It’s not Michael Bay. It’s Roland Emmerich. Bay did Pearl Harbour, which was fucking awful.
Comment on Prognosis: back pain and general grouchiness
niktemadur@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
You like “basically dead” old? I’ll show ya “advanced state of decomposition” old…
You know what film my father took me to see when it came out?
“Midway”.
Not Michael Bay “Midway”, no siree… I’m talking Charlton Heston, Glenn Ford, Henry Fonda “Midway”, in glorious Sensurround Sound™️, which seemed to be a big selling point at the time, the latest and greatest Hollywood movie magic tech.
Blackmist@feddit.uk 4 weeks ago
niktemadur@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
From the looks of another comment down the thread, there’s gonna be quite a bit of people like me, who get Emmerich and Bay mixed up.
The bombastic, clumsily unrealistic abuse of CGI might fit fantasy or disaster movies, but it is positively jarring in a war movie, which requires a more sober or constrained style of direction. WWII physics of motion shouldn’t look like a fucking video game on the large screen, not even the dogfights.
kamenlady@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
It depends, your father could have taken you, when you were 2 or 17 - it’s almost a lifetime of a difference.
So you’re either a dinosaur or a microbe.
I’m somewhat of a dinosaur myself.
Anticorp@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
Such a great movie! I didn’t see it in the theater, but it was on free TV all the time when I was a kid, so I’ve seen it several times.
The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
I just had to look that movie up. Is it a good one?
niktemadur@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
It uses a combination of practical footage (like Christopher Nolan did with Dunkirk), a ton of WWII archival footage, and a sprinkle of special effects with miniatures. Overall, it looks pretty good.
The “cast of thousands” is front-loaded with some old school screen legends, plus many who went on to become TV stars (Tom Selleck, Erik Estrada, Dabney Coleman).
The film slowly builds up momentum, the way other war films of the time like “A Bridge Too Far” did. It takes over an hour for the Battle Of Midway itself to begin. And unlike so many more recent films of the genre, there isn’t any fictional personal drama nor romantic subplots. It’s long enough as it already is, telling a grand sweeping story.
Very much a product of its’ time, yes I’d definitely recommend it, although I prefer that leisurely pace of 70s films, it’s a matter of personal taste, maybe because growing up with those kinds of films.
Land_Strider@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
Thanks, for your detailed review, dude. Definitely mentioning all the stuff I’d be looking for.
This has been slowly creeping up and tiring to see in all movies. The “archetypes” have been used so many times already that it feels like watching the same stuff over and over again, with a different coat.
The_Picard_Maneuver@lemmy.world 5 weeks ago
I prefer old films and shows too, when given the choice. I enjoy the slower pacing, fewer cuts, and heavier reliance on the quality of the actors, because special effects themselves couldn’t carry the whole movie.
jawa21@lemmy.sdf.org 5 weeks ago
It is solid if you enjoy that genre.
Anticorp@lemmy.world 4 weeks ago
It’s about 100x better than the Michael Bay version, but that’s still not saying much. Yes, it’s a good movie for its era. If you watch it today then you’ll need to be a little generous about the movie style, since we’ve come a long way since then.