Let me see, Highly romanticised and over-sentamentalised gush? Check.

Crappy CGI? Check.

Unimaginative, self indulgent production values? Check.

Blatant plagiarism poorly disguised by a gossamer thin plot? Check.

Yep, it's another big budget American war film.

Is it really necessary to go out of your way to start attacking other people ad hominem simply because they have a different opinion? That's what destroys so many threads on so many forums. I'm surprised at this coming from a Senior Member of the forum.

Because, as non Hollywood movie and as low budget one they use scenes from 1969 Battle of Britain movie, and in 1969 dont left too much real 109 to make movies, and porked CGI (like UFO P-51 from THC or Hollyood) are not standart in these times. ;)

The inverted footage from bf109 cockpit is strange option from makers - the same scene, but not inverted is show in BoB movie.

Despite this DBW is a very good movie.

Sokol1

I agree it will hurt. I'm not hoping that it will flop, I'm just predicting that it will.

We can only hope and pray that Peter Jackson, an aviation enthusiast himself, will actually produce his supposed re-make of "Dambusters", which project seems right now to be dead in the water...

thats because todays geeks aren't into aircraft any more, it's all about fantasy elves or Belgian cartoon characters nowadays.

It's too bad. There are so many out of this world stories I'm sure many of us know in here that happened in WWII. What about those English special forces guys that went in and disabled the Tirpitz with those mines. That was nuts. If we could remake some of the old classics....WELL!....they would be great with the effects we have now. I can just see the Bismark and the Hood now crashing threw the North Atlantic. FIRE!!!....SHOOT!!! :)

This movie targets the majority of the consumers, the ppl who expect entertainment, nothing else. They don't want to know any details.
The fact the Americans(they had the p51, remember) won is all the want - and need to know.
2 hrs full of high quality boom, drama(+potentially sex) and as many dead nazis you can potentially put in, et voilà; blockbusters.

Was Indiana Jones historically correct? No, but it worked.
What about U571? Again, it was all BS once more, yet it did ok.

".....there really is no reason for those senseless falsifications, except a really dumb/careless audience is expected."

Which hits right on the truth, in my view. A box-office hit won't depend on a few thousand self-opinionated flight-simmers and their picky take on 'realism' or 'integrity' or any other long words. And, anyway, half of us will probably see it so that we can gripe about it afterwards.

But why on earth would the general public want to see it? Sure it's a great story of success in the face of adversity and prejudice, but that story is an old one. Set it against the backdrop of aircraft in WW2 and the general public isn't interested. I bet that's why it is a cheap looking film.

Hood

They don't just have a different opinion, they try to force on the rest of the ppl.
In movies, tires even squeal on dust roads, that's wrong - so what?
Shoot a car tank and it explodes - so unrealistic!
Shoot a tire and the whole car drops 20inches, ouch.
...but it's fun, and sometimes even adds to the drama :)
It entertainment, simple as that. If I want to learn something the last place i would go to is the cinema. There TV channels like History Channnel and NG, made for exactly that.

Quote:

I'm surprised at this coming from a Senior Member of the forum.

Huh? As sorry as I am, but I dont consider myself part of this "community".
I have certain hobbies, interests - some ppl here seem to have the same, that makes it a good place to share infos and ask questions - but it doesn't turen those ppl into friends.
BTW: The usage of "ad hominem in this context is wrong, as I am basically attacking the majority of the readers.