Midway Review & Comments

It's weird looking at the trailers it looks so unrealistic 'just computers' with over clean looking everything.
 
It's weird looking at the trailers it looks so unrealistic 'just computers' with over clean looking everything.
This is what worries me as well - the shots in the trailer reminded me of a video game on Max settings. Dunkirk never came over like that, and I know they used some real aircraft, but it always seemed real to me.

Of course, in terms of real aircraft, "The Battle of Britain" will now be impossible to beat - not enough flying examples.
 
I must admit, after reading a number of Midway reviews, there's a good chance I would really enjoy the disaster master's latest. The emphasis is on the bigger story, minimizing the hand-wringing soya-induced modern romance melodrama, sticking to vast visuals and the gung-ho square-jaws of the Greatest Generation. And the sound design is exceptional. I think I will buy it.
Can we stop focusing on the non-existant feminising effects of soya?
Everyone knows it's a cover story to distract from the fact that the deep state and the Illuminati are using chemtrails to turn all the frogs gay to kick start the new world order... You absolute nutcase.
 
using chemtrails to turn all the frogs gay
What about Asexual Frogs?
(In Jurassic Park, Richard Attenborough specifically stated that some frogs are Asexual, and he would not lie to us!) :)
EDIT: At least I think it was him who said that - anyway, it was DEFINITELY stated in Jurassic Park!
 
You have no idea how high up this goes.
Nooooo... that would break the World If we cannot believe Mr. Attenborough, who is left?
Either that or you're one of them!
Nope, just checked, and I am definitely not a frog... of any persuasion.
 
Totally agree with review " Boring " CGI ok ,but dialogue was full of clichés .
 
I still think The Patriot is Roland's best movie.
 
Great review, thanks. I was going to waste some cash to watch this, but I think I'll give it a miss!
You should ignore someone else's opinion until you've seen it. I thought it was very good. Don't remember the original and don't know anything about the director, but thought it looked and sounded great. It's based on real events so no unexpected twists, but very well done. Of course you should also ignore my opinion 😁
 
This is what worries me as well - the shots in the trailer reminded me of a video game on Max settings. Dunkirk never came over like that, and I know they used some real aircraft, but it always seemed real to me.

Of course, in terms of real aircraft, "The Battle of Britain" will now be impossible to beat - not enough flying examples.

I'd say probably just too much money to play with has gave this result?

Even the recent catch-22 which was a series for TV looked far more 'real'
 
You should ignore someone else's opinion until you've seen it. I thought it was very good. Don't remember the original and don't know anything about the director, but thought it looked and sounded great. It's based on real events so no unexpected twists, but very well done. Of course you should also ignore my opinion 😁

Well you could look at 'Letters from Iwo Jima' and 'flags of our fathers' both recreating realistic events but were so much more than just the event. I think that and over the top CGI is what others are complaining about.
 
You should ignore someone else's opinion until you've seen it. I thought it was very good. Don't remember the original and don't know anything about the director, but thought it looked and sounded great. It's based on real events so no unexpected twists, but very well done. Of course you should also ignore my opinion 😁

Agreed with this, the action scenes were great and overall it was a great movie but the main lead just bugged me, not sure why they had to make him a dislikeable character and few other personal things that irked me but it was still great.

But when all said and done only you can be the judge of how you will like it.
 
Actually thought this was fairly decent. I mean, it’s all over the place and there’s too many characters (they’re all pretty thin as well) but the action and effects are really well handled, I was concerned about the CGI from seeing the trailers but it was rather good (with the exception of some of the shots in the Pearl Harbour sequence). Acting wise it was solid, given the script did very little to help anyone. It was poignant to see the real life people, the characters were based on at the end. It was far too long though overall though, my patience was beginning to be tested toward the end.
6/10
 
Actually thought this was fairly decent. I mean, it’s all over the place and there’s too many characters (they’re all pretty thin as well) but the action and effects are really well handled, I was concerned about the CGI from seeing the trailers but it was rather good (with the exception of some of the shots in the Pearl Harbour sequence). Acting wise it was solid, given the script did very little to help anyone. It was poignant to see the real life people, the characters were based on at the end. It was far too long though overall though, my patience was beginning to be tested toward the end.
6/10
You could say you started to lose interest...MIDWAY
 
Last edited:
is the cgi really as bad as shown in the trailer?, though it was a War Thunder ad
 
Well, I’ve seen it and do you know, it wasn’t half as bad as I was expecting, certainly a lot better than Pearl Harbor.

The acting isn’t going to win any awards (well, not complimentary ones) but aside from the exaggerated flying of the main character, Richard Best, I don’t think there was anything portrayed inaccurately.

None of the really made-up stuff that they had in Pearl Harbor that got me really irritated.

So I’d say it was okay, worth a watch, even if you wait for the disk or for it to turn up on Sky or Netflix.

Cheers,

Nigel
 
‘But cinema has moved on since the 90s, and audiences generally demand more nowadays than just impressive computer effects’ - yep, that explains the box-office failure of movies... oh, wait... If anything, the opposite is true
 
I actually agree with nearly everything in Kumari's review. It is a thinly written pastiche full of cliched characters, soundbites and bad accents. However as a pure war movie it really delivers on the mechanics of the conflict, both in terms of its battle sequences and overall accuracy to the real events. It's pretty spectacular to be fair.

Provided you can manage without any believable human stakes or character development, you can still be thoroughly entertained by this. 6/10
 
I was planning on doing a double feature with this and Doctor Sleep and I didn't end up seeing Doctor Sleep because of how mad this movie made me. It's genuinely awful: horrible dialogue, pretty cagey CGI, incredibly miscast actors (how in the world Ed Skrein got the lead role with that "accent" is a mystery to me), and the list goes on.

About 45 minutes in to the movie I was already looking at my watch and wondering when it was going to end (but of course it's at least half an hour longer than it needs to be).

Don't see it.
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom