Red Tails Review

[swmdo]

Great movie. I enjoyed it with son. Did have some star wars effects to it when showing the enemy. Reminded me of darth vader?? :think:

[Teamski]

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.

 

Jon

 

You can only jam only so much in two hours. The fact that they had them start out in P-40's and ended with P-51s is good enough for me. They could have had them in AT-6's you know. Now if they could devote 10 hours on them like they did in BoB, then you could have done some real justice to the Tuskegee Airmen and shown the true progression of their equipment. I was happy I paid the dosh to see the movie in the theater. I might only go to one or two movies a year, and this one was worth the trip, even with all of the criticisms being leveled at the film by the critics. They showed them in P-40F's not P-40N's.

 

-Ski

[Cobrahistorian]

You can only jam only so much in two hours. The fact that they had them start out in P-40's and ended with P-51s is good enough for me. They could have had them in AT-6's you know. Now if they could devote 10 hours on them like they did in BoB, then you could have done some real justice to the Tuskegee Airmen and shown the true progression of their equipment. I was happy I paid the dosh to see the movie in the theater. I might only go to one or two movies a year, and this one was worth the trip, even with all of the criticisms being leveled at the film by the critics. They showed them in P-40F's not P-40N's.

 

-Ski

 

Ok, good to hear! I cringed when 'd heard they were in N models, so I'm glad to hear that was incorrect information. I'll be seeing it on Super Bowl Saturday, so I'm looking forward to it. I wish they'd done a BoB-style miniseries. Now THAT would have been something, and there's significantly more combat experience to draw from too...

 

Jon

[rustywings]

Regarding the film, "Red Tails", about the Tuskegee airmen, this might be a good time to revisit an interesting read authored by former 8th Air Force Pilot and noted military historian Robert Powell:

 

 

 

From: Bob Powell

Date: July 3, 2008

 

This letter was not written for publication, but to enlighten you and you and your staff about some of the errors and misleading information you continue to publish, Perhaps it should be published to set your readers straight. As a WWII Historian and former 8th AF fighter pilot flying 87 missions over Europe during WWII, I am dedicated to factual reporting about the air war in Europe and aviation in general, and I take issue with the media (and not with just AJC) continuing to publish untrue and/or misleading statements about the Tuskegee Airmen (T/A).

Although I have great respect for the pilots and achievements of this WWII Fighter Group, I do not appreciate the continuing repetition of myths and untruths about their military record, the latest example in the obit on Lt. Col Charles Dryden in today's paper, repeating the same errors which appeared in his obit story a few days ago.

 

For more than 60 years the myth that they "never lost a bomber they were escorting to an enemy fighter", was their primary claim to fame! Then, several months ago, their Historian, William E. Holten, announced that his research proved that this was not true, that they had, indeed, lost some 25 bombers to enemy fighters. This myth still gets published occasionally, but far less frequently since he made this disclosure, thank goodness. Lies told often enough tend to become truths in the minds of many. However, it now seems to have been replaced by another false claim, i.e. that the Tuskegee Airmen flew more than 15,000 combat missions. ALSO NOT TRUE!

 

Their own official records indicate that the T/A only flew 311missions. Their so-called 15,000 "missions" were actually 15,000 "sorties.". Apparently, none of your reporters know the difference between a "mission" and a "sortie," so let me define these for you and them. Combat Mission is an assigned flight to accomplish a military objective. This can be flown by one pilot or a squadron or group of pilots flying together. It is recorded as one mission. Combat Sortie. When, for example, 48 or 64 pilots fly together on a combat mission it is recorded as 48 or 64 combat sorties.

 

The T/A did not fly 15,000+ combat missions - as stated in your articles about the demise of Col. Charles Dryden. They flew 15,000+ "sorties". To have flown that many "missions" during the time they were in combat in the MTO, they would have had to fly about 25 missions a day everyday they were in combat. Do the math. That's one mission every hour, everyday they were in combat. Impossible! Weather alone would have prevented this, not to mention the problem of keeping all of their aircraft flyable everyday over that period of time. FACT: Their official records indicate they flew only 311 missions, a far cry from 15,000 claimed. Please advise your reporters of the difference between a mission and a sortie so that another T/A myth is not appearing in every mention this Fighter group.

