Red Tails spoiler

Geez, Doogs, don't you remember the Heinkel 100 the Germans had 10 of and represented as 100's?

I can sympathize with what you said about making history simple, having mentioned an obscure name like Hitler and getting blank stares.  Ancient history, old fart!

MSgtMJ62

Hollywood always screws up the facts especially historical facts as all they care about is making money period, just like the big corporations.

Totally agree with you about the screwing up of facts...but it's not necessarily a money thing.

Sometimes, it's a time constraint. You can't possibly encapsulate the story of the Tuskegee Airmen in two hours, so you synthesize. And that means things like facing the same German ace over and over again. Or pilots based in Sicily flying cover for Berlin raids (huh?). Or all the planes being P-51Ds. The reason Band of Brothers (and The Pacific) worked so well is they had movie-level budgets and the time to fully explore what their characters went through. Could you imagine cutting BoB down to a two-hour movie? I'm convinced that's why Saving Private Ryan had such a bizarre strategic end-game - trying to cram too many elements of the experience into one story.

Sometimes, it's an education constraint (or unconstraint). Most people know jack all about WWII (or ancient Rome or medieval Scotland or wherever). Sometimes things are just more complicated than you have time to explain. Sometimes you have to dumb down concepts to something your average audience member can grasp. I'm convinced this is the source of that awful dialogue from the bomber pilots in the opening credits. And sometimes, knowing your audience doesn't know better can lead to sheer laziness - no, the Republic was not restored after Commodus was killed, as Gladiator would have you believe. In fact it ushered in an era of civil war and assassinations that nearly broke the empire...oops.

Sometimes it's oversight. Not sure who heard in the briefing that the bomb group would be going up against everything the Germans had...100s, 109s, 190s, even 262s. 100s? Can someone please tell me WTF a German 100 is? Probably just that dude reading the line wrong, but it happend to be the best take.

The one thing that really drove me crazy though...especially amid all the amazing sound effects in the movie...was how quiet those cockpits were. These are Mustangs, not Lexuses...

I was the first to disagree with your original statement, and it had Nothing to do with racism. In fact I was interested in that question you raised and did a little research.

His 1/2 victory was after all shared with another black pilot.

but I think you know that.

wow what a debate I wonder what would happen it there was something really important to talk about like models lol

Just Kidding Guys I ll hope I ll enjoyed the movie when I see it l.

F-8fanatic

Have you ever heard Bud Anderson or any other WWII ace speak?  They dont say "Hi, I'm Bud Anderson, I shot down 16 and a quarter planes in WWII, how are you?"   

And to clarify, I did not make a "qualitative" judgement on whether any "red-tails" were aces or not, just brought up the historical fact...and there seems to be some debate on that point...I couldn't care less myself, other than discussing it from a historical perspective...I am begining to belive that you, and some others, are subtly implying a race issue surrounding anyone who brings up this one point in conversation regarding the red-tails' history  and I certainly am offended by that...

I loved it!  I'm not a rivet counter and was 6 months old when WWII started, but I remember knowing what was going on at age 4.  My uncle served with an Army Air Corps unit in the Pacific, and never told any of us what he experienced when he came home.  I have never been in combat, so can't judge the authenticity of this. 

I'm a civilian pilot, have ridden in a restored B-17 and seen many warbirds up close and personal on the ground,  This movie all looked very real to me!

All I can say, it was an enjoyable, exciting couple of hours of entertainment, and I'll buy the DVD when available!

F-8fanatic

I will be going to see it myself, and I am not expecting some accurately-portrayed historical masterpiece... 

 

At least Dale Dye wasn`t in it

I think that all this hen-pecking about ace status, etc etc is rather pointless.  Here's a fact for everyone to ponder--before the Tuskegee Airmen flew escort, bomber losses were much higher than they were with these pilots flying escort.  Anyone can say what they want--in the end, these guys did one massively great job that wasnt being done before.  Not to take anything away from any other pilots, but someone here said something about how the 332nd lost "at least 25 bombers".  Sad reality is that sometimes, more than that number were lost on a single mission, whereas the 332nd lost about that many total.  Clearly, they made one hell of a contribution, and that contribution was not about how many aces there were.

