- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Watching Midway tonight….(the newer one).
Posted on 12/6/24 at 6:51 pm
Posted on 12/6/24 at 6:51 pm
Damn it’s good…not finished yet but it is really good. Can’t believe I haven’t seen it before now.
10
Posted on 12/6/24 at 7:19 pm to themetalreb
It’s a damn good movie.. the bravery and sacrifice that the Greatest Generation possessed is always humbling to see. 
Posted on 12/6/24 at 8:02 pm to themetalreb
I prefer the older one, though nothing against this one.
Posted on 12/6/24 at 8:21 pm to PsychTiger
The new one is technically accurate but lacking in emotion.
Posted on 12/6/24 at 8:27 pm to cypresstiger
Get some whiskey and cigars and watch the OG one REAL LOUD!
Posted on 12/6/24 at 9:11 pm to themetalreb
quote:
not finished yet but it is really good.
So good you’re on your phone posting about it instead of watching it? :
Posted on 12/6/24 at 9:19 pm to PsychTiger
quote:
I prefer the older one, though nothing against this one.
Just watched the old one the other night. The cast is pretty awesome.
Posted on 12/6/24 at 9:29 pm to themetalreb
WAY better than I thought it would be.
Bought the Bluray when it came out.
Bought the Bluray when it came out.
This post was edited on 12/6/24 at 9:30 pm
Posted on 12/6/24 at 9:42 pm to themetalreb
For a blow-by-blow account of the War in the Pacific from December 7, 1941 to June 7, 1942, there is probably no better movie than Midway (2019). It sticks pretty closely to history for a Hollywood film. However, you could tell that the producers lacked a budget and the screenwriters had to sacrifice character to cover all the events they were attempting to portray in the film.
I really liked Woody Harrelson as Chester Nimitz though.
I really liked Woody Harrelson as Chester Nimitz though.
This post was edited on 12/6/24 at 9:44 pm
Posted on 12/6/24 at 10:01 pm to RollTide1987
quote:
I really liked Woody Harrelson as Chester Nimitz though.
I loved that he gave his all to make a great Chester Nimitz, would be nice for some war films to be made with superhero movies fading out.
Personally I would love to see a film made about the battles on Guadalcanal but I’m a sucker for just about everything WWII.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 12:04 am to cypresstiger
quote:
The new one is technically accurate but lacking in emotion.
It's certainly not lacking CGI explosions. Especially flak.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 3:53 am to themetalreb
Good movie.
Just felt like they tried to match Pearl Harbor level production and it didn’t quite have the budget to do so
Just felt like they tried to match Pearl Harbor level production and it didn’t quite have the budget to do so
Posted on 12/7/24 at 1:12 pm to themetalreb
I like the newer one a lot more than I thought I would but prefer the original one
Posted on 12/7/24 at 2:05 pm to bad93ex
quote:
Personally I would love to see a film made about the battles on Guadalcanal but I’m a sucker for just about everything WWII.
Give me a massive budget movie or show on the battle of Kursk but that will never happen
Posted on 12/7/24 at 3:34 pm to Don Quixote
quote:
I like the newer one a lot more than I thought I would but prefer the original one
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, I had watched the old one within the last few days. So I decided to watch the new one again too (had seen it a few years ago).
In most ways, the old one is far superior. But the new one is surprisingly good. I would say that the worst parts of the new one is that it suffers from “modern sensibilities” - the need to “dumb things down” for an audience that lacks historical context, over reliance on CGI and explosions, and having difficulty navigating poignancy. But overall, it was a good film. Much, much better than Pearl Harbor.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 4:46 pm to PsychTiger
quote:
I prefer the older one, though nothing against this one.
I agree. The old one had much better actors and more likable characters, and of course, no CGI.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 6:34 pm to CocomoLSU
quote:
So good you’re on your phone posting about it instead of watching it?
I had to go take a shite so I took my phone to post on the SEC movie board and text your mom.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 7:36 pm to Mstate
quote:
Give me a massive budget movie or show on the battle of Kursk but that will never happen
The scale, magnitude and significance of that battle would be difficult to convey to a modern western audience.
Very few of us learned anything of the eastern front so it would be tough to find an audience who would understand what they’re seeing.
Even Enemy at the Gates had to make Stalingrad about a sniper in a love story to have a chance to hold an audience with a similar setting.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 7:50 pm to themetalreb
quote:
I had to go take a shite so I took my phone to post on the SEC movie board and text your mom.
Tell her I said hi, tough guy.
Posted on 12/7/24 at 8:07 pm to 0x15E
quote:
Good movie.
Just felt like they tried to match Pearl Harbor level production and it didn’t quite have the budget to do so
the only thing accurate about that pearl harbor movie is that a pearl harbor exists and it's in hawaii
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News