 

The Dryden story also stated that the 99th Squadron of the T/A was "the most successful squadron in American history." NOT SO! It would be more correct to say they have been the most publicized squadron in American history, however, thanks to a fully-paid public relations staff in Washington, D.C., the only such office of any military unit other than the U.S. Army, Navy, Marines and Coast Guard..

 

Although I do not have complete combat statistics on all the fighter groups flying out of Africa and Italy (the MTO), I do have the stats on all of the 16 fighter groups flying in the Eighth Air Force over western Europe. And, when these records are compared, the Tuskegee Airmen rank at the bottom of the list despite the fact that they had four squadrons to only three for the 8th AF groups. FYI, and one of the reasons the T/A exploit their 15,000+ sorties (which they call missions) is that on a normal mission they would put up 64 fighters compared to only 48 for the 8th AF groups. And, since they did mostly ground support missions rather than bomber escort missions, the average length of their missions was about half that of the time in the air flown by the 8thAF fighters. Re the above mentioned stats, I would be delighted to provide these for your information if requested.

 

Another gross error in your first story on Colonel Dryden is that the implication that he was, individually, awarded the Congressional Gold Medal recently. ALSO NOT TRUE. Through the efforts of the New York Senator, this medal was awarded to the Tuskegee Airmen, authorizing all Tuskegee Airman to receive this award. It was not awarded for individual achievements, as implied, but for the role played by the T/A in breaking the color ban for pilots, a civil rights accomplishment, not for their military achievements.

Had this award been given for their military achievements alone, it should also have been awarded to each and every other fighter group in WWII whose records exceeded those of the Tuskegee Airmen. In my opinion, this was a "political award" instead of a military award. No other bomber or fighter units have been awarded this Medal, only Unit Citations. These are facts. Check them out, and here's to more factual reporting and a better AJC.

 

Most sincerely,

 

Robert H. Powell, Jr.

Author/Editor/Historian/Pilot 352nd Fighter Group

Atlanta, Ga.

[rustywings]

Regarding the above post, "AJC" is in reference to the "Atlanta Journal Constitution" newspaper.

 

Russ

[Teamski]

Wow, that guy really went off on them. Either way, he was correct in his corrections, but to say the Congressional Gold medal was awarded on political grounds I think is rather off base. The very fact that the T/A did what they did in the time period that they did it in was trully deserving of the award, IMHO.

 

-Ski

[Lightning Ace]

I saw the movie and I enjoyed it and after growing up in the 1950's watching the WW II Aviation movies Hollywood put out back then which I still watch from time to time and can really be picked apart, there's no way I'm going to pick this movie apart which I believe I could if I wanted to after collecting WW II Aviation for 17 plus years over 18 years ago. I'm just glad that they're still making WW II movies for the public to keep WW II history alive.

I hope someday they'll do a movie that has a good story to it and has squadrons of P-38 Lightnings in it which will be done with computers too because there's only seven in the world that they still fly.

[Teamski]

Ok, good to hear! I cringed when 'd heard they were in N models, so I'm glad to hear that was incorrect information. I'll be seeing it on Super Bowl Saturday, so I'm looking forward to it. I wish they'd done a BoB-style miniseries. Now THAT would have been something, and there's significantly more combat experience to draw from too...

 

Jon

 

Here is a shot of the green screen showing the P-40 mock-up they used. The confusion of it being a P-40N probably came from the angled frame corners that the later P-40s had and the inaccurate rear windows. I think it showed quite an eye to detail that they got the exact version the T/A's flew.

 

-Ski

[zbcdn]

I just got back from seeing it. I thought it was very enjoyable. I thought the German pilot though was ridiculous. How did the same German pilot end up fighting them on all their missions, despite the fact that they were spread over Italy, Germany and Romania???? I was not expecting Das Boot or The Pacific. It is what it is, entertainment for dudes like us.

[B-17Guy]

Hello All,

 

Finally saw the movie last Sunday.

