Gotta admit, I think he nailed the handling of the X-wings and Tie-Fighters far better than these UFO-51's ;)

I would be much happier with a true as possible story line. Unforchantly Hollywood is more interested in sales than the truth. Peal Harbor was visually stunning but totally spoilt by the plot, acting and direction. Liberty Bell is the best of the US flight film IMA.

I'm taking a guess that you mean "Memphis Belle" ?

LOL yes Memphis Belle. My bad:rolleyes:

You miss the point completely, of course, as to be expected in any terminally weak argument that invokes racism in it's first sentence (Godwin-lite?).

If it's not feasible to include it in a film in this day and age because of wrong-headed sensibilities then just don't include it. If hearing such words in a plummy British accent offends your delicate ears, don't put it in, no need to invite the revisionism squad to pretend it was something it wasn't. Not as if there's not enough drama elsewhere in the mission to cover, is it!

If it makes things any easier for you to understand, I'd be just as irritated by the invention of a beautiful American love interest, the casting of a woman as Wing Commander 'Guy' Gibson, or a P51 pathfinder piloted by Ben Affleck out in front of the Lancasters (or, logically, B17s). All just as fictitious as a dog named Digger.

It's simply unnecessary and cheapens the whole venture. The movie industry seems to view the public as simpletons (in this, and, to return vaguely to topic, the perceived need to portray WWII fighters as inertialess X-Wings because, presumably, real aircraft are just not sexy enough).

:rolleyes:

Fifty bucks says there will be a line something like:

"A pilot? Y'all got as much chance o becommin' pilots as one o' your kind as become president o the You-nighted Staites"

A couple of comments about the movie from Ed Shipley:

If you don't know who Ed Shipley is, he's the guy in `Double Trouble Two'.

http://www.aero-pix.com/qp09/p51/images/img_004.jpg

You would think that a guy who flies P-51s pretty regularly would be the most upset about the unrealistic flight model in this 2 minute trailer. Oddly, he does not appear to be very upset. Maybe you P-51 experts should go over to ASB and set him straight about how a P-51 really performs.

because the movie is for "ordinary" people and not for "nitpickers" like us here... ;-)

And as hes getting paid by them hes not exactly going to tell us there rubbish is he? :rolleyes:

Plus he never says the CGI flight model is accurate or looks realistic, he just says they have tried hard, which they prob have.

Seriously David, i dont for one second think you agree the clip where the P51 preforms a tie-fighter turn is accurate, so why are you trying to argue?

I'm sure there'll be a scene with one or two all American hero's in their P51's shooting down ten naughty Germans... ;)

Are you talking about the scene where the P-51 pulls out of a stall at the top of a loop and then shoots the wing off a 109262? I agree. That ruins the whole movie for me.

Of course not. I'm just wondering why he isn't pissed off that they ignored all his technical advice. :confused:

I think this is not the worst part. I suspect they went "lets put as much planes as possible into single frame, as that will look epic" way. :grin: Wing to wing escorts, planes flying inside enemy bomber formation, Me-262 flown like prop planes and so on.

David, nobody is saying the movie is ruined by the CGI, if you read my first post in this thread i said "If the film does justice to the story then ok il prob watch it and try to forget the P51 pulling a tie fighter turn and the rest of the awful CGI"

I can separate the story from the CGI, can you?

Who knows, the movie may still suck, or it might be great! but the CGI is to my mind not as good as it could be, and i think you agree.

You didn't bother to read this thread, did you? Go back and read post #3.

Ok most people are not. what about the rest of my post?

Too many people in here are.

I think the CGI could probably have been more realistic. But, they're not making a documentary. They're making a movie. Every movie ever produced has made some changes for dramatic effect.

I draw the line when I see things that the average person would realize are completely unrealistic. So far I haven't seen much of that. However, this is only a short clip out of 1 hour of flight scenes.

