Flyboys

[Ross[_1_]]

I have just returned from seeing this movie. One word - OUTSTANDING!

Go see it.
--
Regards,

Ross
C-172F 180 hp
KSWI

[Jay Honeck]

> I have just returned from seeing this movie. One word - OUTSTANDING!
>
> Go see it.

Agree 100%. We just got back from it, too, and I was glad to see a
good crowd in the theater, and a good buzz about the movie after the
show.

It's very well done, and the flying sequences are fantastic.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dave Stadt]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>> I have just returned from seeing this movie. One word - OUTSTANDING!
>>
>> Go see it.
>
> Agree 100%. We just got back from it, too, and I was glad to see a
> good crowd in the theater, and a good buzz about the movie after the
> show.
>
> It's very well done, and the flying sequences are fantastic.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"


Good but far from realistic. Not one rotary engine in the bunch and what
were those goofey back fires every time they pulled an engine through.
Also, the engine sounds weren't even close to correct.

[C. Massey]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> ps.com...
>>> I have just returned from seeing this movie. One word - OUTSTANDING!
>>>
>>> Go see it.
>>
>> Agree 100%. We just got back from it, too, and I was glad to see a
>> good crowd in the theater, and a good buzz about the movie after the
>> show.
>>
>> It's very well done, and the flying sequences are fantastic.
>> --
>> Jay Honeck
>> Iowa City, IA
>> Pathfinder N56993
>> www.AlexisParkInn.com
>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
> Good but far from realistic. Not one rotary engine in the bunch and what
> were those goofey back fires every time they pulled an engine through.
> Also, the engine sounds weren't even close to correct.
>
>


It's a moooovie...




---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0638-1, 09/22/2006
Tested on: 9/22/2006 11:23:26 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2006 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

[Jay Honeck]

> Good but far from realistic. Not one rotary engine in the bunch and what
> were those goofey back fires every time they pulled an engine through.
> Also, the engine sounds weren't even close to correct.

True, the backfires were overdone, and the Fokker triplane in a dive
sounded suspiciously like a P-47 Thunderbolt. And, as long as we're
picking nits, landing at night or in no-man's land was a bit over the
top, too.

But, hey -- it was a movie about AVIATION, and it was 95% well done.
Lot's of non-flying folks were in the crowd, and some of them will be
enamored enough with the beauty of this movie and flight in general to
head to their FBO tomorrow.

THAT can only be good.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dave Stadt]

"C. Massey" > wrote in message
t...
>
> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>> ps.com...
>>>> I have just returned from seeing this movie. One word - OUTSTANDING!
>>>>
>>>> Go see it.
>>>
>>> Agree 100%. We just got back from it, too, and I was glad to see a
>>> good crowd in the theater, and a good buzz about the movie after the
>>> show.
>>>
>>> It's very well done, and the flying sequences are fantastic.
>>> --
>>> Jay Honeck
>>> Iowa City, IA
>>> Pathfinder N56993
>>> www.AlexisParkInn.com
>>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>>
>>
>> Good but far from realistic. Not one rotary engine in the bunch and what
>> were those goofey back fires every time they pulled an engine through.
>> Also, the engine sounds weren't even close to correct.
>>
>>
>
>
> It's a moooovie...

.........from Hollywood. Shouldn't expect much I guess. Lotsa hype about
realism but they blew the basics.

[[email protected]]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>> But, hey -- it was a movie about AVIATION, and it was 95% well done.
> Lot's of non-flying folks were in the crowd, and some of them will be
> enamored enough with the beauty of this movie and flight in general to
> head to their FBO tomorrow.
>
Where the planes that they can fly are only slightly more modern that
the ones in the movie... :)

[tony roberts[_1_]]

True - but it wasn't made for pilots -
And the general public will love it -
Which can only be good for GA.
So I'm cautiously impressed !

Tony
--

Tony Roberts
PP-ASEL
VFR OTT
Night
Cessna 172H C-GICE

[Jay Honeck]

> True - but it wasn't made for pilots -
> And the general public will love it -
> Which can only be good for GA.
> So I'm cautiously impressed !

Me, too. Incidentally, over on the "military channel"
(rec.aviation.military) some nitwit troll posted that "Flyboys" was
being stupidly Politically Correct for portraying a black man in the
role of fighter pilot, long before blacks were allowed to such things.

Out of that ignorance came information about Eugene Ballard, a black
pilot who was (apparently) the model for the black character in
Flyboys. See more about this fascinating man here:

http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/apjinternational/apj-s/2005/3tri05/chivaletteeng.html


Imagine -- this guy fought for France in many of the most titanic land
battles of World War I, and then went on to become a fighter pilot
after being injured too badly to fight in the infantry. THAT is
heroism.

I'm always amazed at what can be learned on these newsgroups -- even,
occasionally, thanks to trolls.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Matt Whiting]

Dave Stadt wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
> ps.com...
>
>>>I have just returned from seeing this movie. One word - OUTSTANDING!
>>>
>>>Go see it.
>>
>>Agree 100%. We just got back from it, too, and I was glad to see a
>>good crowd in the theater, and a good buzz about the movie after the
>>show.
>>
>>It's very well done, and the flying sequences are fantastic.
>>--
>>Jay Honeck
>>Iowa City, IA
>>Pathfinder N56993
>>www.AlexisParkInn.com
>>"Your Aviation Destination"
>
>
>
> Good but far from realistic. Not one rotary engine in the bunch and what
> were those goofey back fires every time they pulled an engine through.
> Also, the engine sounds weren't even close to correct.