I would like to say that I really enjoyed the film, and thought it honored the great Tuskegee Airmen well. I have had the privilege of meeting many of them and they

are truly a terrific group.

 

I do have two points of view, first as a pilot of WWII aircraft, and second as a lifelong militaria collector.

 

As a collector, I thought, as most all others noted, that the uniforms and equipment were great. The flight jackets were very well done,

along with the flight gear. I noticed at least four different maker's of pilot wing (I am a wing collector), plus one that looked theater made.

RAF gear was a nice touch, but I thought only crews in England did that, not Italy, but I could be wrong. The base was very accurately put together

as well, in my opinion. In fact, I thought most everything on the ground was very impressive. Even the interaction between pilots and mechanics

I felt was spot on.

 

From a pilot's point of view, it was for the most part, the standard mess of inaccuracies. It was the usual list of things that pilots don't do, say, or

how we fly and things airplanes can't do without coming apart. The dogfights looked like something out of Star Wars, and the whole Darth Vader thing with the

evil German, as other forum members have referred to him, was just stupid. The scene with the destroyer reminded me of Luke destroying the Death Star.

CGI was, in my opinion mostly bad, with a few moments of cool stuff (evil German putting the 109 on its guts was great and 17's coming apart actually hurt to see).

Not my area of expertise, but if the History Channel's "Dogfights" series got the CGI so right (my opinion), why couldn't the tech's do better in this movie?

 

Over all I liked the movie and was glad to see it made. I will get it when it comes out on DVD for sure.

 

Best, John

[BILL THE PATCH]

hi, glad to be back on the forum. i went to see the movie with my 11year old, 13year daughter, son's freind and wife. i was very pleased. it's a good old ww2 movie!! plain and simple. now i did catch myself eyeballeing the bullion patches and a2's outstanding work on the insignia. it may be corny at times or cliche. evil germans and all that. but about two weeks agoi finished the book red tails. my kids loved it even the wife thought it was good. she kept bringing up terance howard for some reason. not as much as i brought up the Iltalian woman . in my book AAA+. i can get past all the mess ups so to say. also my older son works for regal theaters, so all family members and one guest are FREE. and all the free soda and popcorn you can eat. and i'm not fibbing. so i recommand tell your oldest children to get a part time job and regal cinema theaters. it's worth it. :thumbsup:

[vostoktrading]

hi, glad to be back on the forum. i went to see the movie with my 11year old, 13year daughter, son's freind and wife. i was very pleased. it's a good old ww2 movie!! plain and simple. now i did catch myself eyeballeing the bullion patches and a2's outstanding work on the insignia. it may be corny at times or cliche. evil germans and all that. but about two weeks agoi finished the book red tails. my kids loved it even the wife thought it was good. she kept bringing up terance howard for some reason. not as much as i brought up the Iltalian woman . in my book AAA+. i can get past all the mess ups so to say. also my older son works for regal theaters, so all family members and one guest are FREE. and all the free soda and popcorn you can eat. and i'm not fibbing. so i recommand tell your oldest children to get a part time job and regal cinema theaters. it's worth it. :thumbsup:

Hey, Bill! Where have you been? Good to see you back!

[38Driver]

Wow, that guy really went off on them. Either way, he was correct in his corrections, but to say the Congressional Gold medal was awarded on political grounds I think is rather off base. The very fact that the T/A did what they did in the time period that they did it in was trully deserving of the award, IMHO.

 

-Ski

 

 

What's interesting to me is that Punchy Powell seems to feel like the Red Tails get too much press. Anyone who follows warbirds and WW2 Aviation will tell you that the guys who tend to be front and center and overpowering at times are the "Blue Nosers" of the 352nd FG. Their publicity machine isn't too bad either and I would suggest that the number of books etc out there about the Blue Nosers is far greater then those on the Red Tails.

