Red Tails!

In the interest of fairness...

This story isn't really the story of the 332nd or the Tuskeegee Airmen. It is, and I quote, "inspired by" those stories. Which means right from the get go they decided to take a lot of license with the story.

What will piss me off is if people go see it and accept it as absolute fact.
 
killbilly said:
In the interest of fairness...

This story isn't really the story of the 332nd or the Tuskeegee Airmen. It is, and I quote, "inspired by" those stories. Which means right from the get go they decided to take a lot of license with the story.

What will piss me off is if people go see it and accept it as absolute fact.
Click to expand...
I dont think there's any if in question, I'm sure 95% of viewers of that movie will view it as fact... even some of the maneuvers they perform are outright impossible/improbable, but the general public eats that up.

The fact that the TV trailer has a dubstep music background makes me want to avoid this thing completely, despite my appetite for anything WW2 :)
 
You know... almost every time I log on here I always think I'm so out of touch with this forum. Hell any forum, for that matter. Then I read this thread and it just kinda proves that well I am.

I agree with all those that say over use of CGI sucks, and well it does (3D movies suck too). It would have rocked if they used real planes, but as many have said the insurance is too expensive. But to not want to see the movie cause it gets details wrong or has too much CGI, really?

It's a friggin movie people. Magneto from X-Men First Class didn't get his Spartan style helmet from Sebastian Shaw, like he did in the movie. No, in the comics (from which the movie is based) he and Professor X designed it together. But when I saw that in hte movie I didn't run out of the theaters crying. Or rip my clothes, don swaddling clothes and pour dirt on me and roll around on the ground crying all dramatically like they did in the Bible. Geez, people!!!

Instead of quibbling about CGI how about you just go see it cause it's a good movie/story. Or better yet how about you go to support positive black actors working in Hollywood, who aren't playing ignorant n-word like characters. You all do know it's very hard to be black and a successful actor in Hollywood, right? Only few have done it, most notably Will Smith and Denzel... why because they can play parts originally written for white people.

Most other black actors with Hollywood dreams have to flounder at the B or even C scale and play minstrel like character say from Tyler Perry's House of Pain or the Wayans Bros Show. Money talks in Hollywood. Maybe if more people actually supported black movies Hollywood would feel a lot better about green lighting more of them and there would be less stereotypical black movies/characters/television shows. Because black folks wouldn't have to act like _____s to make that cheddar.

Just the opinion from someone on the other side who's thinking seriously... WTF!
 
I'll take a stab at this one...

Max - I get your point - and if the subject matter was from a fantasy-laden comic book, I'd be in complete agreement. The issue isn't the quality of the actors nor race nor any other facet of Hollywood politics - the issue is that many of us feel that the subject matter in question has a certain degree of gravitas that should be treated with at least a modicum of respect. HBO did that fairly well with their version. And the performances in that movie were fairly stellar on all accounts.

If you want to talk about inequity for black actors in film and television, we can do that, although I think it would merit a separate thread. But
THIS issue with THIS movie is that Lucas has taken a powerful, emotionally-charged and nuanced story of adversity, heroism and honor and turned it into - potentially, since we haven't seen it yet - a Bazooka Joe comic on a piece of bubblegum. The excessive CGI is a tool of his sin, not the sin itself.
 
With respect to all, I just have very little patience (anymore) to argue online about topics I find stupid (kinda like this one) about excessive use of CGI vs. using real planes and using that as a spring board or reason valid or not to see said movie. It's a friggin movie people, and because in the trailer a P-51 Mustang does a flip that a plane with thrust vectoring does I'm now supposed to get totally bent out of shape and turned inside out... from Hollywood whose goal is simply to entertain and (read) not get facts right.

Geez, are we actually saying now that the excessive use of CGI in a movie vs. use of real airplanes now sours the whole Tuskegee airman's role in history??? None of you have even seen the damn movie, and you're already lambasting it. CGI or not, I'm in that theater, believe that.

This whole thread is stupid, I feel stupid for having read it and actually responded to it. It's like listening to a bunch of D&D fan boys argue, form a nash cluster and fight about the power levels of a dark mage vs a blue dragon.

Look the movie isn't about planes--like at all, it's about a race of people and individuals who were told they were stupid and lacked the mental fortitude to actually fly planes, and be in combat. The use of planes in the movie is trivial at best as even Doug himself pointed out. The planes in the movie and history as a whole are a tool for the oppressed to simply show their oppressors that they were wrong. That they were equal and that with the right education and training they too could learn/retain knowledge and perform as good as or if not better than their white peers.

Seriously guys, much love to one and all... it's been real!
 
