Red Tails Review

[Stillwell]

Hey guys, I just got pack from seeing Red Tails

I'll try not to give too much away

 

The movie was fine. It wasn't completely awesome, it was somewhat satisfying.

If you go see the movie, take into account that it is not on a huge budget and it was made by George Lucas

Most of the money went to uniforms, some high profile actors, and the fuel for 3 planes, that is it.

It was definitely a lucas movie (like Indiana Jones: Kingdom of the Crystal Skull)

 

Pros: Most of the black actors were good

There were some really funny moments (particularly involving the supporting actors)

the uniforms were really well done (as far as I could see, I'll let you guys be the judge) I thought they were properly aged and well matched

The scenes on the airfield were really cool, they did a good job showing the Mediterranean mud and huts made from crates and canvas

There was also a lot of cigarette smoke in the buildings, which was a cool touch

The film was not preachy, it certainly wasn't a spike lee movie, it was balanced

The battle scenes were cool if your really into big loud explosions

 

Cons: Really Really hokie: Evil Germans, bad acting, Extremely extremely cliche storyline and characters

war movie stereotype

Dialog was unrealistic and forced at times

3/4s of the movie was a stretched out version of the trailer

The plot itself was really choppy (big story chunks glued together with no transition)

CGI was not good. CGI in the air was alright, CGI on the ground looked like a crappy greenscreen

Very predictable, I knew the end of the movie after 20 minutes

Soundtrack was not what you would expect: Soundtrack consisted of 1970s bass and a fairly groovy beat, occasional electronic sounds (I thought it was funny because I'm weird and like contrasting music, but others will probably not like it)

Planes probably didn't move like planes (but I can't exactly tell)

Sound effects were definitely recycled from star wars (I never knew that ME-109s sounded like TiE fighters! also, 50 calibers sounded like lasers at times)

Whoever was in charge of the microphones should be sacked

There were some unrealistic instances and a love story that was filmed to show an excess of pastels

the opening scene was just painful

 

For you nitpickers: I saw a post war sweater and the aircraft markings were very off

 

That is my 2 cent rant, I'm sorry it's long

Overall, I urge you to form your own opinions about it, but I don't know if you should spend a lot on the movie

It was a nice flick overall and it was just fun to watch things explode and funny talking supporting actors.

 

that is all!

[strayduck230]

Also just got back from it. I will say I agree with all of the above pros and cons.

 

I was very pleased with the effort of correct uniforms, equipment, and the vehicles. Only a couple short scenes where I spotted a M-38 jeep rather than a GPW or MB. But im a jeep guy and those differences stick out to me

[Bob Hudson]

I saw the previews when I went to see WAR HORSE and I was impressed with the CGI dogfight footage (well I guess it's no longer "footage" if it was not shot on film and it's digitally projected in the theater).

 

I have seen some critics whine because it's not Tuskegee Airmen, but that film had already been made. This one was made as an action film and in those the bad guys are always overplayed and cliches abound. The spent $58 million and much of that is in fact for CGI: look at movie credits some time at just how many people are involved in the digital image creation process: it's huge.

 

Of course militaria collectors have a hard time with war movies because we are button counters who get worked up on uniform details and gun sounds (let's face it, realistic gun sounds are too dull for movies).

 

I think it's great that there is a new war movie that is not preachy or trying to put a 21st century Hollywood liberal spin on history.

 

The official opening is Jan. 20th in the US and I'm going to take my dad to see it next week (we went to WAR HORSE last week).

[Sabrejet]

The flight clothing was largely supplied by the UK's Eastman company, so at least that was guaranteed to be accurate! :thumbsup:

 

http://www.eastmanleather.com/

[ken88]

Thanks for the heads up!

 

Okay guys, just let's forget we're collectors for once and let's enjoy the movie :thumbsup: Watching movies is all about thinking you're there, so don't let the minor uniform mistakes screw it up.

 

I've been waiting a looooong time to see this, trailer just gives me goose bumps.

 

Cheers

[FNG]

I think your Cons will keep me at home or rather seeing "Haywire" instead.

Can't fake a real MMA babe beating up dudes.

[Garandomatic]

I did like George Lucas's comment that he did it to give kids heroes and to try to breed some patriotism, we certainly could use some today, plus the fact that he paid for it apparently out of pocket. Not sure if I'll be crazy about it, I'll try to see it.

[m1ashooter]

I'm going to see it not because of the uniforms but because its about a USAAF Fighter Group and their aren't that many movies made about the USAAF.

 

Go For Broke was made to show the Japanese American GI's contribution to the fight and it is fitting and proper to show the contribution of the African American GI's in the war.

 

We must remember we are one nation, even though I live in TEXAS!!!!!

 

Can't wait to see the movie.

[gwb123]

For anyone who wants the in depth story behind making this movie, check out this six page story from the

New York Times website:

 

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/22/magazine...=1&emc=eta1

 

It's very striking that Lucas could not get the backing of a major studio for this project. Apparently there is an industry belief that a WWII style patriotic movie just will not make money. Yet everywhere it was previewed it won great praise!

