[WWI] Flyboys

Ray Boorman fokkereiv at gmail.com
Sat Apr 7 11:48:18 EDT 2007


Of Topic, but i think Batttle of Britain was a pretty good movie.
I was going to say Hollyweird should stay out of war movies, but then
you get movies like Saving Private Ryan. I think bad producers and
Directors should stay away from war movies.

I wonder what a Peter Jackson could do to a wwi movie???

Isnt there a movie being made in Germany about Richtofen??

Ray

On 4/7/07, Christopher Malany <cmm-saj at snet.net> wrote:
> Hello, Stephen:
>
> I've got to agree about many of the comments I've read
> on list about this film, including your own.  I'm of
> two minds about "Flyboys":
>
> 1) As a WWI aviation enthusiast, I welcome any film
> about the topic.  Decent replicas and
> computer-generated effects let me see something on
> screen that otherwise I can only imagine.  Also, my
> wife, who is usually completely indifferent to my
> hobbies, actually suggested we go see the theatrical
> release, enjoyed it, and asked me some good questions
> about WWI aviation.  She learned something from the
> movie, in spite of itself.
>
> 2) On the other hand, "Flyboys" is a good example of
> of the chronic problem of Hollywood and History,
> particularly with war films.  Hollywood has a genius
> for combining lavish production values,
> state-of-the-art CGI effects, hackneyed writing, and
> plot lines that ignore or distort basic historical
> facts.  Looking to "Flyboys," the basic scenario
> provided plenty of real drama:  Young men coming of
> age in the horror, stress, discomfort and tragic waste
> of the Great War, against the backdrop of evolving
> aerial warfare.  It's not necessary to pick apart the
> film, again - "Flyboys" trivialized virtually all of
> these themes.
>
> IMHO, the last competent aviation war film Hollywood
> made was "The Bridges of Toko-Ri."  "The Blue Max"
> tried, but every departure from the plot of Jack
> Hunter's novel weakened it.  My favorite WWI aviation
> movie remains "Ace's High," based on the play
> "Journey's End."  The flying and "special effects"
> sequences are clumsy and dated, but the film tries
> hard to evoke the realities and ethos of the Great War
> in the air.
>
> - Chris Malany
>
>
>
> --- Stephen Auslender <auslend at snet.net> wrote:
>
> > OK guys, my turn.
> > I read so many of your posts about the film "The
> > Flyboys" that I had to rent
> > it.
> > What did I think of it?
> > Well, It was pertty so-so, even kind of boring at
> > times until the last big
> > battle at the end of the film and then they ruined
> > the whole thing.
> > Talk about a hokey ending!
> > Its like they had an average writer who had just
> > finished a high school
> > course in creative writing do the film, using all
> > the tricks he learned
> > reading a book on making Hollywood type films. Then
> > they went Hollywood and
> > brought in a drunken old hack to butcher it at the
> > ending.
> > It was almost as bad as the last film make of Pearl
> > Harbor - but nothing
> > could be that bad!
> > It appears that Hollywood thinks special effects can
> > compensate for really
> > bad writing.
> > The last good WW1 aviation film I saw was "Wings"
> > and that was made how many
> > years ago? Seventy five?
> > I'm surprised the film lasted three days in Canada.
> > Pretty aeroplanes, though.
> > Stephen
> >
> >
> >
>
>


More information about the WWI mailing list