Red Tails!

Looks very interesting. Worth checking out.

But I hope they put in some real aircraft footage (E.G. Top Gun) and not turn it into another CGI lovefest such as Pearl Harbor (2001)
 
CrippleHawk said:
Looks very interesting. Worth checking out.

But I hope they put in some real aircraft footage (E.G. Top Gun) and not turn it into another CGI lovefest such as Pearl Harbor (2001)
Click to expand...

Judging from the trailer it will be a CGI love fest unfortunately. Still looks good though!
 
USMCmech said:
, and the same actor in both movies.
Click to expand...

You noticed that too eh? I want this to be great, but it really looks like Lucas is once again doing the same movie just with lots of CGI this time. I wonder if Jar-Jar will be a tailgunner or one of the 332nd pilots in this one.
 
darrenf said:
So wait a second. George Lucas, lots of CGI, and a movie that's already been made, and made well. Hmm. Seems like I have heard this story before.
Click to expand...

Just because it deals with the same subject matter as another flick doesn't make it 'a movie that's all ready been made'.

No more than "Pearl Harbor" was a re-make of "Tora! Tora! Tora!".
 
Hacker15e said:
Just because it deals with the same subject matter as another flick doesn't make it 'a movie that's all ready been made'.

No more than "Pearl Harbor" was a re-make of "Tora! Tora! Tora!".
Click to expand...


I agree, but this is Lucas we are talking about. Some of the scenes in that short trailer are almost a word for word remake.
 
darrenf said:
I agree, but this is Lucas we are talking about. Some of the scenes in that short trailer are almost a word for word remake.
Click to expand...

And which movies did he do re-makes of (and, presumably based on your tone, completely botch)? Other than the sequels to his own movies?

I'd argue that his modernizations of the pulp novels of the early 1900s (both the Star Wars and Raiders series) were brilliant.

I think people get overly hung up on hating the last Star Wars and Raiders sequels and tend to want to discount the man's entire catalog.

Personally, I'd rather that he did an untold WWII story rather than this one, but I do hope that he has a story this time that is better than the one told in the previous movie on the subject.
 
Hacker15e said:
And which movies did he do re-makes of (and, presumably based on your tone, completely botch)? Other than the sequels to his own movies?
Click to expand...

He botched them thoroughly enough that I don't need any more evidence.
Hacker15e said:
I'd argue that his modernizations of the pulp novels of the early 1900s (both the Star Wars and Raiders series) were brilliant.
Click to expand...
They were, and they were done before the days of excessive CGI.

Hacker15e said:
I think people get overly hung up on hating the last Star Wars and Raiders sequels and tend to want to discount the man's entire catalog.
Click to expand...
I don't, but his recent efforts (remakes and prequels) have been a disaster. If his earlier works were of the same quality, we wouldn't even remember his name.

Hacker15e said:
Personally, I'd rather that he did an untold WWII story rather than this one, but I do hope that he has a story this time that is better than the one told in the previous movie on the subject.
Click to expand...

I agree, I wish he had tackled a different story. I think the Tuskegee story was adequately covered with the existing film. I HOPE he proves me wrong, I really want to like this movie, and will definitely see it with an open mind.
 
Hacker15e said:
And which movies did he do re-makes of (and, presumably based on your tone, completely botch)? Other than the sequels to his own movies?
Click to expand...

I didn't like the re-released but changed versions of the original Star Wars trilogy. The CGI Jabba Scene in the remake of Star Wars, A New Hope, for example. I thought Jabba and Yoda both looked better as puppets than as CGI characters.

And I agree on the newer trilogy. Lucas did great on the special effects, even if they were a little CGI and cheesy... after all, the blaster bolts in the original Star Wars looked a little cheesy too, (although they were state of the art for the time period). The difference is plot and character development. The original trilogy had it... the newer trilogy, meh. Jar Jar was just the most egregious example, but Anakin was almost as bad. Completely un-conflicted about leaving mom home as a slave to die on Tatooine, completely fearless in battle even though he was what, about 9 years old? A totally wooden unbelievable character. Qi Gong, Obi-Wan, most of the characters in the story were the same. Cartoon caricatures with unbelievable motivations and reactions rather than 3-dimensional characters. All of them capable of exactly 1 emotion at a time, and most of them capable of exactly 1 emotion for the whole film.

Same complaint with Michael Bay's collected works.
 
I wish someone such as the Hanks/Spielberg combo would do a movie based around the Pacific carrier groups in WWII. There is such a great story to be told and told well there.
 
CGI has it's place but it is way over used today and not even done well is some cases. I wish they would spend the money and shoot it old school in some movies, especially when dealing with aviation.

IMO the original StarWars movies are better than the later CGI'd ones.
 
I hear the argument of shooting without using CGI, and some P-51 realism would make any aviation buff drool for days on end. However, CGI is probably cheaper to produce in the long run, and they can make the scenes without having to pay millions in insurance. I liked the Tuskegee Airmen story though so I'll definitely check it out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top