Midway (2019) (1 Viewer)

[Colin Jacobson]

I'm not seeing any Pearl Harbor type romance in the Midway trailers

To be clear, my comparisons between the 2 weren't because of romantic elements - more just a feel that "Midway" would emphasize big action over story...

 

[YANG]

Current generation viewers don't have that kind of patience to sit their butts to go through elaborate portrayal of the whole event unlike those cinema goers back more than 3,40yrs ago... Whose more willing to get their butts warmed by the poor seats to go thru more than 3hrs long A Bridge too Far, Battle of the Bulge as well as Patton. Even slightly modern slow ones like Thin Red Line feels a little draggy to some, in comparison to " well action timed " Saving Private Ryan.

 

[Tino]

event unlike those cinema goers back more than 3,40yrs ago

Wow. Didn’t know we had movie theaters over three hundred years ago. Sound must’ve sucked.

 

[MTrotter]

I think a lot of people worry that modern identity politics will be sent back in time to create jarring anachronisms (*).

It's been a while since I've seen the Heston version, so I'll have to paraphrase, but there a scene where a character is raging about the internment of Japanese-Americans and asks how come Italian-Americans are being treated the same.

Heston responds that Italians didn't do Pearl Harbour.

It's a great line, but it's not hard to imagine that being removed at scripting stages these days, with a note from one of the producers calling it "problematic".

(*) And yes, obviously anachronisms in historical films are as old as Hollywood, but sometimes the reasoning is understandable (e.g. people speaking English in Ben Hur). However, pandering/virtue-signalling to university hot-heads isn't.

Yes, you nailed what I was concerned about.

 

[YANG]

Wow. Didn’t know we had movie theaters over three hundred years ago. Sound must’ve sucked.

ooopz... wrong punctuation there!

 

[Colin Jacobson]

Current generation viewers don't have that kind of patience to sit their butts to go through elaborate portrayal of the whole event unlike those cinema goers back more than 3,40yrs ago... Whose more willing to get their butts warmed by the poor seats to go thru more than 3hrs long A Bridge too Far, Battle of the Bulge as well as Patton. Even slightly modern slow ones like Thin Red Line feels a little draggy to some, in comparison to " well action timed " Saving Private Ryan.

Yes, it's true that modern audiences won't sit through long movies.

That's why the 3-hour "Endgame" flopped...

 

[sleroi]

"Based on incredible real events" then two cuts later a shot of a plane flying down main street firing.

I guess it could have happened, but it looks so movie-ish.

Also, Some of the shots of civilians looking up at enemy planes flying overhead are very reminiscent of Bay's Pearl Harbor.

 

[DFurr]

After watching the trailers this morning my interest has dissolved somewhat. Just too much CGI.

 

[YANG]

this is a R.E. film，not R.S. film.
it's Roland “Effectz” Emmerich.
not Ridley “Stunt-ing” Scott.

 

[Ross Gowland]

Current generation viewers don't have that kind of patience to sit their butts to go through elaborate portrayal of the whole event unlike those cinema goers back more than 3,40yrs ago... Whose more willing to get their butts warmed by the poor seats to go thru more than 3hrs long A Bridge too Far, Battle of the Bulge as well as Patton. Even slightly modern slow ones like Thin Red Line feels a little draggy to some, in comparison to " well action timed " Saving Private Ryan.

Here in the UK, cinema seats are more comfortable than they were a few decades ago. Imagine it’s the same in most countries.

And in a world where IT 2 is the best part of three hours, then it seems modern audiences are quite happy with long films.

In fact, many of the most popular films of the past two decades seem to be epic length. Titanic, Endgame, Infinity War, Avatar...

 

[Tino]

this is a R.E. film，not R.S. film.
it's Roland “Effectz” Emmerich.
not Ridley “Stunt-ing” Scott.

Yeah. And.......?

 

[Worth]

this is a R.E. film，not R.S. film.
it's Roland “Effectz” Emmerich.
not Ridley “Stunt-ing” Scott.

Independence Day had a very good balance between CG and practical effects.

 

[Worth]

Yes, it's true that modern audiences won't sit through long movies.

That's why the 3-hour "Endgame" flopped...

If anything, movies today are over-long and bloated. The only movie in the top-ten highest grossing films of all time that's under two hours is The Lion King remake, and that's just two minutes shy of two hours.

 

[YANG]

just walked out from the first day screening of MIDWAY. my advice？
1. don't watch the original MIDWAY in whatever format U possess，let this remake renew ur idea what or how the MIDWAY battle happened to be.
2. buy a slightly bigger serving of popcorn as u'll munching lots of it during the numbers of ID4~ish dog fights which in comparison could put Battle of Britain and Tora Tora Tora ... to sleep.

 

[Robert Crawford]

Yeah, I'm not keen about this film which is why it might be an A-Lister movie for me. If not then I'll probably skip it altogether and watch it on cable.

 

[Tino]

I’m definitely in. Dolby Cinema!

 

[benbess]

Liked it! And I just listened to a long audio book about Midway, as well as a couple of others on the Pacific War, and this is surprisingly accurate. "B+"

 

[Edwin-S]

It's a WWII flick. I'm a sucker for those. I know this film is a Bruckheimer production, so I'm not expecting anything much better than "Pearl Harbor" level trash, but I'll still go to see this before it leaves the theatre.

 

[benbess]

It's a big-budget and highly accurate "docudrama" if that makes sense. Pretty much everything in this movie actually happened.

(It doesn't add a made-up soap opera a la Pearl Harbor.)

 

[YANG]

hmmm... historically correct huh...
http://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/midway/
...i guess i gotta study more history records on that event ever since “i'm afraid we had awaken the sleeping giant” @ the wrong place？