced reviews. I bought tickets for Friday, and I expect to enjoy this one. Unless they give me B-52 Stratofortress bombers bombing the Emperor's palace or some garbage like that.
samurai_science
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The movie is trying to cover to much and the CGI looks......terrible.

Don't care about Rotten Tomatoes, but I will just watch Midway if I need my Midawy fix.
Belton Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I don't give a **** about the CGI or anything else, I'm going to enjoy this movie.
Capitol Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Not sure if this was mentioned in the thread already, but the Japanese never used any twin engine bombers in the battle unless those scenes are supposed to be later during the war. While we did launch B-25s from the Hornet in April 42, that was unusual for that time to have such a large aircraft be used from a carrier and a carrier landing would have been extremely dangerous plus they'd take up too much room on the ship. Seems like they at least tried to make the aircraft accurate in the rest of the film in terms of markings and models actually used other then the Japanese twin engine planes so maybe that is a scene that is showing a future battle. I will eventually watch it as I'm a huge WWII buff but wish it didn't get a 36%. I will say that I feel these types of things make a better series then a movie. Like an HBO or Netflix type of thing where the characters and situations can be developed. But Hollywood did a great job with Tora Tora Tora but from what I understand (and could be wrong) it wasn't well received by movie goers as it's very much a documentary with actors vs a drama. But it's probab the most accurate war movie ever made.
Cinco Ranch Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
You're right about the Japanese twin engine aircraft (in this case, G3M Nell bombers). From the Japanese perspective, the Battle of Midway was strictly a Naval aircraft carrier battle. They did not possess any islands near enough to Midway to have launched what was a land-based medium bomber against the Americans. So yes, the presence of Nell bombers in this movie is nothing more than a geek-out moment for me but completely inconsistent with history. Nevertheless, I don't care and am going to enjoy the hell out of this.

Now the Americans did have some B-26 Marauders that launched from one of the Midway Islands (I think), that were launched against the Jap carriers. Most were shot down but one at least did get through to be able to launch against those carriers. The attack didn't result in any positive results for the Americans, though.
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Belton Ag said:

I don't give a **** about the CGI or anything else, I'm going to enjoy this movie.


What if it's so bad it ruins it?
oragator
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Just in the trailer there are 4 or 5 things either flat out wrong or completely exaggerated historically, the cgi looks terrible, and the underlying plot lines seem forced.
As a history major I usually want to see these types of movies, but this one will get a pass I think.
Belton Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PatAg said:

Belton Ag said:

I don't give a **** about the CGI or anything else, I'm going to enjoy this movie.


What if it's so bad it ruins it?
I doubt it will be. I'm old and half blind anyway.
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Like you, I'm a sucker for anything WWII. Just wish someone like Nolan was doing this film.
tamuags08
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Cinco Ranch Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PatAg said:

Like you, I'm a sucker for anything WWII. Just wish someone like Nolan was doing this film.
Did you miss Nolan's miraculous gliding Spitfire?

I jest, as I enjoyed the hell out of that movie too.
Cinco Ranch Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PatAg said:

Belton Ag said:

I don't give a **** about the CGI or anything else, I'm going to enjoy this movie.


What if it's so bad it ruins it?
I don't get wrapped up in bad CGI. Not even really sure I'd recognize something as bad that everyone else seems to believe is bad.

I'm just happy to see a movie about one of WWII's greatest stories on a big screen with mostly correct aircraft represented. It's certainly possible that the visuals are not great, but I'm just not concerned with the look on that front. I have noted, however, some maneuvers that in reality would not be possible, or would result in catastrophe for the pilot. That's concerning, but not enough to dissuade me from watching and enjoying this movie.
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

PatAg said:

Belton Ag said:

I don't give a **** about the CGI or anything else, I'm going to enjoy this movie.


What if it's so bad it ruins it?
I don't get wrapped up in bad CGI. Not even really sure I'd recognize something as bad that everyone else seems to believe is bad.