Ah, the life of the party. And the people weren't the real people from
that time either. And...

Matt

[Jim Logajan]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:
> And, as long as we're
> picking nits, landing at night or in no-man's land was a bit over the
> top, too.

Such an incident really appears to have taken place, according to the
movie's FAQ, http://www.mgm.com/flyboys/pdf/real_vs_reel.pdf :

"-Could a pilot actually land and take off at night from behind enemy
lines?

From AVIATION CENTURY: “....Warneford recovered control of his
aircraft and completed a forced landing in the dark behind enemy lines.
After being on the ground for 35 minutes and repairing a broken fuel line
with a piece of a cigarette holder, he got airborne again and made his way
back to base.” Night landings – forced or intentional – were more
survivable than might be imagined."

[Martin Hotze[_1_]]

On 23 Sep 2006 05:52:26 -0700, Jay Honeck wrote:

>Imagine -- this guy fought for France in many of the most titanic land
>battles of World War I, and then went on to become a fighter pilot
>after being injured too badly to fight in the infantry. THAT is
>heroism.

or idiocy.

#m
--
Arabic T-shirt sparks airport row
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5297822.stm>

I Am Not A Terrorist <http://itsnotallbad.com/iamnotaterrorist/>

[Jim Logajan]

Martin Hotze > wrote:
> On 23 Sep 2006 05:52:26 -0700, Jay Honeck wrote:
>
>>Imagine -- this guy fought for France in many of the most titanic land
>>battles of World War I, and then went on to become a fighter pilot
>>after being injured too badly to fight in the infantry. THAT is
>>heroism.
>
> or idiocy.

That insult also would apply to the white boys (rich and poor).

[Martin Hotze[_1_]]

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 17:14:53 -0000, Jim Logajan wrote:

>That insult also would apply to the white boys (rich and poor).

true. but each to his own.

#m
--
Arabic T-shirt sparks airport row
<http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/5297822.stm>

I Am Not A Terrorist <http://itsnotallbad.com/iamnotaterrorist/>

[.Blueskies.]

"Jim Logajan" > wrote in message ...
: "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
: > And, as long as we're
: > picking nits, landing at night or in no-man's land was a bit over the
: > top, too.
:
: Such an incident really appears to have taken place, according to the
: movie's FAQ, http://www.mgm.com/flyboys/pdf/real_vs_reel.pdf :
:
: "-Could a pilot actually land and take off at night from behind enemy
: lines?
:
: From AVIATION CENTURY: "....Warneford recovered control of his
: aircraft and completed a forced landing in the dark behind enemy lines.
: After being on the ground for 35 minutes and repairing a broken fuel line
: with a piece of a cigarette holder, he got airborne again and made his way
: back to base." Night landings - forced or intentional - were more
: survivable than might be imagined."



Yes, like most of the movie, it is based on true stories...

http://www.wwiaviation.com/aces/laffeyette.shtml

http://www.amazon.com/Winged-Victory-V-Yeates/dp/1904010652/sr=8-8/qid=1159032945/ref=pd_bbs_8/002-5653481-4244842?ie=UTF8&s=books

[.Blueskies.]

Actually, his name was Eugene Skinner and he was allowed to fly for the French, but when the USA entered the war, he was
not allowed to fly because he was black.



"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message ups.com...
:> True - but it wasn't made for pilots -
: > And the general public will love it -
: > Which can only be good for GA.
: > So I'm cautiously impressed !
:
: Me, too. Incidentally, over on the "military channel"
: (rec.aviation.military) some nitwit troll posted that "Flyboys" was
: being stupidly Politically Correct for portraying a black man in the
: role of fighter pilot, long before blacks were allowed to such things.
:
: Out of that ignorance came information about Eugene Ballard, a black
: pilot who was (apparently) the model for the black character in
: Flyboys. See more about this fascinating man here:
:
: http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/apjinternational/apj-s/2005/3tri05/chivaletteeng.html
:
:
: Imagine -- this guy fought for France in many of the most titanic land
: battles of World War I, and then went on to become a fighter pilot
: after being injured too badly to fight in the infantry. THAT is
: heroism.
:
: I'm always amazed at what can be learned on these newsgroups -- even,
: occasionally, thanks to trolls.
: --
: Jay Honeck
: Iowa City, IA
: Pathfinder N56993
: www.AlexisParkInn.com
: "Your Aviation Destination"
:

[.Blueskies.]

".Blueskies." > wrote in message . ..
: Actually, his name was Eugene Skinner and he was allowed to fly for the French, but when the USA entered the war, he
was
: not allowed to fly because he was black.
:


Looks like the movie credits are wrong, the name was Eugene Bullard, but the rest of the story is right...

