FLYER Exhibitions
Saw it this evening. Attempts to tell the story of the Tuskeegee Airmen. Good aerial CGI stuff and seemed pretty accurate in that regard. Good production values and an awful lot of aircraft ("planes")
But, oversimplified plot and dire dialogue. Pointless love story sub plot. Shame. The TV movie from a few years ago much better.
 |
 |
Friday 24 May 2013 00:13 UTC |
||
|
Latest FLYER headlines:
Red Tails, up there with Pearl Harbor
Frequently misunderstood
The subject is a great one, but I fear that Lucas was not the man for the job. The clips that I have seen make the CGI look appalling. The aircraft appear to have no mass, and move in a way that defies physics. Worse than the worst PC flight sim, and almost as bad as that in dire the French Aeronauts movie, which ruined Tanguy and Laverdure for ever.. Pearl Harbo(u)r has to be one of the biggest movie turkeys ever made. The only good air combat CGI I have seen is in the excellent Czech WW2 movie "Dark Blue World".
Re: Red Tails, up there with Pearl Harbor
I know we've done it before, but I have to say again how much poor CGI of aircraft annoys me (HINT: a helluva lot).
Lucas made one good film and just keeps re-making it. Is Red Tails any different? Martin
Of course DBW used real Spirfires in their filming - they used two of them and then duplicated them on screen. The CGI stuff I guess would have been integrated with real aeroplanes, so making the whole feel different.
Dark Blue World used a lot of Battle of Britain film footage that had been CGI'd. We grew up with that film, it used real aircraft, but they weren't really fighting, so manoeuvres likely were more gentle (and clearly not computer game impossible) . Red Tails combat sequences looked pretty good, the breaking up of B17s in mid air looked very like actual camera gun footage. Maybe only someone who had fought in a P51 or Me 109 could comment on the accuracy. So, if our perception of air combat on film has been calibrated by BoB, that of our interplanetary space combat has therefore been calibrated by Star Wars. Wonder if that's wrong too? Frequently misunderstood
Yes. Very!
Even with gyro stabilised inertia dampening warp drive that look like chemical rockets, use direct vision for targetting and and have aerofoils? Frequently misunderstood
The choreography of the combat sequences in Star Wars 1 (The first one launched, which is actually 5 or something in chronology) came direct from the BoB movie according to George Lucas.
Rob P Forum Diversity & Equality Officer (unpaid)
"We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm." - George Orwell-
That'll be why I so closely resembles Dambusters. (Cue that mash up on YouTube). Frequently misunderstood
No, no , no,no. The TIE fighter, X-wing and AA on the Millennium Falcon use electronic targeting as any fule noes. Aerofoils are de-rigeur for when bringing your ship into the atmosphere of a planet. [/nerd]  TIE Fighter  X-Wing
. Not if you use the force. Frequently misunderstood
The depiction of air fighting in BoB is based on gun camera footage and the advice of those who were there, including Stanford Tuck and Adolf Galland. It is, I think,a fairly realistic depiction of how big piston aircraft fought, with combinations of zoom and boom and turn and burn being depicted. Compare and contrast the great flying but very unrealistic moves shown in the excellent WW1 flying film "Aces High", in which the pilots use loops as standard evasive moves. In reality that would be a good way to get dead quickly.
Have been looking forward to this for ages, and sadly having seen the latest trailer and reviews I think I am going to hold out until it is on tv..it looks like it could be a little dissapointing.
On the other hand just stubled across this trailer... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewnD8mV1NB4 Looks very promising!! Who is onlineUsers browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests |
| |||
Login / Register