 

It sounds like there were short cuts, but given that Lucas paid for this out of his own pocket that is not surprising.

 

Sadly, because of the rough time he had selling this he's decided this is his last blockbuster film. He's going back to art house films. I'm sure they will be great, and perhaps that is where he needs to be at this stage of life, but who knows what else he might have produced.

[Bluehawk]

I think it's great that there is a new war movie that is not preachy or trying to put a 21st century Hollywood liberal spin on history.

If that ^ is actually true, then I might spend the money to see the aircraft-related stuff.

[carbinephalen]

I just got home from the theater and I have NOTHING but good stuff to say about it!

 

Acting was a little hokie at times (but what movie doesn't have that right?) so I give the acting a B but the aerial/fighting scenes get an A in my book! Granted they are computer generated....but getting an entire squadron of P-51's and B-17's as we all know is impossible in this day and age, so they had to go with the next best thing :thumbsup: The uniforms all looked great as did the rest of the WWII era items. I wish I had some of those A2's in my collection to display :drool2:

 

I spent $14 for my wife and I to go watch it and it was money well spent! I would've paid double that. A great flick in my book.

 

Anyways, go watch it fellas while it's still in theaters to get the full effect!

 

-Thomas

[Stillwell]

After reading that article about it, I can see why the movie turned out the way it did

Seeing that the purpose of the movie was to be a stereotypical flashy war movie, it was fine

[Jack's Son]

Seeing that the purpose of the movie was to be a stereotypical flashy war movie, it was fine

If this is Truely the purpose of the movie, I am happy I have yet to see it. I don't go to the movies for intertainment only, I also like to learn something along the way. Facts, history, new perspectives of battles, and the "truth" that was maybe not accurately portrayed by the history books.

 

I enjoyed "Patton", "Tora,Tora,Tora", "Midway" and the like. With this in mind, please tell me your thoughts regarding the comparison of this movies too those??

 

Thank you.

[Teamski]

I just got back from the movie myself and I really enjoyed it. While there were some inaccuracies (109's with BOB paint schemes, squadron patch on an Ike, flash of a red bordered US insignia in 1944, etc) on the whole it was very well done. Yeah, I was a bit put off by the evil Germans, but it didn't ruin the movie for me. I think Red Tails was a real tribute to the African Americans who served in WWII. The same couldn't be said for Pearl harbor.

 

The CGI was outstanding! The metal finishes and physics models (except for one said maneuver; you know what I mean if you see the movie) was really well done. The airfield shots really suspended any disbelief. Imagine if Memphis Bell had this sort of treatment.

 

I thought the acting was fine. There were some sections that pushed the plot a bit, like Spaatz talking to the group commanders......

 

Anyways, I HIGHLY recommend the movie. It is a treat for the eyes and a refreshing WWII movie. It made the Mustang as sexy as it can be, that is for sure.

 

-Ski

[Bob Hudson]

...but getting an entire squadron of P-51's and B-17's as we all knoble in this day and age, so they had to go with the next best thing :thumbsup:

 

And with real airplanes you could not do the kinds of things you can with CGI.

[CNY Militaria]

I just saw it today and loved the whole thing! I went into it without any plan of nitpicking and loved every minute of it--even the evil Germans.

[RDUNE]

I just got home from this movie, and overall I enjoyed it. The dialogue was cheesey at times, and a couple scenes seemed waaay too Hollywood, but it was still a well done movie. Certainly worth seeing.

[willysmb44]

Just saw it tonight. It's pretty much a comic book brought to life.

The sets were incredible, the uniforms and equipment very well done and the actors were good. Just a shame that the plot read like a comic book.

And for the guy who invented surround sound for movies, there sound was deeply unimpressive in regard to the sounds of airplanes and weapons!

[Cobrahistorian]

I have yet to see it, but from everything I've heard, the dialog is typical Lucas. I'd expect that. He's a visionary, but man, he can't write dialog to save himself. I'm looking forward to seeing it in 2 weeks with my best friend and his family. His wife's uncle flew with the 332nd, so it'll be pretty cool to see his kids' reaction to what their great uncle did, even if the portrayal is a bit hokey!

 

Jon

[bobgee]

I saw it Sat with my 10 year old grandson. I thought it was great. He thought it was "awesome!" Yes, It is a Hollywood story - fiction based on fact - meaning that the characters and events are compilations. It covered the trevails that these men faced to get to combat but it was done well. I think people will come away with a better understanding of what segregation was like in that era. It was a different world. These men had to fight to get to war and did an outstanding job when they got there. BUT for us History nit-pickers, IMHO the special effects and CGI are outstanding. Attention to detail on the aircraft and personnel and their personal gear is outstanding. It is obvious that the team used real photos to recreate the details. You will see correct patched A-2s, B-10s, RAF Type B and C helmets, both leather and khaki, A-9s and A-11s and everything else of the type that was worn by Fighter Squadrons in the MTO. All visable 332nd Swuadron insignia is correct. The "Ike" jacketr that Ski mentions is actually a Brit combat jacket with U.S. insignia and a Squadron patch sewn on the left pocket. Though I haven't seen it, I'll bet a 332nd pilot's photo exists. FOX reran Geraldo Rivera' s "War Story" episode of "Tuskeegee Airmen" on Sat afternoon with interviews and great original film, See it if you can. The theater I was at was large and quite full. And -There was applause and cheering! How about that???? If you are a WWII AAF history buff, you've got to see it. Technically IMO it was better than "Catch 22" and that was outstanding. I give "Red Tails" the classic :twothumbup: Bobgee