This is not the general public is it? this is a flight sim forum where we want historical realism and accurate bleedin everything.

so you should adjust what your argument accordingly?

The movie was not made for aviation geeks. it was made for the general public. Its the geeks who need to adjust their arguments accordingly.

?

I thought I was clear. What part of my post did you not understand?

David, do you really think that is possible, i mean...come on....give me a break. :grin:

You are right. It is too much to expect people to think before they trash something.

I found Ed Shipley's comments very interesting, thanks for posting.

Andthe 50s are porked ;)

One can only hope.

;)

Yes its been ages since I've thrown something at the TV! ;)

Not necessarily. I showed the same trailer to another fella who regularly flies a P-51 Mustang here in the UK and at the infamous scene of the P-51 tumbling backwards he sniggered and said "a bit overdramatic, maybe you could do that in a Pitts". It screams Hollywood, that's the problem.

It's actually appalling to know that they spent so much time on research, trying to get things right, and then come out with this cartoonish thingie, but then again it wouldn't be the first time: the Gladiator was supposedly followed by experts on the Roman empire, still the whole thing was riddled with errors. Did it ruin it for me? Hell no! Loved the movie! Still, I know it won't be remembered for its accuracy.

The issue is that whenever we see a pair of wings we think "man this is gotta be accurate, since it talks about a niche subject!", but it's hardly ever the case. On the other hand, the maniacal job done by Spielberg & Co. for Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers and The Pacific probably spoilt us..

Bottomline, it's a shame to see that such a director fell in the cliche' of "we need to make this ridiculously spectacular to attract the crowds"..

Light years away from Dark Blue World, done on a infinitesimal budget part of this CGI monster.

The pilots are black. So it will be one or two Americans who were really born in Kenya shooting down 10 naughty Germans. :rolleyes:

I think while film makers use CGI (understandable these days) we will always have planes doing what the director wants, rather than what planes can really do.
If you want realism,go to an airshow. If you want fantasy escapism, watch these sort of films.
The problem with us as an audience, most of us can tell when its not realistic.Most people who see this sort of film won't know, or care.

Spot on.

David do you fly online in COD yet?

There are but you'll never get it from a country that was an Ally during the war.

lol!

looks fun, i'll watch it. never seen a real massed bomber raid so how would i know if it's right or wrong. anyone else?

fyi airshows aren't real life aircombat either. saying the film is less realistic is laughable. it's like saying this keyboard is a rubbish cat.

And was he consulted on the making of the movie? If so how much of his input actually makes in it there? This is a dramatised movie remember ;) not an historical documentary.

thats one scene that i like to see again

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPN4m10BysI


also this one is the same tactic with the movie trailer one
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tuipn...eature=related

Enough to make him happy, apparently.

that sounds a bit like speculation ;)

Oh dear...!
it reminds me of the intro video of EAW, just with more polys!

Craig

lol, that 51 dreamed of being a Fokker Dr1 when it was small :D

Nailed it.

It's shocking that a "small fry" producer can make a film like Dark Blue World, apart from the romance in the film (it really wasn't that bad) the only thing that annoyed me was the use of buchons not emils... :( Americans should be banned from making ww2 aircraft movies, the last good film they made was Memphis Belle.

My god ILM is the top CGI firm on the planet, if they can't make something good enough for you then no one can..:rolleyes:

NICE ONE..I guess the armchair critics will say he's lying now..:rolleyes::confused:

Probably should have got someone with eyes to look at the visuals before releasing it to the public...

It's not the quality of the image, it's the way they move. CGI aircraft tend to move far, far too fast and change direction as though they weigh nothing. It immediately breaks the immersion and screams 'I've been made by a computer programmer, as opposed to being a solid thing'.

That's probably why they brought in a real P-51 driver as a consultant.

And clearly did not listen to him...

I guess they should have hired you.