Mannstein, you are correct in that the air forces tried to keep track of kills.  But you are looking at this from the public side, not from the fighter pilot side.  Have you ever heard Bud Anderson or any other WWII ace speak?  They dont say "Hi, I'm Bud Anderson, I shot down 16 and a quarter planes in WWII, how are you?"  Anderson flew 116 combat sorties, and shot down 16.25 enemy aircraft.  To proclaim that the kills really were the important issue is completely false, otherwise, the vast majority of Anderson's sorties would be viewed as failures.  One one day he shot down two e/a, on another he shot down three FW-190s.  So basically, by using your logic, basically 10 or 12 or so sorties were good and the rest were not.  But that is a very over-simplified view.  Suppose he didnt get a kill one mission but he chased a 109 off of Yeager's tail?  Suppose he chased fighters away from bombers  without getting the kills, and in the process saved 10 men a piece?  We were in a war of attrition, and shooting down the enemy was not required for success--preventing THEM from shooting our bombers down WAS.  We never won the attrition battle with enemy aircraft--at the end of the war there were hundreds of German fighters still flyable, but little fuel and very few experienced pilots left to get them in the air.  That is where the war was won.  We didnt have to shoot them all down, we only needed to keep them at bay enough to get our bombers there and back, and when that was accomplished, the Germans had no chance.  We neutralized their ability to roam the skies and down dozens of bombers every day.  It didnt take an air force full of aces to do it.  Most who flew the P-51 were not aces, yet they all contributed to the effort immensely.

By the way, whoever it was that mentioned "I Am Legend" as a movie that was "heavily cast with black actors"....come on, really?  There were three main characters in the movie.  Will Smith was one.  A German Shepherd was the second one, and a woman who is not African American was the third.  Aside from that, there was no bias at all toward any race.  look at the early scenes in the movie--there were people from all different races. 

Anyways, this movie isnt meant to be a strict documentary.  It isnt meant to be the most accurate flying movie.  It is meant to honor a group of people that had everything stacked against them and still came out performing brilliantly.  Like I said, bomber losses dropped significantly when the 332nd and her sister squadrons began flying top cover.  They fought just to be allowed to fight for their country, no other group in our nation had to do that.  They more than got the job done.  And they deserve a little Hollywood liberty as far as I am concerned--every other group has gotten it.  Its funny how we dont see half this much complaining when it came to other aviation movies, but we see it here.  Top Gun has got to be the single absolute worst piece of hollywood fluff ever to be put on film.  But we dont see any heated debates about how a Tomcat couldnt get that close to an F5 while flying inverted or their vertical tails would hit....or anyone complaining about how Goose could not have impacted the canopy after ejecting because the canopy would not have remained hovering in place directly above the cockpit like that.  Some of you are reading way too far into this movie.  I will be going to see it myself, and I am not expecting some accurately-portrayed historical masterpiece because it isnt meant to be one.  It is to tell a story of MEN, not anything else.  And its one that needs to be told.  A whole generation is growing up in front of our eyes, nearly completely ignorant of our history.

I have not seen this movie yet, don’t know that I will (on the big screen anyway). The record of the black airmen speaks for itself and really needs no embellishment but, like most things from Hollywood, I’m sure there is some “hype” in this film.

I think that due to US racism the “Tuskegee Airmen” may have been the most experienced group of airmen (and don’t forget there were a lot of black soldiers supporting the pilots and they suffered the same discrimination) the US sent to war.

I hope the movie will generate some interest in all aspects of the history of WWII.

I do take issure, however, with the constant referral to the “Tuskegee Airmen” as America’s first Afro-American combat pilots. They were not.

I attended a ceremony in San Diego, CA, in the late ‘60’s honoring James Peck, a US Afro-American who flew in the Spanish Civil War. Some sources claim he was an “ace” though that is much in dispute. If he did shoot down 5 planes he would be the first black US ace, and I think there may have been other black US pilots with him. There was also a black US pilot, Eugene Bullard, who flew for the French in WWI. These men are the first US Afro-American combat pilots.

Just saw it. Overall, felt old-fashioned with a lot of war movie cliches, but solid for what it was. The shot of the P-51s coming up through the clouds on their first escort mission gave me goosebumps. But then so did the shot in Star Trek of the Enterprise coming up out of Saturn. Guess I have a weak spot for that kind of thing...

Just got back from watching Red Tails. Not impressed with the movie; leaning more towards disappointing. 

I loved the aircraft though.  

Reasoned

For those that have seen this, okay for an 11 & 13 yr old (language violence etc.)?

Yes, for your kids ages I would imagine they worse from classmates at school. The cussing is at a minimum, and I only counted one N bomb, which to me is suprising considering the subject of the movie. I've let my kids (currently 9 and 5) watch other war movies and I might take them to see this one. I went to a matinee to see red tails yesterday when the boys were at school, left the ticket stub out by mistake, my 9 yo was pissed that I didnt take him to see it. My boys are dying to see it.