[C. Massey]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
t...
>
> "C. Massey" > wrote in message
> t...
>>
>> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>>> ps.com...
>>>>> I have just returned from seeing this movie. One word - OUTSTANDING!
>>>>>
>>>>> Go see it.
>>>>
>>>> Agree 100%. We just got back from it, too, and I was glad to see a
>>>> good crowd in the theater, and a good buzz about the movie after the
>>>> show.
>>>>
>>>> It's very well done, and the flying sequences are fantastic.
>>>> --
>>>> Jay Honeck
>>>> Iowa City, IA
>>>> Pathfinder N56993
>>>> www.AlexisParkInn.com
>>>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>>>
>>>
>>> Good but far from realistic. Not one rotary engine in the bunch and
>>> what were those goofey back fires every time they pulled an engine
>>> through. Also, the engine sounds weren't even close to correct.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> It's a moooovie...
>
> ........from Hollywood. Shouldn't expect much I guess. Lotsa hype about
> realism but they blew the basics.
>



Same with Days of Thunder. I am a big NASCAR fan and have been for years.
While this movie was entertaining, it was also so unrealistic it's pitiful!
But, I just kept in mind that it's only a movie so relax and enjoy it!




---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0638-1, 09/22/2006
Tested on: 9/23/2006 1:31:13 PM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2006 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

[Dan Luke]

"C. Massey" wrote:

> While this movie was entertaining, it was also so unrealistic it's
> pitiful! But, I just kept in mind that it's only a movie so relax and
> enjoy it!

Doesn't work for me. When the smell of fertilizer gets too strong, I have
to leave.

In the case of _Flyboys_, a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 29% means it's a "wait
for the DVD" deal for me.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/flyboys/


--
Dan

"Almost all the matter that came out of the Big Bang was two specific sorts;
hydrogen, and stupidity."

-Robert Carnegie in talk.origins

[Larry Dighera]

On Sat, 23 Sep 2006 14:37:42 -0500, "Dan Luke"
> wrote in
>:

>
>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/flyboys/

Interesting web site.

I found this review apt:


http://www.eonline.com/Reviews/Facts/Movies/Reviews/0,1052,89320,00.html
You wouldn't think to describe a war movie as "dreamy," but this
$60 million epic is exactly that. Heck, Grimm's Fairy Tales
feature more bloodshed. Lucienne (Jennifer Decker), a wide-eyed
local girl, tends to her orphaned niece and nephews while
inspiring Rawlings' stupefying heroism and provides a plotline
civilians can be swept away by.

Perfect for air show attendees, Air Force recruiters and vets of
any war seeking to convey their experiences to squeamish wives or
small children. Other viewers will likely find themselves playing
"aviator dead pool" when not being dazzled by the smashing air
battles of director Tony Bill.
--Skylaire Alfvegren

[Ross[_1_]]

Dan Luke wrote:
> "C. Massey" wrote:
>
>
>>While this movie was entertaining, it was also so unrealistic it's
>>pitiful! But, I just kept in mind that it's only a movie so relax and
>>enjoy it!
>
>
> Doesn't work for me. When the smell of fertilizer gets too strong, I have
> to leave.
>
> In the case of _Flyboys_, a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 29% means it's a "wait
> for the DVD" deal for me.
>
> http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/flyboys/
>
>
I have seen movies that the "critics" raved about only to be really
disappointed. Critics do what they are supposed to do - nit pick films.
Go see the movie and enjoy. This months AOPA pilot has a nice write up
about the movie.

--
Regards,

Ross
C-172F 180 hp
KSWI

[Dan Luke]

"Ross" wrote:

>> In the case of _Flyboys_, a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 29% means it's a
>> "wait for the DVD" deal for me.
>>
>> http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/flyboys/
>>
>>
> I have seen movies that the "critics" raved about only to be really
> disappointed. Critics do what they are supposed to do - nit pick films. Go
> see the movie and enjoy. This months AOPA pilot has a nice write up about
> the movie.

A Rotten Tomatoes score below 35% guarantees a poor movie, in my experience.
That goes back years before I'd ever heard of the site. A critic or two may
be off base, but a large negative score from many critics is an ominous,
reliable sign.

The trailers for Flyboys remind me a lot of Pearl Harbor, a wretchedly
written piece of Hollywood tripe full of Pretty People doing and saying
silly things. I'll pass until it shows up on satellite TV.

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Jim Logajan]

"Dan Luke" > wrote:
> A Rotten Tomatoes score below 35% guarantees a poor movie, in my
> experience. That goes back years before I'd ever heard of the site.

I never heard of the site before. So I did a quick check, and if "The Devil
Wears Prada" is considered good by that site, it probably is the case I
would need to invert the ratings (or more likely ignore them altogether) to
determine if a movie was worth my time.

I get the impression the reviewers on the site tend to prefer "indie"
productions, giving them higher scores the more obscure that are. The more
a movie is into deep character studies, the higher it rates (nothing wrong
with that, if weighted in moderation). Good acting and character
development seem to be weighted very heavily by the reviewers and story,
plot, and visuals seem to decrease progressively in the weighting.
Naturally a flying movie of any sort that focuses on flying is going to do
badly when that kind of weighting is applied by reviewers. The characters
in Flyboys are simply too traditional and conventional for those reviewers.
I suspect that if the movie had some of the characters committing war
atrocities (or done _anything_ "out of character") the movie reviewers
would have gone bonkers and given the movie a great rating. All IMHO!