 

Shall we count the warbirds painted as 332nd vs 352nd? I think the Blue Nosers have that one comfortably under control too

[GEB]

When I was in 7th grade (&13 y/o) I wrote a story about WWII fliers. Watching this move, I found myself suspecting the screen writers has stolen my script. Seriously the dialogue sucked. This was a video comic on the scale of Sgt. Rock, Sgt. Furry, Jeb Stuart, and Capt. Storm. I was quite disappointed. Particularly with the timelines (the first bombing of Berlin?) and over the top successes. (What was it? Four 262 destoyed in that fight?). And who knew that planes with just machine guns could wreck such havoc on an enemy air base or combat ship? I get that this was just an action flick. But the heroics of the Tuskeegee Airmen are worthy of being told truthfully. And "pretty boy?" OMG What a laugh. See, the problem is that African Americans have gotten such a poor showing in the media, that some unsuspecting folks will chalk this "finally told" version down as truth. The men of the 332nd deserved better than this. Heck, in SO many ways they were better than this!

 

Jeez, even the early debate about whether or not to attack the train was totally cornball: repeat after me, "rules of engagment." ( Now the popcorn: that was darn good!)

[claymore]

I went to see it and ya' gotta forget about complete accuracy and remember this is Hollywood and not a History Channel documentary. I liked it as well as my wife. Started out kinda slow and I had my misgivings but it picked up. Keep in mind that Lucas did it and we gotta please everyone, patriotism, war, action, a bit of romance and airplanes! Lots of em. An air armada,,,didn't think there was so many made during the war, and all with the 15th. But the visuals were good and gave the impression just how fast combat flying was. No 24s though. Oh well---- go see it! Maybe they will make some more! Finally credit for the Tuskagees. I have met some of them. You're right bout the German! Bet Galland is rolling in his grave :thumbsup: what fun

 

claymore

[panzerbait]

I rather enjoyed it. The uniforms and aircrew gear and set dressing were top notch, the effects were good, the storyline was straight out of one of those Hollywood patriotic movies of the 1940's. it was slow in spots but if you go in with the attitude that it's a fun popcorn movie I don't think you'll be disappointed.

[Cobrahistorian]

Hi all,

 

Well, I finally got to see it tonight. Overall I enjoyed it very much. I went in with the expectation that it was going to be a Lucas movie with dialog that he wrote. That's exactly what I got. Why he's allowed to write dialog is just beyond me. But I digress.

 

Now, I'm going to criticize first and then praise.

The P-40s were a mix of P-40Ms and Ns. Yes, I know, I'm nitpicking, they flew P-40s, who cares what type they were. I can say this with almost absolute certainty. The 99th FS never flew anything but P-40Fs and Ls. The only possibility of them ever flying an Allison-engined P-40 is if they received a P-40K that was a hand-me-down from the 57th FG. Otherwise, it was strictly Merlin-powered P-40s, and I have never seen photograpic documentation of 99th FS airplanes that didn't show an F or an L. The P-40Ns were most likely used because that's what was available as far as real airplanes go, but with the CGI airplanes, there's no excuse.

 

Their attitude towards the P-40 also irked me. Yes, the 99th FS received older P-40s, but what the movie doesn't tell you is that the P-40 was actually a more maneuverable airplane than the 109. It turned tighter and climbed and dove better than the Messerschmitt. The 109 was a faster airplane, but US P-40s did VERY well in the MTO against the Germans.

 

The reports of the 99th FS being sub-par and being assigned to Coastal Patrols are skewing the actual historical timeline for dramatic effect. The 99th flew with three Fighter Groups prior to the formation of the 332nd FG. Their initial assignment with the 52nd FG met with significant discrimination and they were not properly utilized. That changed when they were reassigned to the 79th and 324th Fighter Groups, where they flew as the fourth squadron in each group and amassed a small but significant record as fighter bomber pilots. This was poorly portrayed and made it seem like there was no military use to the interdiction missions they were flying. In Italy, destroying a truck or a train was a far more militarily significant act than shooting down another airplane.

 

The fact that they left out the P-39 and P-47 periods (a total of four months of their history) is fine, as neither type really did much with the 99th FS. They flew the P-39 for just a few months before starting Strategic Escort missions in the P-47. They flew the -47 for one month before turning their Jugs over to units of the 12th AF (there are a few well documented 57th FG airplanes that were hand-me-downs from the 332nd!) and picking up new P-51B/Cs. They did fly D models, but towards the end of the war.