No this guy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TFl8X4y9-94

Why is that guy better than this guy?

http://www.aero-pix.com/qp09/p51/images/img_015.jpg

http://www.aero-pix.com/oceana05/f86/images/img_012.jpg

http://www.aero-pix.com/qp11/f8/images/img_005.jpg

http://www.aero-pix.com/oceana07/p51...es/img_007.jpg

LOL are we back at school?

I just wanted to post some of my better photographs. I don't really care who consulted.

Tbf there is only one maneuver in the clip that is ridiculous... but I get a feeling there will be more.

Don't forget the ship killing 50 cals :)

lol i almost cried when i saw that

Gah, actually the only recent video I thought had "believeable" air combat scenes was actually The Red Baron. It had some wicked manouvers I think would be difficult to pull off, but it also featured way more realistic parts than hollywoodized... Noone on earth can turn a mustang like he did in that movie :p noone. I can't even do that with my 800gram RC electric mustang. No sir.

It wasn't a turn. He was stalling at the top of a loop.

yeah right... :rolleyes:

you might have heard of torque at some point in your life, well mustangs come with buckets of it: at the top of a loop a Mustang (christ, even a T-6!) will tend to torque itself out of the upside down position, that tumble on top is mere sci-fi, unless you chopped your throttle on the way up, but then just a moron would do it, because you'd never reach the top, and surely you'd have enough momentum to make a mess of that. The mustang is an energy fighter, not an Extra 300..

You should go over the airshowbuzz and let that Mustang driver know where he got it wrong.

I don't need that David, thank you. You see, you're so narrow minded you think that any pilot out there that flies a warbird is a god, well you're very, very wrong. Some of them are good, some simply aren't, some other just like boasting improbable stuff just because, like you and me, are human beings.

NO warbird operator would ever attempt such manoeuvre, simply because it's beyond the edge of flight envelope, and frankly stupid, especially if you're flying a machine worth a couple of million dollars, which has a very temperamental torque, a laminar flow wing and a stall with no warning.

As a pilot of moderate experience and that also flies on warbirds, I can tell you that, again in my humble opinion and the one of other warbird operators (who commented on the trailer we watched together), that tumble is really unlikely to happen on a Mustang, and even if it did, it's probably cos the pilot screwed up big time: it's not a manoeuvre, it's a mistake.

Then again, feel free to believe in your reality.

I don't think he's a god. I do think he knows more about what a 51 can do than do you.

Or maybe it's a really desperate pilot hanging it out on the edge because he's got a really big pair?

I do find it humorous that your expert agrees that it could possibly happen, but I'm the one in the alternative reality...

ok David, you're right :rolleyes:

No, the "big balls factor" is another silly badge that pilots like to decorate themselves with, but when they tell you these stories they know (and other pilots know) that they screwed up in the beginning, it's called human error, it happens and sometimes it claims the lives of pilots. In my airfield life I have met pilots of any kind: anybody can be a pilot, all you have to do is paying for flying lessons, being a good pilot is not something all can achieve.

I can hear a ww2 vet talking about this unlikely manoeuvre and be respectfuk to the man, smiling and listening for another hour, but when a modern warbird operator talks about the possibility of this kinda manoeuvre, my answer normally is "why don't you go up there and show us?", to which very few follow through. And believe me, sometimes it happened that the pilot went up there and showed us something that let us with our jaws scraping the hangar floor, but this is definitely a load of baloney.

My experts don't agree, finding it really unlikely is a sarcastic expression, I'm sure you heard of sarcasm. I am motivating the reasons why that is unlikely to happen, you at the contrary, are just opening your big mouth and blurting out nonsense, mainly intended to provoke a reaction of other members who, unlike you, also do contribute fruitfully to this space.

Actually, I haven't said anything. I have no idea whether it could happen, and neither do you.