I loved it... CGI's a bit overdone... yes there were inaccuracies...  but all in all a good flic.    My favorite quote " You turn red when your mad... green when your sick...  yellow when your scared... and have have the nerve to call us colored? "

Cadet Chuck

Younger kids might be upset by the violence- planes getting shot down, bloody pilots struggling to keep their planes in the air..........

 That's the stuff that grabs THIER attention!!! I fare amount of action and "A-Team" explosions will keep them interested enough, that they may get the story behind it too.

Aside from a couple "N" bombs (as you would expect).....I don't recall much in the way of swearing. It is definitely an enjoyable movie....for sure. I'll buy it on blue-ray, when it comes out, and watch it many times.

Planning on seeing it tonight with the wife.   I will enjoy it as a movie rather than expecting it be 100% accurate or even close. I'm sure its not.  I doubt there is any 'war' movie out that is all that close to accurate in every sense.   Those of us that are into military history, aircraft and equipment of those eras will always be able to pick out most of the inaccuracies much easier than the general public who will not be able to.   Such as my wife who barely knows what Pearl Harbor was about and couldn't find even the most obvious inaccuracy and think its 'as it was then'.  When she hears me start to complain about something in the movie, only then does she start thinking its not all that accurate.  I'm no expert by any means and not as knowledgeable as I'm sure some of you are, but I have read LOTS of books on WW II and know more about WW II than any one I personally know. 

IMO, Band of Brothers is the best one ever made.  Hollywood always screws up the facts especially historical facts as all they care about is making money period, just like the big corporations.

I have no doubt about the amount of cheese in the movie - that's Hollywood for ya.   But I'm sure it is a good movie for its purpose - to get a story out about an era of history and about a group of people involved in this story.   So many others I wish they would make too. 

If they did make movies like totally accurate, I could see where it could spark alot of outrage among some due to the treatment of people as it happened in real life.  Which nowadays some of us would be totally against.  (Different era / different feelings than today)

Just my .02 worth. 

Mike

Younger kids might be upset by the violence- planes getting shot down, bloody pilots struggling to keep their planes in the air, and some racial words.  It is rated Pg-13.  It's not excessive, but after all, it is a war movie.

I haven't seen it (going Sunday after Church), but I can't imagine that it's any worse then most of the video games they can play, or what they hear at school.

Reid

For those that have seen this, okay for an 11 & 13 yr old (language violence etc.)?

I'm hoping to see it today. Pretty darn excited about it, although the little snowstorm we are having might screw up my plans....

I saw it last night with the family. I enjoyed it as it is, a movie. I didn't go with high expectations of a multi million dollar documentary. As a Star Wars fan, I couldn't help to notice that some of the sound FX were dragged and dropped here too. Will buy on Blu-Ray went it comes out.

Hammer, I believe before the war was over ground kills were disqualified for the reasons you stated...a lot of guys had their scores dropped considerably and many lost ace status...it hit the 15th AF hard too...

Manstein's revenge

From WIKIPEDIA:

While flying with the 302nd Fighter Squadron, he flew 169 combat missions in the European Theatre of World War II, scoring four confirmed air combat victories:

• one Messerschmitt Bf 109 on 18 July 1944 over Memmingen, Germany
• three Bf 109s on 12 October 1944 over Lake Balaton, Hungary

He also destroyed six aircraft on the ground during a strafing mission in August 1944.

Ground kills were not counted when it came to "ace" status---only air-to-air kills. Looks like the steel trap is still strong...

Actually, Air-to-ground-kills DID "count" in the 8th AF, but not the 9th or 15th.. Therein lies the confusion for some folks..  The requirement that kills constituted an Ace was established at the war's end to keep it "fair" for other Army pilots (and air-gunners), and the US Navy and Marine pilots...

A lot of 8th AF fighter pilots had kill-markings stenciled on their aircraft that were actually air-to-ground kills, but at the same time many others did not, in order to keep from "offending" the Aces in the other fighter groups...

As for Lee Archer's status, Archer himself said that he never made five...  Also, the 332nd  "Never lost a bomber" record was debunked as well... They lost at least 25... Then it was given the tag, "Never lost a bomber to enemy fighters".. That too, was dispelled... They lost several bombers to enemy fighters...    All this was done as late as 2006 through official USAF missing aircrew reports, debriefs, and eyewitness accounts, as well as German records...

On 24 March 1945, during the war, the Chicago Defender said that no bomber escorted by the Tuskegee Airmen had ever been lost to enemy fire, under the headline: "332nd Flies Its 200th Mission Without Loss"; the article was based on information supplied by the 15th Air Force.....