 

They didn't, however, explain the difference between the 99th FS and the 332nd FG. The 99th went overseas in 1943, while the 100th, 301st and 302nd FSs came over in 1944, establishing the 332nd FG. The command structure in the movie was convoluted. Was Terence Howard's character the CO of the 99th or of the 332nd? Was the "Easy" character a Squadron Commander or a flight leader? Again this was one of the terrible dialog points; the constant referring to "leading your squad". There were no squads in the USAAF. He was either a flight leader (in command of 4 airplanes) or a Squadron commander (in charge of up to thirty!)

 

One of the things that really bothered me was the outright insubordination by one of the pilots, arguably the main character. As a military aviator, that simply wouldn't have happened. Discussion, even arguments on the ground about how best to attack a train or enemy fighter formation, sure. But to have a single airplane break from formation and conduct an attack TOWARDS friendly forces? No. His constant public insubordination towards his flight (squadron?) leader would have had him busted pretty quickly.

 

***SPOILER ALERT!!***

 

The last thing I'll comment negatively on was the final scene where "Lightning" meets his fate. I was impressed with the initial appearance of the Me262s and the appreciably deeper sound of their 30mm cannon. The Mk108 cannon was a slow-firing relatively low-velocity weapon that was great for knocking down bombers. Three hits from an Mk108 was usually sufficient to bring down a B-17 or B-24. One direct hit would demolish a P-51. Had "Lightning" been hit by an Mk108 round in the shoulder, arm and chest, he'd have been a cloud of pink mist.

 

His reference to the "Gruesome Twosome" as he dies, was an interesting tribute to the real "Gruesome Twosome" of Lts. Wendell Pruitt and Lee Archer, but if you didn't know who they were and what they did, you'd have missed it. Archer and Pruitt were the 332nd's most successful pilots and flying as a team, they destroyed a number of German fighters. There has been considerable discussion about Archer over the years as to whether he was an Ace or not. While I can interject an educated personal opinion here, his official score was 4 confirmed kills. Pruitt had three. Both of them survived combat, although Pruitt was killed in a training accident as an instructor in Tuskeegee in 1945. Neither of them flew with the 99th FS though.

***SPOILER ALERT OFF***

Again, it's a movie and you do have to suspend disbelief to an extent, but those were a few things that irked me. Now on to the good stuff:

 

I was very impressed with the accuracy of the uniforms and equipment. There was some question earlier in this thread about the wearing of RAF equipment. It was VERY prevalent in the fighter units of the MTO. I was impressed as hell that they showed a mix of RAF Type B, C and D helmets (especially D's!) and US A-11s. Mae Wests were an appropriate mix of US and RAF vests and overall it was very well done.

 

The British battle jacket with the 99th FS patch on it was right-on and taken from photographic documentation. Again, a non-standard thing that pilots did all the time. I've got pics of a few 57th FG guys wearing British battle jackets.

 

The costuming and set people really seemed to have gone the extra yard to get things right. Even the blankets in the infirmary were 1944 medical corps blankets!

 

I was also impressed that the B-17 tail markings were appropriate for the 5th Bomb Wing (99th BG to be exact). There was also mention of the 463rd BG earlier on. I agree that B-24s would have been nice to see, but the -17s were very well done (except for that one B-17 without the chin turret, that clearly showed where the chin turret should have been!)

 

The CGI combat was well done, not hokey, other than the maneuver shown in the trailer.

 

The love story was actually well done and didn't take away from the main movie plot as it did in Pearl Harbor. It was very matter of fact and I appreciated that.

 

Overall, it was an enjoyable movie and I will be buying it on DVD when it comes out.

 

Jon

[Franklin45]

I was very impressed with the accuracy of the uniforms and equipment. There was some question earlier in this thread about the wearing of RAF equipment. It was VERY prevalent in the fighter units of the MTO. I was impressed as hell that they showed a mix of RAF Type B, C and D helmets (especially D's!) and US A-11s. Mae Wests were an appropriate mix of US and RAF vests and overall it was very well done.

