Movie: BATTLE OF MIDWAY (2 Viewers)

Brad,

I believe that the Lexington Museum in Corpus Christi Bay gets rented out to movie studios, so that might be the “inspiration” for the rendering of the vessel in the poster. A little surprised that no one mentioned the 4-bladed prop, and, apparently, wing-mounted machine-guns on the Dauntless dive-bombers. It’s times like this when I wish Hollywood would surrender replica management, unconditionally, and simply yield the work to the Japanese! :rolleyes:

-Moe

That might be so, but it's still inexcusable. It's a mistake on the part of the artist. And it reinforces the idea that the film is going to be more like "Pearl Harbor", than like "Tora! Tora! Tora!"

That's a good point about the propeller and the wing guns, too. The artist did paint in the bulge in front of the windscreen, where the SBD's nose-mounted twin-30s were installed, so he must have had access to some reference.

All this makes me even less inclined to see this movie.

Prost!
Brad
 
Yes, apparently Holloywood just doesn't mind getting it right, when it would be so easy not to make such gross mistakes. Anyway, I watched the trailer carefully and despite far from perfect, at least in the movie, the Dauntless has three blades with no machine guns on its wings.
Both American and Japanese aircraft carriers are roughly the right way too.
This stark nonsense seems to be relegated only to the poster...
 
This stark nonsense seems to be relegated only to the poster...

Good enough, but consider the following screen capture from the Midway movie trailer:

Midway Movie.jpg

That doesn't look like Japanese surface elements defending against an air attack. Ships relied on maneuver to evade torpedoes and steamed in relatively loose formations to do so. And can you imagine how many topside crew would be killed by FRIENDLY antiaircraft fire with the ships packed so closely together? No, this doesn't look like a reasonable depiction of a naval/air battle, circa 1942. Rather, it looks like World of Warships (the video game). Wouldn't be surprised if there's not just such a Midway game ready for release come the movie's premier date.
 
You are right Moe, no such thing as a tight formation like that in an open water naval battle, but you know, the CGI guys want to show off their skills...{sm4}{sm4}:wink2:
 
Good enough, but consider the following screen capture from the Midway movie trailer:

View attachment 252680

That doesn't look like Japanese surface elements defending against an air attack. Ships relied on maneuver to evade torpedoes and steamed in relatively loose formations to do so. And can you imagine how many topside crew would be killed by FRIENDLY antiaircraft fire with the ships packed so closely together? No, this doesn't look like a reasonable depiction of a naval/air battle, circa 1942. Rather, it looks like World of Warships (the video game). Wouldn't be surprised if there's not just such a Midway game ready for release come the movie's premier date.
Plus, most, or all, of the TBD's would be in the drink by this point.:wink2: -- Al
 
The commercial for this was shown on The Walking Dead tonight. Release date is November 8. -- Al
 
Good enough, but consider the following screen capture from the Midway movie trailer:

View attachment 252680

That doesn't look like Japanese surface elements defending against an air attack. Ships relied on maneuver to evade torpedoes and steamed in relatively loose formations to do so. And can you imagine how many topside crew would be killed by FRIENDLY antiaircraft fire with the ships packed so closely together? No, this doesn't look like a reasonable depiction of a naval/air battle, circa 1942. Rather, it looks like World of Warships (the video game). Wouldn't be surprised if there's not just such a Midway game ready for release come the movie's premier date.

You are right Moe, no such thing as a tight formation like that in an open water naval battle, but you know, the CGI guys want to show off their skills...{sm4}{sm4}:wink2:

You guys make a great point, not just in terms of general naval tactics, but in the terms of the specific Japanese tactics, based on their doctrine.

In 1942, the Japanese still believed that an aircraft carrier was its own best defense against air attacks, which they expected to be coordinated or balanced strikes of torpedo planes and dive bombers. This was reflected in their own attack doctrine, too. They feared torpedo attacks over dive bomber attacks. It was no wonder, because their torpedo squadrons were the best in the world. In any case they expected to deliver a combined attack on a target afloat, with the torpedo planes crippling ships and the dive bombers finishing them off. With massed carriers, this was a devastating attack.

