[Captain Eddie]

I kinda agree with Migmauler, but I can also not worry about it too much. As far as history, though, it generally stinks. Off the top of my head, two issues: When the star of the show sees the news reels back in the States, he is looking at what appear to be Spad 13's, and I thought I saw Eddie Rickenbacker, which would place the time from late 1918, which was AFTER the Lafayette Escadrille.

Second, the French Captain introduces the Nieuport 17 as the latest aircraft. It came out in 1916 (and yes, the pilots of the Lafayette DID fly them), but the Fokker Dr 1 came out late 1917, as the Nieuport 17 was being withdrawn from active combat. They may have met each other, but probably in small numbers, and not for long

[STARMAN 352ND]

The Planes look magnificent, but could have been done better. The use of German Dr1's (the Fokker Triplanes) as the only German fighter is understandable as distinguishing friend from foe. However, making all of the Dr1's solid red is extremely annoying. While it is up to some discussion if the Red Baron's Dr1 was all red or mostly red, it does not mean that all Dr1's were red, especially all red. The Dr1's came from the Fokker factory usually in an olive drab paint scheme with a light blue underside. The film makers could have added a red scheme to the planes but left a portion olive drab and blue underside, it still would have made the Germans distinctive without being MVR.
The dogfights are fun to watch and are fairly exciting, however the planes fly highly unrealistically at times. Overall the CGI is excellent but at times it is noticeable as CGI. The planes that explode are such a Hollywood staple are unrealistic and the Gotha bomber and the Zeppelin isn't bad.
Having said that: It's riddled with factual and historical errors... All of which were avoidable had the writers/director cared to pay attention. It probably would have cost nothing to do it right. Nonexistent aircraft in 1916 such as the Fokker Triplanes would of been much better if they had used a Fokker Eindecker EIII or Albatros for the German side.
But if you like the dogfights scenes as much as i do and don't care about History too much watch it.... after all thats called entertainment.
JP

[mustangdriver]

I am going to have to go with you guys on the history side of it, as I am just learning about WWI aviation. I still liked the movie though.

[HotTrap429]

MigMauler is correct about the historical inaccuracies. But if I wanted a "historically accurate" story about WWI - which I really don't give a c_ _ p about BTW, I'd read a book. For a couple of hours, I could just forget about life's problems and be entertained. I think that's the basic reason I watch movies for in the first place. So if it's fun - let it be!

[aeroeng]

I saw the previews on TV and didn't plan to see it at the movies or on DVD. My dad got the DVD and dropped it off at my house to watch. I went ahead and watched it and thought it was actually a pretty cool movie.

[PappyB]

Originally Posted by HotTrap429

MigMauler is correct about the historical inaccuracies. But if I wanted a "historically accurate" story about WWI - which I really don't give a c_ _ p about BTW, I'd read a book. For a couple of hours, I could just forget about life's problems and be entertained. I think that's the basic reason I watch movies for in the first place. So if it's fun - let it be!

Hey, I hear that too -- I mean we could get destroy the fun of Star Wars by dissecting it as well... It's just that for me, the movie as pure "entertainment" wasn't all that "fun" -- the silly love story and poor acting (repeating Pearl Harbor's big gaff IMHO, thought I liked Pearl more) on both sides brought it down. If it was all airplanes and stuff blowing up "real good" I'd probably liked it more.... Different strokes.

[timbo]

Originally Posted by PappyB

Hey, I hear that too -- I mean we could get destroy the fun of Star Wars by dissecting it as well... It's just that for me, the movie as pure "entertainment" wasn't all that "fun" -- the silly love story and poor acting (repeating Pearl Harbor's big gaff IMHO, thought I liked Pearl more) on both sides brought it down. If it was all airplanes and stuff blowing up "real good" I'd probably liked it more.... Different strokes.

Ok lets put it this way - If they remade the Battle of Britain and gave the Germans bright red FW190's what would you say then

It's just as easy for the film makers to get it right as it is to get it wrong. If they claim to base it on fact then they should at least pay lip service to getting it right.

This is just typical Hollywood c**p, dumbing down to the lowest common denominator - ie lets make all the Germans fly red planes so no one gets confused.

[HotTrap429]

Originally Posted by timbo

Ok lets put it this way - If they remade the Battle of Britain and gave the Germans bright red FW190's what would you say then

Remember TopGun timbo? Totally bogus story line, stupid love story, F5s as "Mig 28s" that were painted black - talk about "dummying down" for the lowest denominator, and basically a totally inaccurate movie. But man, we had F-14s flying all over the screen and it was so cool! I watched that movie atleast 15 times. It was fun and I enjoyed it. Every historical movie has something lame in it and is inaccurate in some way or another. Some people are harder to please than others. As Gene Hackman as Lex Luther said in the original Superman movie, "Some people can read War and Peace and think its a simple story while others can unlock the secrets of the universe while reading a bubble gum wrapper." To each his own. For me, I really didn't care if the Fokker were the wrong version or even the wrong color. WWI is not my thing. As to Red Fw190s during a Battle of Britian movie (now that would really be a screw up), I'd watch it if it looked like a good movie.

[timbo]

Originally Posted by HotTrap429

Remember TopGun timbo? Totally bogus story line, stupid love story, F5s as "Mig 28s" that were painted black - talk about "dummying down" for the lowest denominator, and basically a totally inaccurate movie. But man, we had F-14s flying all over the screen and it was so cool! I watched that movie atleast 15 times. It was fun and I enjoyed it. Every historical movie has something lame in it and is inaccurate in some way or another. Some people are harder to please than others. As Gene Hackman as Lex Luther said in the original Superman movie, "Some people can read War and Peace and think its a simple story while others can unlock the secrets of the universe while reading a bubble gum wrapper." To each his own. For me, I really didn't care if the Fokker were the wrong version or even the wrong color. WWI is not my thing. As to Red Fw190s during a Battle of Britian movie (now that would really be a screw up), I'd watch it if it looked like a good movie.

Your right, but some are just more lame than others.

The thing that really annoys me about all this is that with the advances in CGI the makers really have no excuses to get it wrong - Esp with the money they spend on making this crap. When top gun was made there was no hope in hell of getting a Mig 28 (Whatever that was), now they can give you any Soviet plane in an virtual environment detailed down to the nth degree. Yep it won't make the lame love sub plot any better, but at least it's one less stone that can be thrown.

All it just takes is a little care and attention. Something Hollywood filmmakers are for the most part sadly lacking

[DCRanger]

It wasn't all CGI. Here's one of the stars at Breighton in July last year.



I haven't seen the film yet but I was under the impression that this one was also in the film although from the "all red" comments I wonder?