WOw seriously guys, start your own PM(s) fight ;)

You guys always go at eachother, like two dungbeetles fighting over some dung :P


Oh and don't drag me into this :P

On topic, either way if it were a stall or whatever it's too hollywood. That means it happens too fast, at too short distance. It's like a car would do a U-turn with the handbrake... Plane looses speed too fast, turns too fast, and fires without airspeed even. He would not be able to keep his nose up with that low airspeed so IRL it would have to be done in a vertical manner... Only did this once in IL-2, in a P-38 ;) Got a zero after doing a stall-turn coming straight at him again. I totally won that day :D

Any news on the new Dambusters film?
Obviously we won't mention the dog...

I surely have more than an idea on whether this could happen or not, while you, being aeronautically ignorant, don't.

I tried to PM David, but his attitude is the same than on the forum, he just loves doing it. I don't even know why I bother, all I can hope for is that he manages to get himself banned soon.

As for the topic, yes well, a P-38, having two engines with propellers rotating in opposite directions, is more likely to contrast torque in such a situation and tumble backwards. Still, it would be a hair raising, edge of the envelope, "how the hell did I get myself into this?!" situation.

Wake me when you find an expert who can give you a definitive "no". Right now your expert appears to think it's possible.

Where did u read this exactly? :confused:

If your boy doesn't think it's possible, why even mention how it could have happened?

It's my fault, he crawled up my leg, then into my rectum, and I excreted him back out, and now he is right back here posting his "contributions".

I should have flushed faster.

David Hayward likes to get into arguments with everybody in this forum. I still remember glancing through the threads we had about the landscape color, and he was defending his position single-handedly against everybody else by scrutinizing every single post and look for every possible minute detail he could attack on. hahahah a true forum "hero'. You have my admiration, good sir. :grin:

My favorite part of that argument was when someone posted a modded CoD image with the trees just slightly darker. People were falling over themselves to post how great it looked. The trees were slightly darker and suddenly the landscape went from "cartoon" to "great". It was funny as hell.

BTW, I wasn't alone, and I didn't scrutinize every post. It wasn't necessary. All you need to do is post a WoPuke screenshot and you win a color argument every time.

haha also remember that one, it was a perfect 'introduce yourself'. TBH i'm starting to doubt if this guy actually even has the game or is into sims...

I often wonder the same thing about the people who relentlessly whine about this game.

funny as hell uh?...

http://img220.imageshack.us/img220/4...al07090701.jpg

http://img828.imageshack.us/img828/3...90701light.jpg

anyone can tell any difference? it's just 10% lighten referring to the real thing, just on trees; no global filter or anything, i PS it myself.

David, ever heard about something called 'details'? no you don't seem to... how can you get along without that? you can't. now how's that for some fun?:rolleyes:

lol i love it how i promptly diverted the course of this thread, once i saw that the material related to the red tails and the aerodynamics behind it are running low and the arguments are getting dry.
lololololololol
:grin::grin::grin::grin::grin:

let's just go with it and see where it takes us.

lol we're getting back to square one

yay, I've missed these forums. :rolleyes:

Looks fine to me, god forbid anyone makes a movie about anything WWII related. The film releases in Jan 2012, and I can say for certain that most of those Special FX shots aren't final, the sound design has been done by the movie trailer people with stock SFX, so those will also change in the final mix.
For action and pace, some of the scenes may have been sped up slightly time wise so they could fit the shot into the rhythm of the trailer making the FM look a little strange.

A 2 hour movie will never fully capture 100% of the details of WWII, that should be assumed first off. Band of Brothers did a pretty good job telling 0.0001% of Easy company of the 101st, and that was a 10 hour mini series.

My final thought on the matter is; this film could inspire those who have no idea who the "Red Tails" are to pick up a book and read all about them. Think of it as a catalyst agent to a long road to becoming a "know it all" negatron like some people.