Based on this, the Japanese pushed the escorts out to a wide ring around the carriers. They served more as anti-submarine defense, and as pickets to warn of incoming air attacks. Remember, too, that they didn't have radar-they relied on the Mk 1 eyeball to spot attacks.

With that open space, a carrier could manoeuver to avoid torpedo and dive bomber attacks. The combat air patrol and the carrier's own AA batteries also contributed. But this reliance on manoeverability was displayed during the battle, as the American attacks unfolded. Manoeuvering to avoid attacks eventually drew Kido Butai's box formation into a ragged line about 10 miles from end to end.

This is a direct contrast to our navy's doctrine, which saw the escorting vessels as contributing to the carrier's AA defenses with their own batteries.

So, yeah, the image may look cool, but I agree, it looks like it comes from World of Warships.

I have even less of a desire now, to see this movie, ever.

Prost!
Brad
 
The ship formation may be close for dramatic effect. If the ships were separated far apart, the viewer would see a battle with one ship with the rest of ships on the far horizon.
 
The ship formation may be close for dramatic effect. If the ships were separated far apart, the viewer would see a battle with one ship with the rest of ships on the far horizon.

But see, that's the point-"dramatic effect". How many liberties with details has Emmerich and his team taken, for dramatic effect? The makers of "Pearl Harbor" did, too, and it was a lousy movie.

That's why I'm underwhelmed by this movie and won't go out of my way to see it. I'll enjoy re-reading the books about the battle instead.

Prost!
Brad
 
I’m actually excited to see it.
Is it going to be historically accurate? Absolutely not but for entertainment sake, that doesn’t bother me. But hey, I mix scales and time periods in toy soldiers too! 😉

What’s unfortunate is that history class has become a joke and kids see these movies and take them as fact. These aren’t documentaries, they are entertainment meant to be enjoyed and make the studio a ton of money! Hence the “BASED on a true story “ tag line before them. Kids ignore that part
 
...Is it going to be historically accurate? Absolutely not but for entertainment sake...

For me, entertainment's sake is even less of a reason to see it. I'd rather watch the 1976 movie, then, if I want to be entertained.
 
I’ll be hitting the theater next Thursday evening (movies here are released on Thursdays, not Fridays like in the US). Never in my 58 year existence did I go watching a war movie expecting to see historical accuracy. No matter how close to real facts, equipment, tactics it may get, there is always in the best case scenario at least a small “poetic license” created by the director, screenwriter or studio to spoil it from the truth... anyway I have never missed a single one because just like Zach said, the bottom line is that they entertain me and even sometimes laughing or cursing at the absurdities shown, I have fun!
I enter the screening room already knowing there will be inaccuracy, gross mistakes,
and down right lies, but I turn on the “enjoy it” button, and try to have a good time. I think I’ll enjoy this one a lot, and visually it will certainly be more interesting than the first one (cgi rocks!)
 
For me, entertainment's sake is even less of a reason to see it. I'd rather watch the 1976 movie, then, if I want to be entertained.

Agreed, in this day and age I would expect a little more accuracy and attention to detail rather than some movie company cashing in on a significant historical event such as this.
 
If a studio can make a "Tora! Tora! Tora!", then we have a right to expect that someone will make a historically accurate movie about Midway. It's because of the quality of that movie, that I don't care to see this movie, and that I was disappointed by the old movie. There is enough drama, action, and heroism in the facts, that it is unnecessary to add any fictional elements to the story. That's my opinion. You guys have yours. I'm not saying no one should go and see it. I'm not trying to dissuade anyone. If you want to see it, and you will enjoy the movie, then that's great. There is no disputing about tastes, as the Romans said, or, to each, his own.

Prost!
Brad
 
Here is a discussion of the trailer's accuracy...

I just saw your comment in the thread on the latest film version of HG Wells' "War of the Worlds", and I had to respond that it expresses pretty much what I think about this upcoming movie.

Prost!
Brad
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top