[.Blueskies.]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message ...
:
: "Ross" wrote:
:
: >> In the case of _Flyboys_, a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 29% means it's a
: >> "wait for the DVD" deal for me.
: >>
: >> http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/flyboys/
: >>
: >>
: > I have seen movies that the "critics" raved about only to be really
: > disappointed. Critics do what they are supposed to do - nit pick films. Go
: > see the movie and enjoy. This months AOPA pilot has a nice write up about
: > the movie.
:
: A Rotten Tomatoes score below 35% guarantees a poor movie, in my experience.
: That goes back years before I'd ever heard of the site. A critic or two may
: be off base, but a large negative score from many critics is an ominous,
: reliable sign.
:
: The trailers for Flyboys remind me a lot of Pearl Harbor, a wretchedly
: written piece of Hollywood tripe full of Pretty People doing and saying
: silly things. I'll pass until it shows up on satellite TV.
:
: --
: Dan
: C172RG at BFM
:
:

You are going to miss a good movie on the big screen. It looks like the rotten tomatoes review thinks that a war movie
has to be all guts and gore. I too thought it would be a 'Pearl Harbor' chick fliq, but it is not. Bob Hoover got up
during the premier at Oshkosh and said it was one of the best war movies he had seen...and I agree...

[Ross[_1_]]

..Blueskies. wrote:

> "Dan Luke" > wrote in message ...
> :
> : "Ross" wrote:
> :
> : >> In the case of _Flyboys_, a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 29% means it's a
> : >> "wait for the DVD" deal for me.
> : >>
> : >> http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/flyboys/
> : >>
> : >>
> : > I have seen movies that the "critics" raved about only to be really
> : > disappointed. Critics do what they are supposed to do - nit pick films. Go
> : > see the movie and enjoy. This months AOPA pilot has a nice write up about
> : > the movie.
> :
> : A Rotten Tomatoes score below 35% guarantees a poor movie, in my experience.
> : That goes back years before I'd ever heard of the site. A critic or two may
> : be off base, but a large negative score from many critics is an ominous,
> : reliable sign.
> :
> : The trailers for Flyboys remind me a lot of Pearl Harbor, a wretchedly
> : written piece of Hollywood tripe full of Pretty People doing and saying
> : silly things. I'll pass until it shows up on satellite TV.
> :
> : --
> : Dan
> : C172RG at BFM
> :
> :
>
> You are going to miss a good movie on the big screen. It looks like the rotten tomatoes review thinks that a war movie
> has to be all guts and gore. I too thought it would be a 'Pearl Harbor' chick fliq, but it is not. Bob Hoover got up
> during the premier at Oshkosh and said it was one of the best war movies he had seen...and I agree...
>
>
I agree. If a movie produces an emotion in me then it has merit. I have
sat though movies that I just sat there. My wife usually does not like
these type of movies (when a movie is bad her legs start jumping and
moving like she is ready to go) and she stayed still during the movie.

--
Regards,

Ross
C-172F 180 hp
KSWI

[John Ousterhout[_2_]]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> Lot's of non-flying folks were in the crowd, and some of them will be
> enamored enough with the beauty of this movie and flight in general to
> head to their FBO tomorrow.

Bravo Sierra.

We all recall the thousands of pilots that only began flying because
they saw Top Gun :-)

- J.O.-

[Jay Honeck]

> We all recall the thousands of pilots that only began flying because
> they saw Top Gun :-)

Actually, Navy recruiting shot through the roof, after "Top Gun" hit
the silver screen.

Let's hope "Flyboys" helps GA in the same way.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[Dan Luke]

"Jim Logajan" wrote:

> I never heard of the site before. So I did a quick check, and if "The
> Devil
> Wears Prada" is considered good by that site, it probably is the case I
> would need to invert the ratings (or more likely ignore them altogether)
> to
> determine if a movie was worth my time.
>
> I get the impression the reviewers on the site tend to prefer "indie"
> productions,

Rotten Tomatoes doesn't have reviewers. It merely compiles what's out
there.

[Jim Logajan]

"Dan Luke" > wrote:
>
> "Jim Logajan" wrote:
>
>> I never heard of the site before. So I did a quick check,
>
> Rotten Tomatoes doesn't have reviewers. It merely compiles what's out
> there.

That's what I get for doing a "quick check". :-)

[Jim Logajan]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>> We all recall the thousands of pilots that only began flying because
>> they saw Top Gun :-)
>
> Actually, Navy recruiting shot through the roof, after "Top Gun" hit
> the silver screen.

Didn't believe that, but looks like you're right:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gun_(film)

"Unsurprisingly, it boosted Air Force recruitment and increased Navy
recruitment 500 percent. This was evident in the fact that the Navy used
its success by having recruitment booths in some theaters to lure
enthusiastic patrons."

[Emily[_1_]]

Jim Logajan wrote:
> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>>> We all recall the thousands of pilots that only began flying because
>>> they saw Top Gun :-)
>> Actually, Navy recruiting shot through the roof, after "Top Gun" hit
>> the silver screen.
>
> Didn't believe that, but looks like you're right:
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gun_(film)
>
> "Unsurprisingly, it boosted Air Force recruitment and increased Navy
> recruitment 500 percent. This was evident in the fact that the Navy used
> its success by having recruitment booths in some theaters to lure
> enthusiastic patrons."

I'm not sure what that says about young men that they think Top Gun is a
reason to join the military...

