Posted on 11/10/2019 5:56:14 AM PST by US Navy Vet
Very will done and presented. Was kind of disappointed the they didn't cover the Sinking of the USS Yorktown very much. Didn't really demonize any side (US OR Japanese) just showed Military Men doing their jobs. All in all at great movie. Really showed what war is really like.
Thoughts..
I plan on going to see this movie today.
I played mine out in the other thread. But overall I had the same impression: better than the ‘76 Midway.
But, what the heck...
I saw the movie today. I might even see it again.
The original ‘76 movie had a much bigger impact on my psyche than this latest version did. It wasn’t until I was older that I understood and saw its flaws, but I still enjoy it more than Tora! Tora! Tora! and Bruckheimer’s Pearl Harbor.
The new movie was more entertaining and did what no war movie has done in a long time: tried to eschew/downplay the romance angles and just accept that the movie will only be seriously attended to by war-movie buffs, historical rivet-counters (that find fault with anything put in front of them, but enjoy it all the more for telling everyone about all the faults they found), and action-movie fans. It was fun to watch in a summer blockbuster sort of way.
This new movie tries to do a lot. It shoehorns Pearl Harbor, a raid on the Marshall Islands, The Doolittle Raid, tags the Battle of Coral Sea, briefly explains the part cryptology played in shaping the Midway battle, and finally the Big Show. The whole time, ships and planes—on both sides—blow up real good. The wives are appreciative of what their husbands are doing, are anxious about it, and look good saying it.
The Japanese are pretty much unchanged from the original movie: ruthless, rigid, disciplined, and doggedly following a fatally flawed battle plan. There is exploration that the Americans will be waiting for them, but it is ultimately dismissed as unrealistic and the plan is pitched with precision into the US Navy’s strike zone.
I think the original movie did a better job of explaining the battle; especially the indecision over whether to continue attacking Midway or (finally) attacking the American carrier group; and showing the loss of the Yorktown. I think it even lent subtitles to specific ships and air groups so you could follow their efforts. Thanks to an extended version that appeared in 80’s on television, the Battle of Coral Sea and the arc of USS Yorktown’s participation is more pronounced.
I noticed a few small things missing from the movie and these my only rivet-counter nits: I did not notice any F2 Buffalos, F4 Wildcats, and only 1 B-17. If anyone else saw them perform in the movie, please point it out to me.
Acting: I thought both were equally well/badly acted. If you like rock-ribbed, square-jawed, cigar-chewing, wise-cracking American heroes both have them in abundance. And get a good look, because they’re a vanishing breed in films these days. The new movie has two or three stunning wives and a nightclub singer to rest your eyes on, so that’s a plus over the earlier film. The Japanese, as mentioned, are on a par with the ‘76 feature.
Okay, that’s it. As I said, I enjoyed it. I was more entertained by it than the ‘76 Midway, but thought the original a better vehicle for telling the story of the battle itself. The new movie packs a lot of other extraneous historical events that seemed (to me) unnecessary but are interesting in showing the context of the battle.
From previews and trailers the CGI anti aircraft fire looked overdone.
This is the first movie I can recall where they mentioned Japan’s failure to destroy our oil reserves on Hawaii as being a major issue. Had they done so it would have given them an additional year to further expand and consolidate their control in the Pacific and directly threaten our West Coast and the Panama Canal before we could redeploy resources from the East Coast. The domino effect would have jeopardized our support for England and delayed a second front with the potential to force Stalin to make another deal with Hitler. So this failure was huge.
I just couldn’t stand the Heston version. Blechhh...
Dropping the bomb was the right thing to do. These people would have not surrendered. Back door negotiations were supposedlyt aking place so that the Japanese could give up and save face’, an Asian concept. When you look at what they did at Nanking, Bataan, and the comfort women it’s obvious they needed to beaten into the real world as Commodore Perry threatened to do 90 years earlier. They still see themselves as a victim of the war.
I completely agree. Heston’s son falling in love with a Japanese girl made it much worse.
I just couldn’t stand the Heston version. Blechhh...
I thought Dennis Quaid was great as Admiral “Bull” Halsey.
I thought Woody Harrelson was good as Admiral Chester Nimitz. To a lot of people older than Harrelson, he’ll always be Woody Boyd from Cheers or the psycho he played in Natural Born Killers (which I haven’t seen). Harrelson’s age was a match for Nimitz when he played the Admiral’s role: 57. His resemblance was also a good one.
I saw it the first night out and was wondering why I had not seen a Freeper comment on it.
I could not believe what I was seeing. A movie, from Hollywood, that was straight forward patriotic, celebrating courage and raw masculinity of the American Fighting MAN without somehow injecting a “woke” aspect to the film. What?!?! I kept expecting the other shoe to drop. It never did. Man, someone in Hollyweird is getting canned or banned over this one.
Overall I found the movie to be the kind of entertainment that I used to enjoy in movies. From a historical accuracy standpoint, it left some things out. I would have liked Thatch to have had a role in the movie since his fighter tactics were so innovative.
Having said that, it had to cram a lot of history into two hours (Pearl-Doolittle-Coral-Sea-Midway) and I understood why some of the detail had to make the cutting room floor. But what it did tell was very accurate. The casting was good (Harelson as Nimitz was weird. Half expected ole Chester to break out the bong). But still, Woody did a good job.
Did they replace the Japanese with Swedes? Is there a special Muslim division that depict the Marines?
You sure have a way with words - so well written. You may be an author? Enjoyed this.
No. But I’ve read that a chunk of Chinese money went into making this movie. That’s the down-side.
The up-side is that the Americans still win the battle!
Thanks much. Looking forward to seeing this.
BTW, you would like my book “Halsey’s Bluff.” It’s a counterfactual where the Japanese win the battle of Midway, seek to envelop Halsey’s carriers (yes, Halsey, not Spruance in my book) and all hell breaks loose.
That’s really interesting as it never gets mentioned. I had read the Japanese designed specific bombs for the oil tanks. Always wondered what type of collateral damage would have occurred when if those yanks went up.
They were supposed to take out the US Navy repair yard and sub pen but didn’t. Huge mistake.
Thanks for the review—so glad to see there is one movie out there not peddling sexual perversion or other lefty agendas.
Hollywood probably views this as a “fringe” movie for the “crazy right winger” demographic. ;-)
I’m going either today or monday. My wife even wants to see it. I’m glad to hear they don’t have a sub plot dealing with a love story with a Jap internee. The battle from what I gather turned on an hour window where the Japs were most vulnerable to an air attack. Except for that, it could have turned out differently. Was that portrayed in the movie??
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.