I'm just happy to see a movie about one of WWII's greatest stories on a big screen with mostly correct aircraft represented. It's certainly possible that the visuals are not great, but I'm just not concerned with the look on that front. I have noted, however, some maneuvers that in reality would not be possible, or would result in catastrophe for the pilot. That's concerning, but not enough to dissuade me from watching and enjoying this movie.
If the trailer didnt bother you, than you should be good to go. I figure it will be similar in quality to Pearl Harbor, which is another part of history I would love to see told by a talented director
Cinco Ranch Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I just got home from seeing Midway.

I do not claim to be a professional historian, but from what I remember of the various books I've read on the subject, I'd say the filmmakers did a good job. First time I recall seeing any part of the Battle of the Coral Sea ever depicted on screen. It covered all the bases accurately enough for my tastes. There was not as much focus on the long-rang scout planes (the big Consolidated PBY Catalina) featured in the original movie, although they do mention these reconn missions. And while we do get a good look at Dick Best's family, it was not a focus - and there is no completely fictional hotshot pilot wanting to bang a Japanese-American gal.

I thought the visuals were well done. Yes, there were inaccuracies. Quite a few, actually, but nothing that made me want to take a crap on the movie. As a life-long warbird nut who has built a bunch of scale models of WWII planes, I thought they nailed the aircraft on both sides of this battle. The A6M Zeros were the right variant (A6M2), and the SBD Dauntless dive bombers looked right (as opposed to the first poster I ever saw for this movie, which gave me concern for the movie's accuracy in depicting a Dauntless with a four-bladed prop and forward-firing wing-mounted machine guns). The G3M Nell bombers were accurately depicted launching from an airstrip in the Marshall Islands, but not during the actual Battle of Midway. And it even showed the flight of US Army B-26 Marauder bombers attacking the Jap fleet (although it didn't show the one B-26 that flew right down the length of the Akagi's (I think) flight deck). Curiously, now that I am sitting here at home, I don't recall seeing any F4F Wildcats, as the movie didn't depict any of the US fighter activity; it focused only on the dive bombing squadrons and both Torpedo Squadron 6 and 8.

I liked the casting of Woody Harrelson as Admiral Nimitz when I didn't think I would. He played the part well, and even bore a slight resemblance to the actual Nimitz. And Dennis Quaid as Bull Halsey was good casting as well.

Both versions of Midway have told the general story right, with this one being perhaps a bit more accurate. Where this one wins hands-down is the accuracy in its depiction of aircraft, as the original movie relied too heavily on archival footage that more times than not was completely wrong for June 1942. But the original has a musical score that blows this one out of the water.
Belton Ag
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Awesome, can't wait, have tickets for 6pm tonight.
One Eyed Reveille
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

But the original has a musical score that blows this one out of the water.


You mean just like a Japanese carrier.
Cinco Ranch Aggie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Sarduakar said:

Cinco Ranch Aggie said:

But the original has a musical score that blows this one out of the water.


You mean just like a Japanese carrier.
Yeah, that was definitely pun intended.
Ambres
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I would not consider a history buff but I really enjoyed this version of Midway. My expectations were low as I fear what the writers planned... my only complaint is that they try to shove to much history in this one movie. The movie really focuses on the Enterprise actions from Pearl Harbor to Midway and everything in between.. including escorting the USS Hornet for the Doolittle raid.
ECONAG92
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Very good recap of the movie CRA. I too am a WWII history buff especially for the Pacific theater and really enjoyed the movie. I will see it again just to catch some of the details I may have missed before. I thought the cgi was well done.

I'm glad they took the time to do their research on the ships & planes & depict them accurately like the towers on the IJN carriers Akagi & Soryu were on the port side Unlike Us ships on the starboard. Also, I was happy to see them using the TBD Devestators rather than TBM Avengers that were in many scenes of the original Midway movie. I too was surprised there was not much coverage of the f4f fighter activity in the movie but they also had to cover a large timeline to fit it in 2hr 18min. movie.
PatAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Good to hear
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.