(ok, ok, I'm the only pilot to dislike that movie, sorry)

[John Clear]

In article >,
Dan Luke > wrote:
>
>"C. Massey" wrote:
>
>> While this movie was entertaining, it was also so unrealistic it's
>> pitiful! But, I just kept in mind that it's only a movie so relax and
>> enjoy it!
>
>Doesn't work for me. When the smell of fertilizer gets too strong, I have
>to leave.
>
>In the case of _Flyboys_, a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 29% means it's a "wait
>for the DVD" deal for me.
>
>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/flyboys/

Mr Cranky[1] gave it Four Bombs.
http://www.mrcranky.com/movies/flyboys.html

From the Mr Cranky review:

Watching an interesting historical episode boiled down to
such a trite and unchallenging story makes me wonder --
really wonder -- just how dumb movie audiences in this
country are becoming.

John
[1] Mr Cranky reviews range from One Bomb (almost tolerable) to a
Nuclear Bomb (proof that Jesus died in vain).
--
John Clear - http://www.clear-prop.org/

[Cubdriver]

On 22 Sep 2006 20:29:20 -0700, "Jay Honeck" >
wrote:

>Agree 100%. We just got back from it, too, and I was glad to see a
>good crowd in the theater, and a good buzz about the movie after the
>show.

I went to the 'plex in a strip mall in a country town nearby, which
saves me the trauma of driving through semi-urban traffic. Generally
the theater is all but empty, and afterward the few wanderers who have
come in from the rain will slink out, avoiding each other's eyes.

Flyboys had thirty, forty people, and at the conclusion THEY APPLAUDED
the screen! I can't remember the last time I saw that in a movie
theater, let along the Spinnelli's Barrington Cinema.

I loved the movie, and it had me sniffling a couple of times (when the
planes took off on their first comat mission, and the camera was
watching the wheels bounce and skitter along the grass; and again
during the lovers' meeting at Lucien's farm with her neice and nephews
romping about--what beautiful children!). The combat sequences got
repetitious after a while, and I could have done without the mandatory
21st century conversation on the futility of war. But overall, streets
ahead of anything I have ever seen on WWI (well, there's Paths of
Glory) or aerial combat or computer simulation (I couldn't tell where
the real planes ended and the fake ones began).

Thank God for Eugene Bullard (Skinner in the movie)! In the air, with
goggles and helmet, it was awfully hard to tell the Americans apart,
and I came to love that black face like spotting an old friend in a
cocktail party full of strangers.

[Dan Luke]

"John Clear" wrote:

>>In the case of _Flyboys_, a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 29% means it's a
>>"wait
>>for the DVD" deal for me.
>>
>>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/flyboys/
>
> Mr Cranky[1] gave it Four Bombs.
> http://www.mrcranky.com/movies/flyboys.html
>
> From the Mr Cranky review:
>
> Watching an interesting historical episode boiled down to
> such a trite and unchallenging story makes me wonder --
> really wonder -- just how dumb movie audiences in this
> country are becoming.
>
> John
> [1] Mr Cranky reviews range from One Bomb (almost tolerable) to a
> Nuclear Bomb (proof that Jesus died in vain).


Haw! Bookmarked!

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Dan Luke]

"Emily" wrote:

> I'm not sure what that says about young men that they think Top Gun is a
> reason to join the military...
>
> (ok, ok, I'm the only pilot to dislike that movie, sorry)

I'm in that club: can't bear to watch it.

Maybe it's just because that twitchy little pratt Tom Cruise is in it.

--
Dan

"Almost all the matter that came out of the Big Bang was two specific sorts;
hydrogen, and stupidity."

-Robert Carnegie in talk.origins

[Matt Whiting]

Emily wrote:

> Jim Logajan wrote:
>
>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>>
>>>> We all recall the thousands of pilots that only began flying because
>>>> they saw Top Gun :-)
>>>
>>> Actually, Navy recruiting shot through the roof, after "Top Gun" hit
>>> the silver screen.
>>
>>
>> Didn't believe that, but looks like you're right:
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gun_(film)
>>
>> "Unsurprisingly, it boosted Air Force recruitment and increased Navy
>> recruitment 500 percent. This was evident in the fact that the Navy
>> used its success by having recruitment booths in some theaters to lure
>> enthusiastic patrons."
>
>
> I'm not sure what that says about young men that they think Top Gun is a
> reason to join the military...
>
> (ok, ok, I'm the only pilot to dislike that movie, sorry)

Other than Tom Cruise being in it, I liked it. The sound track was
excellent as was much of the flying.

Matt

[C. Massey]

"John Clear" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> Dan Luke > wrote:
>>
>>"C. Massey" wrote:
>>
>>> While this movie was entertaining, it was also so unrealistic it's
>>> pitiful! But, I just kept in mind that it's only a movie so relax and
>>> enjoy it!
>>
>>Doesn't work for me. When the smell of fertilizer gets too strong, I have
>>to leave.
>>
>>In the case of _Flyboys_, a Rotten Tomatoes rating of 29% means it's a
>>"wait
>>for the DVD" deal for me.
>>
>>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/flyboys/
>
> Mr Cranky[1] gave it Four Bombs.
> http://www.mrcranky.com/movies/flyboys.html
>
> From the Mr Cranky review:
>
> Watching an interesting historical episode boiled down to
> such a trite and unchallenging story makes me wonder --
> really wonder -- just how dumb movie audiences in this
> country are becoming.
>
> John
> [1] Mr Cranky reviews range from One Bomb (almost tolerable) to a
> Nuclear Bomb (proof that Jesus died in vain).
> --



To bad my quote got all chopped up. I wasn't even referring to Flyboys with
my comment...