So what you're trying to say is that vampires don't sparkle in the sunlight? :)
 
Maximillian_Jenius said:
With respect to all, I just have very little patience (anymore) to argue online about topics I find stupid (kinda like this one) about excessive use of CGI vs. using real planes and using that as a spring board or reason valid or not to see said movie. It's a friggin movie people, and because in the trailer a P-51 Mustang does a flip that a plane with thrust vectoring does I'm now supposed to get totally bent out of shape and turned inside out... from Hollywood whose goal is simply to entertain and (read) not get facts right.
Click to expand...
Yeah we must be the only people alive that watch movies because they are fun to watch.

Wife and I are anxiously awaiting this release:

 
You know - to come full circle kind of: I think one of the advantages of CGI is cost, as well as decreased risk and not having to scramble for airplanes that are exceedingly rare. So, they CGI the crap out of everything.

I stated previously - 12 O'Clock high is one of the more tense war movies ever, and great flying movies ever, with a minimum of flying. It's dialogue and character driven. The idea movie about Tuskegee, the AVG or really any topic wouldn't need a ton of flying - you'd only need a few scenes and not huge amounts of planes - just enough to remind everyone it's a bunch of pilots. The movie I'd like to see, and the parts of Tuskegee Airman that made the movie great, was the dialogue and the stories. In my opinion the airplanes - the Stearmans, T-6's and Mustangs were simply props, but the story that was told was meaningful. The idea is this - if the movie needs heavy CGI...it is probably not worth seeing. It tells the viewer "Hey...we are putting WAY too much emphasis on the machines and the action scenes and not nearly enough into the plot, character development or writing. I will call this the WacoFan corollary.
 
wheelsup said:
Yeah we must be the only people alive that watch movies because they are fun to watch.

Wife and I are anxiously awaiting this release:

Click to expand...


Thanks, I thought this would be the perfect first movie for my daugher to see at the theater and now I read it's direct to DVD. Damn!
 
Maxie, don't ever change. I don't like cheesy CGI but I can deal with ok ones. I like to be entertained at movies so, like Max, I will be watching it in the theaters.
 
It's not the first film on the Tuskegee pilots: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114745/

I liked the above one from 1995. We'll see what George Lucas does. As I understand it, he had great issues with the studios / distribution due to the all-black cast (how sad). He also funded it himself to the tune of $57 million. Wow! There's a check I wish I could write!!!!
 
loubetti said:
It's not the first film on the Tuskegee pilots: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114745/

I liked the above one from 1995. We'll see what George Lucas does. As I understand it, he had great issues with the studios / distribution due to the all-black cast (how sad). He also funded it himself to the tune of $57 million. Wow! There's a check I wish I could write!!!!
Click to expand...

Hollywood doesn't really like positive movies about blacks. They'd much prefer to green light a movie or television series that's all black if the characters are bumbling thugs, drug dealers. Drug addicts or acting like a comical negative stereotype. It's sad really. I praise Lucas CGI or not, for braving ahead despite the major studio issues, and paying out of his own pocket to get this story told. Even if it's not the first time.

Hopefully his many detractors in this thread can do the same, having learned this bit of info. Let's all go see this movie and make it have a profitable return to get Hollywood to hopefully sit up and take notice of positive and though provoking black movies/characters.

As an aside... another good reason to see this movie is that Cuba Gooding Jr. in it. I don't know who he pissed off in Hollywood after his Best Supporting Oscar win. But it's good to see him working again... and his name in the credits this time!
 
I'll watch it, not expecting much other than gross exaggerations, more drama than combat, well you know, Hollywood. I did love the first one, however.
 
Maximillian_Jenius said:
Hollywood doesn't really like positive movies about blacks. They'd much prefer to green light a movie or television series that's all black if the characters are bumbling thugs, drug dealers. Drug addicts or acting like a comical negative stereotype. It's sad really. I praise Lucas CGI or not, for braving ahead despite the major studio issues, and paying out of his own pocket to get this story told. Even if it's not the first time.

Hopefully his many detractors in this thread can do the same, having learned this bit of info. Let's all go see this movie and make it have a profitable return to get Hollywood to hopefully sit up and take notice of positive and though provoking black movies/characters.

As an aside... another good reason to see this movie is that Cuba Gooding Jr. in it. I don't know who he pissed off in Hollywood after his Best Supporting Oscar win. But it's good to see him working again... and his name in the credits this time!
Click to expand...

I understand your point... and it is valid.

It still doesn't change the fact that this movie looks like I would hate it, and the music is extremely irritating. Black actors in positive roles or not, I don't make a habit of spending money on crappy movies.
 
The movie was a total disappointment. The acting is just god awful and its so full of crappy cliches. It got to the point it was so bad that it started becoming a comedy to the people in the movie theater. The only upside was some of the flying CG along with sound effects. But save your money gents, this is a bust.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top