My favourite part us how they have now gone to great lengths to implement the colours you mock in your post lmao

Allready seen a "historical" reconstitution while an US P-51 veteran pilote told to the interviewer that he shot down a Me 262 like that. Propaganda and Whisky would made 20 times US Aces per week ;)

sssh, make sure David doesn't hear you saying that, he reckons that if a pilot says it can be done, then it actually can ;)

As the Project isn't mentioned in the ImdB.com anymore, ist pretty sure that the Dambusters remake has been cancelled.

I didn't mock the colors, I mocked the people who thought it was a HUGE improvement. It was a minor improvement.

lol even for a troll you're a bad one. i've seen smart trolls, funny trolls, polite trolls, but for that you would need at least some little wit. that you clearly don't have. you just have the disjointed dyslexic diarrhea you fart every now and then. this is how you get your kicks, which is pathetic.

because most folks doesnt care about historical accuracy and aviation as we do....nor they are so deep into the subject (most of my friends couldnt tell the difference between bf109 and FW190)...then again, movie is for entertainment...documentaries are about history

agree

That's correct, but there have been Movies in the past, which had entertainment and a historical base, not every WW1 or WW2 movie was crap like Pearl Harbor or U-571 or the Red Baron.

They do care about accuracy. Most people watching historical movie want it to be historical, however they lack the knowledge for seeing inaccuracies. Historical movie needs to be accurate and have 'wow' moments. Unfortunately, it is way easier to do 'wow' without sticking to accuracy, so industry often forgets about it, because not many will notice that anyway.

Entertainment value is good thing, but if unreal things are pressed as real too hard, you end up with people thinking that every car explodes on crash ;-)

Having watched the trailer through a few times, I think this movie will be just more flag waving war-porn.

It was a trailer, trailers are never proper representations of a final film. Besides, they don't call them the "greatest generation" for nothing, so why not allow it some flag waving "war porn" wiggle room :cool:.

You watch Black Hawk Down or Band of Brothers, you could say the same thing (flag waving war porn). Ultimately it's about people and the unimaginable circumstances they have to face). Chalk up the fact the racial card is a MASSIVE factor in this film. It's a great story "based on true events".

I am curious to know how so many can bad mouth an effort to bring WWII to the mainstream simply watching a 2.5 minute trailer. If the film was released and they called P51's "Kittyhawks" then, well, you'd have an argument. Not from an "action" oriented movie trailer.

I had read that Lucas started working toward this movie way back in the early 80's, if that is true I would have to assume this was an important project for him. With that in mind I will try to keep an open mind going into the theater to see this movie. My hope is that the somewhat unrealistic feel present in the trailer flight scenes was caused by the editing, I got the impression that spots may have been sped up to make the action seem more hectic. At this point I am thrilled to get any WW2 aviation movie, though I am glad that the one where Tom Cruise was going to play an American pilot that saved the British in his remake of the Battle of Britain was cancelled...that could have started a new war! LOL.

this movie will be also used as propaganda for a certain racial group to join the Army..

Btw I would have expected Steven Spielberg to work on this, he was the one with the dad flying in B-25s in the Pacific, and one of his very first amateur movies he made when he was a child was done at his dad's base after the war.

Just to say i am not sure if this has been mentioned in this thread yet or not but that scene some of you are complaining about where the Mustang loops onto the 262 actually happend.

The pilot was Roscoe Brown from the flight which later earned the title The Longest Escort of The War in which the B-17s the flight was covering came under attack from 262's.
Brown developed his own version of the Split S in which instead of rolling straight down he would first climb to increase his speed in the dive in order to catch 262, at point of stalling he would either flip the plane or pitch down to start the dive.

He successfully shot down this 262.

Here is the story from Discoverys "Dogfights" told by the actual pilot. Thankfully the part of the story we need is right at the beginning of this video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v1vRcOZdWR8&NR=1

Cheers

S!
Mini

nope, that's something completely different.

In the movie you see this plane at the brink of stall, tumbling backwards and shooting as it happens, which kinda defies a couple of laws of physics.