---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0638-1, 09/22/2006
Tested on: 9/24/2006 8:03:34 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2006 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

[Jay B]

Emily wrote:

> I'm not sure what that says about young men that they think Top Gun is a
> reason to join the military...
>
> (ok, ok, I'm the only pilot to dislike that movie, sorry)

Don't know or care about the testosterone levels involved (must be a
female thing) but you aren't the only pilot who didn't like the movie.

However, it still contains some of the best coreographed aerial
photography ever...

I give it big ups for the technical achievements.

Jay B

[Dudley Henriques[_1_]]

"Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
t...
>
> "C. Massey" > wrote in message
> t...
>>
>> "Dave Stadt" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>>
>>> "Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
>>> ps.com...
>>>>> I have just returned from seeing this movie. One word - OUTSTANDING!
>>>>>
>>>>> Go see it.
>>>>
>>>> Agree 100%. We just got back from it, too, and I was glad to see a
>>>> good crowd in the theater, and a good buzz about the movie after the
>>>> show.
>>>>
>>>> It's very well done, and the flying sequences are fantastic.
>>>> --
>>>> Jay Honeck
>>>> Iowa City, IA
>>>> Pathfinder N56993
>>>> www.AlexisParkInn.com
>>>> "Your Aviation Destination"
>>>
>>>
>>> Good but far from realistic. Not one rotary engine in the bunch and
>>> what were those goofey back fires every time they pulled an engine
>>> through. Also, the engine sounds weren't even close to correct.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> It's a moooovie...
>
> ........from Hollywood. Shouldn't expect much I guess. Lotsa hype about
> realism but they blew the basics.

Problem is that in the "old days", when Hollywood made an aviation movie,
they hired real life people as "technical advisors". These folks got things
as close to being realistic as possible; that is if you actually believe
that the Japanese flew T6's against P40's and won the fight once in awhile
:-))
These days its all done with graphics and special effects. I remember Art
Scholl telling me one night at a dinner that before long, Hollywood wouldn't
need actors. They'd simply make an entire movie in blue screen and
superimpose the image of the actors in the scenes as needed.
:-)
Dudley Henriques

[John Ousterhout[_2_]]

John Ousterhout wrote:
>> We all recall the thousands of pilots that only began flying because
>> they saw Top Gun :-)

Jay Honeck replied:
> Actually, Navy recruiting shot through the roof, after "Top Gun" hit
> the silver screen.

I think that few of those who rushed out and enlisted after watching Top
Gun were of the caliber* required to become a Naval Aviator.

> Let's hope "Flyboys" helps GA in the same way.

I saw Flyboys today. If watching it causes anyone to go to the local
FBO and sign up for flight training I'll buy a beer for everyone in this
discussion.

I thought that Flyboys was hackneyed, trite, sophomoric and predictable.
Some of the flight scenes were great though. I thought the same about
Top Gun. Your mileage may vary :-)

* pun intentional.

- John Ousterhout -

[Stella Starr]

Cubdriver wrote:

> I loved the movie, and it had me sniffling a couple of times (when the
> planes took off

tee hee.
Usually that's what I'm using the popcorn napkins for. I cry at TV
commercials. Didn't tear up at Flyboys, though.

With the improving state of computer animation, it was clear a lot of
the fight sequences were enhanced, to say the least, to make them more
thrilling...though they were pretty good anyhow. Apparently you can
shoot a million holes in the plane and never get the hero.

The little French kids were good, the love interest a little too
contrived (You plan to meet her in Paris? And you don't know her last
name? You couldn't write down an address or something?) but the puptent
flying base was interesting, what we got to see of it. A couple times
my Skepto-Meter kicked in like when he swiped the trainer to rescue his
girlfriend and the Germans about 50 yards away didn't notice him landing
(yeah, I know, he pulled the power on final but jeez) and they don't
show how the hero and the rescued Wisconsin kid got out of the firing
zone...apparently having abandoned one perfectly good plane.

My second favorite part: that one of the actors is genuinely named "Lex
Shrapnel."

My very favorite part -- 11 months ago being at a rural home & workshop
of a fellow in Kansas, one Robert Basley, who builds planes and made
the four biplanes for the movie. Yup, only four...it was all camera and
animation work that made them look like 20 or so. They'd already
finished filming it then, and mailed the planes back to him,
disassembled and stowed in a semi-trailer "container."
FWIW, none really had a radial engine in it, rotating or fixed. The
planes were streaked with paint to make them seem older and grimier, and
seeing all their wire-spoke wheels, fabric wings and fuselages with the
Indian logo scrubbed off but still visible, there in the dim storage
container, was a lot like seeing real relics. Sure made me eager to see
the finished movie.

It's worth a look. Then rent "Dark Blue World" and though it's a WW2
film, and not so early in the history of aviation and war, see the same
plot done better. Ragtag band of reject pilots, seat-of-the-pants
flying, love interest in the nearby town.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0244479/

I think it's in Blockbuster's "foreign film" section.

