Flyboys

[Tony in Tarzana]

Really? The CGI stuff in the trailers I've seen on TV look like they're from a cheap video game. If they really look good on the big screen I may have to see it.

"The Maltese Falcon" aside, I haven't been to a movie theater since early 2003.

 

[Matt Deckard]

There is some corny stuff in the story, though you should go see it at the theater!

 

[Andykev]

It slouns like a must see for me!

I love flying movies, and this one sounds interesting. What ever happened to going to see a movie for entertainment, and not analysis?[huh]

 

[MrBern]

I saw it this afternoon.
Its very hohum. Like some cable movie.
I really didnt get a period feel from this film.
The CGI was...ok.
Interesting that to make it easier to track the shooting, you see a sort of swirl of smoke to indicate the machinegunfire raking the planes. Not realistic, but an artistic choice since people are used to seeing lasers blasting each other.

The french farmgirl was cute.

yawn

 

[jake_fink]

Just rent the Dawn Patrol

Last week I had the good sense to swear off movies for life but yesterday I fell off the wagon and into a matinee showing of Flyboys with a few friends before dinner and drinks.

My brain pan feels so abused! This movie is terrible, absolutely awful, with terrible performances, a truly goofy story/script/thingy and really dull "action" sequences. I'm amazed this tripe got made! Who is the intended audience? Teenage boys? The theatre we were in was practically empty, just five guys in their thirties, a couple of young guys and a few older couples - while the theatre showing the Jackass sequel had a line-up a block and a half long. I actually wish I'd seen that instead. (No I don't.)

One of my friends had read a review that said that the cast were so pretty and the cgi so slick looking that the movie looks like it's partially set in the future, and that's not an unfair comment. The flight sequences - the few of them that there are - are so fast and impossible and phony looking that they are convincing only in the way a flight simulator video game is convincing, which is only in as much as you are watching something happen and we tend to believe what we see. There is no sense of the reality of flight in an open cockpit biplane, no sense of these being real people and no sense of danger.

James Franco deserves special mention for another in a long line of really bad performances. His woo-pitching scenes are painful. I'm beginning to wonder if anyone even tries to learn the craft before they walk on set. Just looking at period movies alone, Colin Farrell and Josh Hartnett were part of the problem in Ask the Dust and Black Dahlia. Is it really good enough just being pretty? There have been lots of pretty actors who could also ACT!

I'm going to watch Dawn Patrol and Rocketeer this weekend, and I wish I had copies of The Blue Max and The Great Waldo Pepper, because it's going to take a lot of air movies to wash the taste of this one out of my mouth.

 

[Matt Crunk]

I think most of you guys are way too hung up on the idea of 100% period correct detail. Remember these filmmakers are appealing to a general public that does not share our interest or knowledge of period style. They only expect a good story told with a little cinematic style.

If they were to make a 100% period correct pirate movie, most people wouldn't even recognize the characters as pirates, for there would not be a bell boot, sash, or skull and crossbones present. And if an accurate picture was made of Vikings, there'd be not a horned helmet in sight.

Certain liberties can and should to be taken to enhance and romanticize an era for the sake of good filmmaking. It is entertainment for the masses, not a period correct study for a few academic types.

 

[Feraud]

I believe only three members have seen it so far. One for, two against.

I personally do not need 100% period accuracy. I would settle for 80-95%.
My personal complaints from films like this come from the filmmakers perception of what the viewers expect. I assume the "average" would be highly insulted by this.

I expect Fiction to be creative. I expect films "based on fact" or however one interprets that phrase to be better than fiction. The truth is more exciting and romantic than anyone can create! Eras do not need to be romanticized. There is bravery, romance, deceit, and thrilling adventure in every generation. The idea that some screenwriter needs to add "spice" to an actual story belittles the reality.

I am planning on seeing Flyboys and The Black Dahlia. I enjoy reading everyone's review but have to see how good or bad a film is for myself.

 

[carebear]

I think there's a difference between insisting on 100% accuracy and wanting nothing to be glaringly, avoidably wrong.

In Patton they used older American armor to stand in for German stuff because there just wasn't enough real German stuff left to do the picture. That's not 100% accuracy but it's by necessity. Glaringly wrong would be to just use M1's because, hey, a tank's a tank, era be damned.

If they had had (and used) CGI to do the picture there'd be no reason to not accurately show Tiger's, Panther's etc. Again, they might use a Tiger over a PzkwII where they shouldn't, simply because it is more recognizably "German" to the mass audience, but there's no excuse to show a Type 97 in that situation.

In Flyboys they had other options than just using red Fokker tri's. The filmmakers instead chose to assume the audience was unable to cope and that created "glaringly wrong".

Similarly, they can take the time to cast and coach the actors to at least simulate the public perception of period mannerisms, speech and dress even if they aren't accurate. Enough at least to set the era rather than just bull on through anachronistically.

It's less insulting to the audience that way. It's easier to "just sit back and enjoy" a movie that doesn't go out of its way to remind you how much better it could easily have been.

 

[jake_fink]

I think most of you guys are way too hung up on the idea of 100% period correct detail. Remember these filmmakers are appealing to a general public that does not share our interest or knowledge of period style. They only expect a good story told with a little cinematic style.

If they were to make a 100% period correct pirate movie, most people wouldn't even recognize the characters as pirates, for there would not be a bell boot, sash, or skull and crossbones present. And if an accurate picture was made of Vikings, there'd be not a horned helmet in sight.