  One mission report states that on 26 July 1944: "1 B-24 seen spiraling out of formation in T/A (target area) after attack by E/A (enemy aircraft). No chutes seen to open." A second report, dated 31 August 1944, praises group commander Colonel Davis by saying, he "so skillfully disposed his squadrons that in spite of the large number of enemy fighters, the bomber formation suffered only a few losses."  William Holloman, of Tuskegee Airmen Inc., a group of surviving Tuskegee pilots and their supporters, a Tuskegee airman who taught Black Studies at the University of Washington, and who chaired the Airmen's history committee, was reported by the Times as saying his review of records confirmed bombers had been lost.

Now, let's get real for a moment..  When it comes to kills, be they air-to-air or air-to-ground, it matters... A LOT... But perhaps only militarily.. Aircraft kills and losses were and still are VERY important numbers, and inflated claims lead to your side getting its collective azz handed to it when your squadron gets mauled by the 40 or 50 enemy fighters that were "shot down" two weeks ago...  The Germans found this out early on in the Battle of Britain when, according to their numbers (mostly from bomber guners), the RAF ran out of fighers in six weeks... Yet there they were...  Same thing happened with US bomber gunners.. Six gunners take a shot at one fighter, it bursts into flames, and every gunner assumes that it was HIS bullets that sent Fritz to Vahalla...  End result is not 1/6th of kill, but six Bf109s shot down... Bad juju...

I plan on seeing it (waiting for the four-dollar matinee though) and histirically accurate or not, plan on enjoying a couple hours, perhaps interspersed with a few groans...

 All in all, I guess the Hollywierd types get past that kind of stuff with the opening words of any movie like this one by showing the diclaimer, "This film is based on true events" or something similar, to include the all-encompassing, "This film was inspired by true events"...

Although, I'd really like to see Archer's last furball on THC's Dogfights...

bbrowniii

Manstein's revenge:

Doesn't sound like Lucas is as smart as he's made out to be seeing that there are plenty of movies with all black casts (or the main characters) that make money every year...

 

Actually, there aren't. Most movies with all black casts are low budget movies, often comedies or movies that pander African American stereotypes. "Red Tails" cost more to make than most movies with an all black cast will gross.

Consider this list:

http://www.blackclassicmovies.com/Movie_Database/all_black_cast.html

Not too many blockbusters in there, particularly recent ones.

i think it was a great movie the only thing that i found wrong( not infuriating rather funny really) was the lead bomber pilot... he had a way of getting his point across.

my point being most pilots with shorten sentances like for example a normal bomber pilot who just spotted his escorts would say something to the effect of "hey there little friends good to see ya" in the movie the bomber pilots exact words were " hey look over there those look like our escorts, but why do they have red tails, oh welll i just hoep they do their job correctly" maybe im over reacting but thats the only cheesey part in the whole movie that and the crazy outfits the bomber crews wore

otherwise great film

Hey, why all the criticism??  I saw it today and had a wonderful couple of hours of entertainment!  It was amazing how the special effects re-created the dogfights, how real all the aircraft looked, etc-

I don't shive a git if the PSP was not correctly aligned-  I really enjoyed the whole show!  Good fun for all!

Manstein's revenge

Doesn't sound like Lucas is as smart as he's made out to be seeing that there are plenty of movies with all black casts (or the main characters) that make money every year...

Actually, there aren't. Most movies with all black casts are low budget movies, often comedies or movies that pander African American stereotypes. "Red Tails" cost more to make than most movies with an all black cast will gross.

Consider this list:

http://www.blackclassicmovies.com/Movie_Database/all_black_cast.html

Not too many blockbusters in there, particularly recent ones.

bbrowniii

Manstein's revenge:

And there will remain millions of  stories that will never be told for whatever reason, and  they never see the light of day; the Red Tails are not one of those stories---they have been praised and celebrated for years...and will continue to enjoy that light...ace or no ace...

 

Again, I agree. Though, if you listen to that interview with Lucas that I posted, one thing that he points out is that he tried for over 20 years to get this movie made, but no studio would back him because they didn't think thay could make a movie with an all black cast profitable.

So, even despite the amazing accomplishments of the Tuskegee airmen, there are barriers in the way of their story enjoying 'that light'.

Well, I'm still going to see it, regardless.

'Glory' was a great movie too, yet the actual attack on Battery Wagner by the 54th Massachusetts was a complete failure and never should have been attempted - they were cut to pieces. It was the story, not the success, that made it appealing, and I anticipate the same with 'Red Tails'.