[Sylvain]

Dudley Henriques wrote:
> wouldn't need actors. They'd simply make an entire movie in blue screen
> and superimpose the image of the actors in the scenes as needed.

that's pretty much how the movie 'Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow'
was done :-) -- by the way, I love that movie: no pretense at being
'realistic' (deliberate 'look and feel' of retro futuristic graphic
novels), and of course it casts Angelina Jolie :-)

--Sylvain

[Don Tuite]

On Mon, 25 Sep 2006 00:57:24 GMT, John Ousterhout
> wrote:

>Jay Honeck replied:
>> Actually, Navy recruiting shot through the roof, after "Top Gun" hit
>> the silver screen.
>
>I think that few of those who rushed out and enlisted after watching Top
>Gun were of the caliber* required to become a Naval Aviator.
>
>> Let's hope "Flyboys" helps GA in the same way.
>
>I saw Flyboys today. If watching it causes anyone to go to the local
>FBO and sign up for flight training I'll buy a beer for everyone in this
>discussion.

The top grossing (!) weekend movie was Jackass II. I can guess which
movie will be the more emulated.
>
>I thought that Flyboys was hackneyed, trite, sophomoric and predictable.
>Some of the flight scenes were great though. I thought the same about
>Top Gun. Your mileage may vary :-)

Age of the viewer may be a consideration. If you grew up on the WWII
Hollywood platoon flicks of the '50s, you've already internalized the
plot; the question is how well the new movie handles it, how they cast
the Jimmy Cagney and the Tyrone Power parts. Flyboys does a good job
updating the genre, but I don't expect it to resonate with the Pulp
Fiction crowd.

Don

[Dan Luke]

"Dudley Henriques" wrote:

> Problem is that in the "old days", when Hollywood made an aviation movie,
> they hired real life people as "technical advisors". These folks got
> things as close to being realistic as possible;

They got pretty careless with the stock footage in the old days. Don't
remember which movie ("Flying Leathernecks" ?), but it showed John Wayne
taking off in a Wildcat and fighting in a Hellcat on the same mission.

Ah, The Duke; he could do anything!

--
Dan
C172RG at BFM

[Jay Honeck]

> It's worth a look. Then rent "Dark Blue World" and though it's a WW2
> film, and not so early in the history of aviation and war, see the same
> plot done better. Ragtag band of reject pilots, seat-of-the-pants
> flying, love interest in the nearby town.

Agreed. We showed "Dark Blue World" at "Movie Night" last week, and it
was a big hit. Same basic plot as Flyboys (aren't they all?), except
not only does the hero lose the girl in the end -- he loses his *dog*.
(Man, that is LOW.)

But beware: "Dark Blue World" is subtitled. Strangely, even the
English-speaking parts are sub-titled. Many people find this to be too
distracting to fully appreciate the movie.

But the Spitfire scenes are worth it.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[C. Massey]

"Dan Luke" > wrote in message
...

<snip>
>
> They got pretty careless with the stock footage in the old days. Don't
> remember which movie ("Flying Leathernecks" ?), but it showed John Wayne
> taking off in a Wildcat and fighting in a Hellcat on the same mission.
>
<snip>


Pay attention to just about any movie or TV show that shows a car. The
exterior shots are a blue Chevy, but the interior shots are a green Ford...




---
avast! Antivirus: Outbound message clean.
Virus Database (VPS): 0639-0, 09/25/2006
Tested on: 9/25/2006 7:59:38 AM
avast! - copyright (c) 1988-2006 ALWIL Software.
http://www.avast.com

[Jose[_1_]]

> Don't
> remember which movie ("Flying Leathernecks" ?), but it showed John Wayne
> taking off in a Wildcat and fighting in a Hellcat on the same mission.

"I Dream of Jeanie" was my favorite for stuff like that. In the space
of thirty seconds, they switched rockets six or seven times.

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

Some trivia about the movie from IMDB.com

a.. Filmmakers attempted to use lightweight reproductions of WWI aircraft,
but grounded them after an accident.


a.. As no studios would back the film, a group of filmmakers and investors
including producer Dean Devlin and ace pilot David Ellison, son of Oracle
Corp. founder Larry Ellison, spent more than $60 million of their own money
to make and market this film.

[Emily[_1_]]

Jose wrote:
>> Don't remember which movie ("Flying Leathernecks" ?), but it showed
>> John Wayne taking off in a Wildcat and fighting in a Hellcat on the
>> same mission.
>
> "I Dream of Jeanie" was my favorite for stuff like that. In the space
> of thirty seconds, they switched rockets six or seven times.
>
> Jose
Nothing wrong with getting in as many different rockets as possible.
Rockets are cool!

[AJ]

I agree with this review:

Had Top Gun been directed by a curator at the Smithsonian Museum,
Flyboys would have been the outcome. -- Tyler Hanley, Palo Alto Weekly

AJH

[AJ]

I'd pay good money to see a film about the "flygirls" -- the Women
Airforce Service Pilots (WASP) in World War II.

AJH

[Montblack[_1_]]

("Stella Starr" wrote)
> With the improving state of computer animation, it was clear a lot of the
> fight sequences were enhanced, to say the least, to make them more
> thrilling...though they were pretty good anyhow.


I'm waiting for the day when they do the same with the actors: Oh wait. They
already do.

Has she had work done?

Not yet. We'll "enhance" her in post production.


Montblack
"Tell Turner to keep his damned crayons away from my film!"

[Jay Honeck]

> I'd pay good money to see a film about the "flygirls" -- the Women
> Airforce Service Pilots (WASP) in World War II.

I'm always surprised that Hollywood hasn't latched onto the WASPs yet.


That story has EVERYTHING. Sex. Violence. Death. Courage. Women doing
stuff they aren't expected to do. It could be a great movie.

