Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Very Nice Short Film


  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

#41 Josh_Echo

Josh_Echo
  • Posts: 3931

Posted 13 October 2011 - 18:50

Oh, good grief. If I'd known that there is a great love here of getting large details wrong without reason, I would have kept my mouth shut and not posted in the damn thread.
  • 0

#42 BuddyWoof

BuddyWoof
  • Posts: 563

Posted 13 October 2011 - 18:56

Quit crying like a baby. Getting all bent out of shape regarding a short film produced by a college kid is childish and ridiculous to say the least.

Ps - nice quick edit there on your post.
  • 0

#43 Josh_Echo

Josh_Echo
  • Posts: 3931

Posted 13 October 2011 - 18:57

I didn't get bent out of shape over the film. I posted two lines indicating that I didn't like it, and then all you people who like making a mockery of old warbirds jumped on me in a mass. Piss off.
  • 0

#44 Josh_Echo

Josh_Echo
  • Posts: 3931

Posted 13 October 2011 - 18:59

Ps - nice quick edit there on your post.

Yeah? Like there was a significant difference? Nice edit yourself.

I am officially out of this preposterous thread. Enjoy your opportunity to slander me without me responding to shoot it down.
  • 0

#45 BuddyWoof

BuddyWoof
  • Posts: 563

Posted 13 October 2011 - 19:01

OMG! Mockery of warbird. LMAO.

My edit was for my PS.
  • 0

#46 JimmyBlonde

JimmyBlonde
  • Posts: 2346

Posted 13 October 2011 - 23:48

I don't demand absolute historical-ness. /quote]

:lol:

Just as well, you'd be pretty frustrated and miserable if you did.

  • 0

#47 R_Suppards

R_Suppards
  • Posts: 598

Posted 14 October 2011 - 06:18

Forget the machine gun.

Forget the graphics.

What remains is still a dumb, trite story riddled with cliches and devoid of any message or narrative arc.
Absolute and total agreement. I listed my objections earlier.The ???style??? is early teen comic book.The attempt at atmosphere was ludicrous and unbelievable.
Now for the good parts that held my attention :——-
  • 0

#48 hq_Reflected

hq_Reflected
  • Posts: 4711

Posted 14 October 2011 - 06:29

Meh, I've seen this movie before and I find it utterly cheesy :?
The visuals are not spectacular either.

I know, strong words from someone who can't draw a tree in Paint, but you don't have to be able to lay an egg to criticize an omlet, now do you? ;)
  • 0

#49 Trooper117

Trooper117
  • Posts: 3410

Posted 14 October 2011 - 08:39

Cartoony, I'd agree with that, I don't think it was meant to be anything much more than that. Plus coupled with a passing interest in WWI airwarfare, (obviously not made by some one with the knowledge of some of you spotters on here is it), so you have a simple tale in that setting..
I understand they weren't trying to be realistic in any way, and in that context I thoroughly enjoyed it.
  • 0

#50 JimmyBlonde

JimmyBlonde
  • Posts: 2346

Posted 14 October 2011 - 10:36

Forget the machine gun.

Forget the graphics.

What remains is still a dumb, trite story riddled with cliches and devoid of any message or narrative arc.
Absolute and total agreement. I listed my objections earlier.The ???style??? is early teen comic book. The attempt at atmosphere was ludicrous and unbelievable.
Now for the good parts that held my attention :——-

I also agree (except the part about it having no message, the film repeatedly belted you over the head with its' dumb, trite, cliched messages)

But I still liked it, silly nonsense is okay with me, it has a place.
  • 0

#51 R_Suppards

R_Suppards
  • Posts: 598

Posted 14 October 2011 - 23:23

J B, I agree silly nonsense has it's place. I am a great admirer of Monty Python and the Goon Show before it. However this rubbish takes itself seriously. It was that that I found ludicrous. :D
  • 0

#52 =III=Flav

=III=Flav
  • Posts: 1128

Posted 15 October 2011 - 08:49

I think it is meant to be art, so I shall accept it as such.
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users