re: "Masters of the Air" | WWII Miniseries | Apple+ Trailer

I actually don’t mind the partying/bar scenes - I feel like that was pretty accurate. I know that if it were me I’d be partying my arse off every time I got off that plane (and I’m not a “partier”). It was a different kind of war, because of how far off the line they were they could do things like that.

What I hate, as others have alluded too, is how “fake” the dialogue seems. You can tell, or it seems, that the writers didn’t have any, or very little, interaction with the men who did the fighting - it so over the top “Hollywood” that you can’t help but roll your eyes for a lot of it.

You really needed a Dick Winters who had the moxy and credentials to come in and help with the writing - obviously those guys are passed now so it’s impossible to do that.

It’s unfair to compare it to BOB because of how much of a perfect storm that was (D-Day to the end of the war in Europe, in most of the major battles, still living veterans to help with the writing, etc.) but I really hoped it’d compare to the Pacific but I’m getting a little worried now. Still hopeful though and will continue to watch. Just love having something “new” out for WW2

The bombing scene made me wonder just how did bombers fair in shooting down fighters when they didn't have any support. At least according to Air and Space Magazine, they did better than I would've guessed (I thought the show was overselling how many they shot down but maybe not):

quote:

---

Shooting remained a difficult task, more art than science. The speed of aircraft had tripled between wars, but the rate of fire for machine guns remained at about 800 rounds per minute. When a 450-mile-per-hour fighter attacked a 300-mile-per-hour bomber head on, the rate of closure was close to the speed of sound. In one second, the fighter’s relative position changed by 1,100 feet while a gunner was able to get off only about a dozen rounds. A nose gunner barely had time to spot an attacking aircraft and fire before it was gone. Waist and tail gunners had more time to aim but still little time to track targets. The solution was to put more guns on each plane and to use a defensive technique similar to the old Lufbery circle. Based on his plane’s position in the formation, each gunner was assigned a specific, narrow area to cover. None had to move his guns more than a few degrees in any direction in order for the formation to confront an attacker with a daunting array of firepower.

Even against these odds, many enemy fighters took the risk, and many scored. More often, however, they looked for straggling bombers that had been crippled by flak or were suffering from mechanical problems. In this position, the lone airplane often could rely only on its own guns for protection. Many fell prey to the fighters, but a remarkable number survived their running gunfights to fly again.
...
In spite of all the hardships, US gunners gave a remarkable account of themselves. In Eighth Air Force, bombers claimed 6,259 enemy aircraft destroyed, 1,836 probables, and 3,210 damaged. On all counts, the record topped that of the Eighth’s fighter pilots. Other heavy, medium, and light bomber units showed similar records.

As in World War I, however, most of the glory went to the fighter pilots. The thousands of planes downed by bombers usually were counted as team, rather than individual, successes. The Air Force maintains that it is too hard to assign credit to individual gunners on missions where dozens of guns may have been blazing away at the same target. Spreading the credit among the gunners in formations of 100 to 1,000 bombers would have been a bookkeeping nightmare. Unlike fighters, bombers did not carry gun cameras to record the action.

---

LINK

quote:

---

That seems to fairly close to how the guys fighting the air war lived

---

You can bet that it was.

Being a pilot or any crew member was one of the most dangerous jobs in WWII.

Blowing off steam and drowning away pain, sadness, and anxiety were almost necessary to keep morale high and men willing/able to make another run.

quote:

---

In Eighth Air Force, bombers claimed 6,259 enemy aircraft destroyed, 1,836 probables, and 3,210 damaged.

---

Also;

quote:

---

Unlike fighters, bombers did not carry gun cameras to record the action.

---

In the histories I have read they are consistent in saying the B17 gunners had very minimal success when it came to shooting down attacking fighters. At least one suggested removing them for more bomb capacity would have been beneficial. (LeMay did in fact do this with the B29s attacking Japan to gain more bomb capacity.)

Those claims in the article above are frankly laughable.

And they are overstating their success in the show.

quote:

---

What I hate, as others have alluded too, is how “fake” the dialogue seems. You can tell, or it seems, that the writers didn’t have any, or very little, interaction with the men who did the fighting - it so over the top “Hollywood” that you can’t help but roll your eyes for a lot of it. You really needed a Dick Winters who had the moxy and credentials to come in and help with the writing - obviously those guys are passed now so it’s impossible to do that.

---

I get it, and at first I thought the same. I’m not defending at all costs cause there are some cheesy lines but you have to get your mindset right in this show. This ain’t BoB or Pacific. These pilots really lived different lives than the infantry.

According to everything I’ve read, Buck and Bucky were actually your classic debonair, rock star, “maverick-esque” pilots. They were very popular with the guys and local bars because of it.

They were, by all accounts, how they’re being portrayed. Cocky, easy going and party boys. It’s only cliche and cheesy to us now because we’ve seen Top Gun and all these other pilot movies.

Bomber and fighter pilots just lived different wars than the men of Easy or Sledge. They had warm beds and chow every night they didn’t have to fly. It’s a different view of the war.

I’m very much enjoying it. My first real complaint has been how bad the backdrop of Africa looked, was very obvious green screen. I’ve seen better CGI backdrops ten years ago

quote:

---

The only worthwhile character is Barry Keoghan’s

---

Curt was my favorite as well. He felt real compared to Buck and Bucky. I’m interested in how they’ll introduce the Red Tails as well as flesh out the whole Quinn storyline. I’m assuming he was talking with Belgian resistance fighters at the end planning his escape back to England?

Haven't read through any of this thread, but we finished the first 3 episodes last night.

Not even in the same universe as Band of Brothers or The Pacific.

CGI extremely disappointing.

My biggest rub is the characters and dialouge. It seems so fake and forced.

I wanted it to like it so bad because it is my favorite subject matter of the 3 series, but I am supremely disappointed

the ball turret ejection was laughable CGI
it took off like it had rocket propulsion

quote:

---

the ball turret ejection was laughable CGI
it took off like it had rocket propulsion

---

I don't understand how ANYONE in the production could look at that and not think maybe it's a little over the top. Maybe if it was ejected from an SR-71.

I also enjoyed episode 3 a lot. Seems like some of you in this thread just set on not enjoying it / made the mistake of thinking it would be BoB quality (damn near perfect).