Funny that they have made a stupid flick about chicks playing baseball
in WWII, but they haven't made one about them flying real, front line
fighters and bombers. Maybe it seems too far-fetched?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[.Blueskies.]

"Don Tuite" > wrote in message ...
:: The top grossing (!) weekend movie was Jackass II. I can guess which
: movie will be the more emulated.
:
: Don
:

Yup, explains a lot about american society doesn't it?

[LWG]

My God, Barbara Eden in a harem costume begging to satisfy our every wish
and you could pay attention to rockets?

"Jose" > wrote in message
om...
>> Don't remember which movie ("Flying Leathernecks" ?), but it showed John
>> Wayne taking off in a Wildcat and fighting in a Hellcat on the same
>> mission.
>
> "I Dream of Jeanie" was my favorite for stuff like that. In the space of
> thirty seconds, they switched rockets six or seven times.
>
> Jose
> --
> "Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where it
> keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
> for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Jim Logajan]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote:
>> I'd pay good money to see a film about the "flygirls" -- the Women
>> Airforce Service Pilots (WASP) in World War II.
>
> I'm always surprised that Hollywood hasn't latched onto the WASPs yet.

It took congress over 30 years to make them elegible for veteran benefits:

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/flygirls/peopleevents/pandeAMEX08.html

It may take another 30 years for Hollywood to make a movie about them.

[Jose[_1_]]

> My God, Barbara Eden in a harem costume begging to satisfy our every wish
> and you could pay attention to rockets?

Whatever happened to Barbara Eden?

Jose
--
"Never trust anything that can think for itself, if you can't see where
it keeps its brain." (chapter 10 of book 3 - Harry Potter).
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

[Montblack[_1_]]

("LWG" wrote)
> My God, Barbara Eden in a harem costume begging to satisfy our every wish
> and you could pay attention to rockets?


'Sometimes a rocket is just a rocket.'
(WATS.F.)


Montblack :-)

[Tom[_1_]]

This was a great reference Jay. Thanks for sharing it with us!


Tom

Jay Honeck wrote:
> > True - but it wasn't made for pilots -
> > And the general public will love it -
> > Which can only be good for GA.
> > So I'm cautiously impressed !
>
> Me, too. Incidentally, over on the "military channel"
> (rec.aviation.military) some nitwit troll posted that "Flyboys" was
> being stupidly Politically Correct for portraying a black man in the
> role of fighter pilot, long before blacks were allowed to such things.
>
> Out of that ignorance came information about Eugene Ballard, a black
> pilot who was (apparently) the model for the black character in
> Flyboys. See more about this fascinating man here:
>
> http://www.airpower.maxwell.af.mil/apjinternational/apj-s/2005/3tri05/chivaletteeng.html
>
>
> Imagine -- this guy fought for France in many of the most titanic land
> battles of World War I, and then went on to become a fighter pilot
> after being injured too badly to fight in the infantry. THAT is
> heroism.
>
> I'm always amazed at what can be learned on these newsgroups -- even,
> occasionally, thanks to trolls.
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

[Dan Luke]

".Blueskies." wrote:

> :: The top grossing (!) weekend movie was Jackass II. I can guess which
> : movie will be the more emulated.
> :
> : Don
> :
>
> Yup, explains a lot about american society doesn't it?


"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the taste of the American public."

-H. L. Mencken

[B A R R Y[_1_]]

..Blueskies. wrote:
>
> Yup, explains a lot about american society doesn't it?
>

Who typically goes out to the movies most often?

That's right, teenagers...

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>> I'd pay good money to see a film about the "flygirls" -- the Women
>> Airforce Service Pilots (WASP) in World War II.
>
> I'm always surprised that Hollywood hasn't latched onto the WASPs yet.
>
>
> That story has EVERYTHING. Sex. Violence. Death. Courage. Women doing
> stuff they aren't expected to do. It could be a great movie.
>
> Funny that they have made a stupid flick about chicks playing baseball
> in WWII, but they haven't made one about them flying real, front line
> fighters and bombers. Maybe it seems too far-fetched?
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"
>

You're a good writer Jay this could be your first screenplay. An you ought
to have plenty of time to do it since your not wasting any time on getting
an IFR ticket.

[Gig 601XL Builder]

"Jose" > wrote in message
...
>> My God, Barbara Eden in a harem costume begging to satisfy our every wish
>> and you could pay attention to rockets?
>
> Whatever happened to Barbara Eden?
>
> Jose


http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001174/

[.Blueskies.]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message ups.com...
:> I'd pay good money to see a film about the "flygirls" -- the Women
: > Airforce Service Pilots (WASP) in World War II.
:
: I'm always surprised that Hollywood hasn't latched onto the WASPs yet.
:
:
: That story has EVERYTHING. Sex. Violence. Death. Courage. Women doing
: stuff they aren't expected to do. It could be a great movie.
:
: Funny that they have made a stupid flick about chicks playing baseball
: in WWII, but they haven't made one about them flying real, front line
: fighters and bombers. Maybe it seems too far-fetched?
: --
: Jay Honeck
: Iowa City, IA
: Pathfinder N56993
: www.AlexisParkInn.com
: "Your Aviation Destination"


One of the reasons the 99s formed was to try and be treated like any other pilot, not some special breed of 'girl' that
was daring and risk taking...

http://www.ninety-nines.org/opal_kunz_ltr.html