[Sabrejet]

I'm patiently awaiting the UK release so have been reading these reviews with interest. In my mind, it's a big-screen version of Discovery's "Dogfights"...which were great! Also...here's a question. Does the film feature 21st century dialogue and attitudes rather than what would be appropriate for its historical time? For example, do they whoop and high-five after a successful mission, NBA style? Just curious!

[seanmc1114]

I was actually pleasantly surprised that the movie didn't beat the racism and segregation issues over the audience's heads. Yes there were definitely elements of those and at times it was a little painful to watch knowing that attitudes like that really existed, but I don't think the movie preached in a politically correct sort of way. Certainly not as much as I was expecting.

 

The biggest drawback I saw was that the timeline was a little murky and at times it could be difficult trying to figure out when the events onscreen were occurring. The first big air battle involving German fighters was coverage of the allied landings at Anzio so that would be January 1944. I think from a brief reference after the fact, the first bomber escort mission was over Ploesti. Sources I have found say these missions started in June 1944. The final mission over Berlin was in March 1945. So basically the film covered 14 or 15 months but there was really nothing in the story to suggest that time frame unless you already knew your history and the dates involved. Without knowing your dates, a viewer could easily believe the film covered just a few days or weeks of time.

 

My biggest gripe, which I understand may have been due more to technical limitations than a lack of historical accuracy, is that in the movie the squadron transitioned from P-40's straight into P-51D's sometime in the spring of 1944. One, from what I have read the 332nd flew P-39's, P-47's and P-51B's after the P-40 but before the P-51D. According to wikipedia, "The Tuskegee Airmen initially were equipped with Curtiss P-40s, briefly with Bell P-39 Airacobras (March 1944), later with Republic P-47 Thunderbolts (June–July 1944), and finally with the aircraft with which they became most commonly identified, the North American P-51 Mustang (July 1944)." Second, I don't believe P-51D's even arrived in the Italian theater until the summer or early fall of 1944. Since there are not a lot of any WWII planes still flying, I'm sure the producers had to make due with what they could get even though it was hard to tell what was real and what was CGI. Still, I have always preferred the look of the razorback Thunderbolts and Mustangs to the bubbletops and would have loved to see some B model Mustangs.

[Cobrahistorian]

My biggest gripe, which I understand may have been due more to technical limitations than a lack of historical accuracy, is that in the movie the squadron transitioned from P-40's straight into P-51D's sometime in the spring of 1944. One, from what I have read the 332nd flew P-39's, P-47's and P-51B's after the P-40 but before the P-51D. According to wikipedia, "The Tuskegee Airmen initially were equipped with Curtiss P-40s, briefly with Bell P-39 Airacobras (March 1944), later with Republic P-47 Thunderbolts (June–July 1944), and finally with the aircraft with which they became most commonly identified, the North American P-51 Mustang (July 1944)." Second, I don't believe P-51D's even arrived in the Italian theater until the summer or early fall of 1944. Since there are not a lot of any WWII planes still flying, I'm sure the producers had to make due with what they could get even though it was hard to tell what was real and what was CGI. Still, I have always preferred the look of the razorback Thunderbolts and Mustangs to the bubbletops and would have loved to see some B model Mustangs.

 

Hey cool! That passage on the Wikipedia article was edited by yours truly. They had the history terribly botched on that article.

 

I agree, it would have been nice to see their reactions to being issued P-39s after flying P-40s and then the movements through the P-47 and on into the Mustang.

 

From what I'm hearing too, they got the basic airplanes correct, but the sub-types (P-40Ns instead of P-40Fs, P-51Ds instead of B/Cs early on) wrong. 99.9% of people out there wouldn't know the difference, but to us aviation-minded people it sticks out like a sore thumb.

 

I am definitely looking forward to seeing the movie as a movie and not as accurate history. I'm happy that the movie was finally made (a friend just sent me a 1993 Lucasfilm fan club article that talked about "coming soon, Red Tails") and serves as a tribute to these pioneers.

 

Jon

[KVSkelton]

Something that bugs at me at least a little is the lack of B-24s. From what I've heard the Red Tails are shown only escorting B-17s. Given the fact that Lucas paid for this movie out of his own pocket it's no surprise that they chose to limit the CGI to only one heavy. There were B-17s in the 15th AAF of course but it would have been nice to see a few Libs. Of course, if I've heard incorrectly and there are B-24s in the movie please ignore my uneducated comments.

 

That said, I'm taking my son to see it this Thursday! :thumbsup:

[HoovieDude]

This is going to be a "friday night redbox" movie for me.