Highly recommend "Midway"....

[Dakota7493]

I saw it this past Sat. Was pretty good. Woody playing Nemitz was a stretch but otherwise not bad. Covered lots of the Pacific battles btw. Pearl, Doolittle Raid, Midway.

[Keith]

My brother-in-law, a former air Force pilot, saw it and told me he was rather disappointed in it. So there were lots of inaccuracies, but we didn't really go into detail. He said the old movie Midway was better.

Sent from my moto g(6) using Tapatalk

[coker737]

Setting up to see FRiday

[TxSon1836]

seeing it tonight cant wait

[TheBeaster]

I was excited to see it, but was a little disappointed afterwards. I agree with TVC above. It was like they tried to cram 2-3 different movies into one. Made it hard to follow. I spent the entire ride home having to explain things to my wife.

[kumathebear]

I'm a military history buff so judging from "some" reviews/comments we will wait until it hits Netflix or Amazon. Wife and I only go to the eat/watch theaters and it's easily $50+- so I would be PO'D if it's historically off base...to a point that is.

I also have shifted my likeability for Woody after his stupid comments about controlling feral hogs in Texas, lol. Typical Hollywood idiot.....but still better likeable than DeNeiro!

[ultrastealth]

I thought those were B-26 w shown. B-17s did attack from high altitude as well as a few B-26 in low level runs.

The bombers in the movie had twin vertical stabilizers, so they weren't B-26's.

[MisplacedTexan]

All I had to do was read the movie's review by Military Times.....think Ill pass.

Sent from my SM-G955U using Tapatalk

[Nicholson84]

If you are looking to Hollywood for a documentary, I'm afraid you will be disappointed at least 100% of the time.

Exactly people it’s a movie not a documentary! The movie was great! Enjoy life.

[DaveC]

I saw it this evening with my wife and son.
If I’m going to give any money towards the Hollywood crowd it will be in movies like this.
I think Pearl Harbor was a better flic, but I didn’t leave disappointed.



Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Gunnyart]

Wife and I saw it today. Excellent. Can't wait to own it on Blu-ray for the bonus features.

[Cawnlu]

This topic is very subjective but here is my take:

It wasn't a bad movie but I was a little disappointed. It was very hard to follow and I'm a WW2 buff who is pretty well versed in the Pacific War. The acting was so so at best (and I really like Patrick Wilson) but the visuals were good.

I really think they should not have shoe-horned Pearl Harbor and the Doolittle raid into the movie because it just complicated the story. An opening crawl could have described the state of the war up to that point rather than spending so much time on screen.

It certainly wasn't as bad as the Military Times review declared but I was disappointed.

[tvc184]

If you are looking to Hollywood for a documentary, I'm afraid you will be disappointed at least 100% of the time.

Not looking for a documentary. It can still be a good screen play.

I thought Patton is a great war movie. It wasn’t a documentary but was fairly close to history and easy to follow.

A Bridge Too Far had an all star cast, was an awesome movie and historically about 98%.

The Longest Day. Same thing.

Tora! Tora! Tora! Same thing.

Yes, a movie can be both great and fairly accurate without being hard to follow without being a documentary.

The Battle of the Bulge was one of the most stupidly inaccurate movies ever made but it was still entertaining.