Certain liberties can and should to be taken to enhance and romanticize an era for the sake of good filmmaking. It is entertainment for the masses, not a period correct study for a few academic types.

I'm not all that hung up on period detail even when it's really off - like Robert Redford's hair in The Sting. Comments like "Josh Harnett's hat is all wrong" are kind of comical, and barely relevant to my veiwing of the film. I'm more than willing to check my disbelief at the door as long as the anachronisms aren't too distracting.

I do however get hung up on the big things that affect quality in my book, things like the script and the actors.

Flyboys, from what I could tell, has lots of period accurate detail, but it's all wasted in a dead-from-the-neck-up movie that I would have hated even when I was eight.

Just when did "the masses" become defined by gullibilty, stupidity and a willingness to buy anything. Aren't "the masses" constituted of individuals, including those terrible "academic types?" Where do you propose they go for entertainment? It seems that when people say "entertainment for the masses" they're really just using a long-winded, academic term for "crap."

 

[Marc Chevalier]

The only way I would see this film is if it played at Universal City's IMAX theater screen ... in 3-D.


Even then, I would go to a matinee. (Does IMAX even offer a matinee discount? If not, then forget it.)


And even after seeing it on a 3-D IMAX screen, I know I'd kick myself afterward. The older I get, the more disgusted I am by asinine movies.


.

 

[Twitch]

WW I was so arcane and is so distantly remote to the American public I don't believe a superaccurate film would be taken to heart either. A script has to take some liberties to expidite the storyline and move the plot along. If I'd want to watch film of actual air combat I could watch that alone and enjoy it. The public needs a decent story if they're going to spend $10.

There were so many more intersting planes than the Fokker DR-1 tri-plane. But let's face it Joe Show-goer actually recognizes that crate maybe only due to a Charlie Brown Snoopy cartoon!! If the story concerns the French aviators fighting at a time and place in the war where a German Dr-1 squadron was it might be semi-reasonable.

I'll wait for it to hit TV anyhow.

 

[Matt Crunk]

I saw Flyboys tonight. Besides me and the misses, there was one other person in the theatre. County Fair is still in town.

But I enjoyed the movie, historical blunders, "red barons" and all. I don't think any more artistic license was taken with this movie than with any golden age war picture. It's all just entertainment after all, not a history lesson.

To me the air combat CGI alone was worth the ticket price. I give it a thumbs up.

-MC

 

[Stinchcomb]

I saw Flyboys last night, DVD rental. I sat down with a glass of wine, turned off all of the lights cranked up the surround sound, and proceeded to get enveloped in a hopefully good movie. No it wasn't accurate, no the acting wasn't that great, but never the less. A very entertaining movie, I thought the CGI was fantastic. There were some exciting moments where my jaw was getting sore from tension. You have to take it for what it's worth. After all what in Hollywood is accurate and real? They obviously spent their budget on the CGI effects. I thought the ending was very cool with the fancy flying maneuver and pistol action. I think it’s great that someone attempted a WW1 air film, for that matter a WW1 film at all. I’d like to see more WW1 films, for anybody out there in Hollywood…hint, hint.

I’d say good movie worth watching.

 

[Marv]

If you are into WW1 movies then have a look at Aces High - Malcolm Macdowell and Blue Max - George Peppard, both excellent movies in my opinion.

 

[Twitch]

Being an air combat history writer and pretty knowledgable on the subject there has yet to be a movie that I cannot find some inaccuracy in. That doesn't prohibit me from becoming immersed in the action. Having done aerobatics in Stearman biplanes and having the knowledge of combat manuevers I'm certain I'll be immersed in the combat sequences whether the story line is plausible or not.

I've seen a lot of older movies about air combat with corny stories but watched them for the joy of seeing the actual planes before CGI. We don't have the luxury of filling the sky with B-17s, P-47s and Bf 109s anymore and less of a chance of doing it with WW I crates. Only flying replicas exist so you'd still have to yell "fake!" if that was your nitpicking perogative.

 

[dr greg]

in-laws

You can study The Great War for years and not figure out why it was fought. I wonder if anybody really knows?

It was basically a family squabble between the incestuously intermingled royal houses of Europe, and a lot of it was down to the personality of Wilhelm11 of Germany who had deep inferiority issues about his arm, and had been snubbed by his auntie Queen Victoria as a teenager...it took several million dead for that to be sorted.
On another issue that Eugene Bullard deserves his own movie...what a man what a life.

 

[scotrace]

See it

Finally saw this last night. It really is a fine adventure and the dogfights, CG or not, were fantastic! I think this is one to own and watch again.

It should win an Oscar for sound. The sounds of the guns and planes were extremely real.

 

[PADDY]

When will it hit the flicks in the UK?

As ever, we in the UK are still waiting for this one to make its way across the Atlantic. When will this one FLY into town?

 

[Hondo]

As ever, we in the UK are still waiting for this one to make its way across the Atlantic. When will this one FLY into town?

Paddy it just hit DVD (Amazon.com) in the States, something has to be done about regional coding, for you R2, you have regional free DVD? Makes it easier.
Remember computer animations for effects, details much like King Kong.
I haven't seen this film, only previews, looks fun, entertaining and isn't that what its all about? Good Luck.

 

[scotrace]

Finally saw this last night. It really is a fine adventure and the dogfights, CG or not, were fantastic! I think this is one to own and watch again.

It should win an Oscar for sound. The sounds of the guns and planes were extremely real.

Wow. Well, it wasn't that good, Scott. Fun clothes though.