 

The British battle jacket with the 99th FS patch on it was right-on and taken from photographic documentation. Again, a non-standard thing that pilots did all the time. I've got pics of a few 57th FG guys wearing British battle jackets.

 

The costuming and set people really seemed to have gone the extra yard to get things right. Even the blankets in the infirmary were 1944 medical corps blankets!

 

 

Apparently USAAF collector Ed Nored acted as a costume consultant/buyer for the production. There is a brief blurb on his site concerning it:

 

http://www.303rdbg.com/uniforms-gear.html

[Sabrejet]

That's a big thumbs-up for the UK's "Eastman Leather Co.", the world's best manufacturer of quality reproduction USAAF flight gear as supplied to the movie's costume department! :twothumbup:

[Teamski]

One of the things that really bothered me was the outright insubordination by one of the pilots, arguably the main character. As a military aviator, that simply wouldn't have happened. Discussion, even arguments on the ground about how best to attack a train or enemy fighter formation, sure. But to have a single airplane break from formation and conduct an attack TOWARDS friendly forces? No. His constant public insubordination towards his flight (squadron?) leader would have had him busted pretty quickly.

 

Great review! However, In this case, you must already know about Kid Hofer of the 4th FG, so insubordination did happen in the air.

 

-Ski

[Cobrahistorian]

Great review! However, In this case, you must already know about Kid Hofer of the 4th FG, so insubordination did happen in the air.

 

-Ski

 

Maaaaaan.... Had to bring up Hofer, didn't ya?

 

Sure, it did happen, but Hofer was also a triple ace with 15 kills in the air and 14 on the ground. He also regularly had Col Don Blakeslee chewing on him for his poor radio discipline. I just thought that the continual undermining of Lightning's flight leader's authority, was absurd.

 

I did want to add that I liked the fact that they included the destruction of the German Destroyer. While not 100% accurate, the scene portrays an actual incident where two 302nd FS P-47s sank a German destroyer in Trieste harbor on 26 June 1944. They weren't authorized to be there (as portrayed in the movie), but did get credit for sinking it. It speaks volumes about the firepower of the P-47, since they were only armed with eight .50 cals!

 

Jon

[Teamski]

Maaaaaan.... Had to bring up Hofer, didn't ya?

 

Sure, it did happen, but Hofer was also a triple ace with 15 kills in the air and 14 on the ground. He also regularly had Col Don Blakeslee chewing on him for his poor radio discipline. I just thought that the continual undermining of Lightning's flight leader's authority, was absurd.

 

I did want to add that I liked the fact that they included the destruction of the German Destroyer. While not 100% accurate, the scene portrays an actual incident where two 302nd FS P-47s sank a German destroyer in Trieste harbor on 26 June 1944. They weren't authorized to be there (as portrayed in the movie), but did get credit for sinking it. It speaks volumes about the firepower of the P-47, since they were only armed with eight .50 cals!

 

Jon

 

In Goodson's Tumult in the Clouds, he has a chapter dedicated to Hofer. He stated that while he constantly chastised Hofer for leaving his assigned section leader on almost every mission, he couldn't ground the guy because he always came back with one or two kills on his gun camera. He wrote that he had to let him fly as it was the role of a fighter pilot to be aggressive. I think you can say the same about the charactor in Red Tails. I think Hofer made him look docile in comparison! How many pilots would have gotten away with leaving his formation and leaving his plane on a beach because he ran out of gas?

 

-Ski

[trenchbuff]

Any Hollywood movie that promotes pride in our military history is a good thing! Especially if it gets the young generation interested. Public schools sure aren't doing the job.

[Garandomatic]

You'd be surprised at the social studies department at the public school I teach at, man.

[History Man]

Well, Im sad. My dad and I were going to go see it today and now its not playing in our theatre. The only theatre playing it is screening the 12:00 and 7:30 showings :pinch: Oh well, I guess Ill have to wait until it comes out on Redbox.

 

Philip