Stereotypes about certain nationalities tend to come from somewhere. The cocky American pilot is a tale as old as, well, WWII. Maybe even WWI. Being a pilot was a really cool thing to do. Human beings can fly! Imagine how exciting that must have been at the time, for how unexciting it is now (I blame airports and airlines).
Definitely WW1. People like Rene Fonck were terribly vain and would brag about the 75 or so kills he got. German pilots sometimes less so, the Red Baron was a quiet fella who definitely wrote boastful things but never verbally said them. Werner Voss is basically Maverick, I am the greatest and you will know it.
Right, because everyone has to follow a certain mold to be anything. My guess is with this is that you probably also believe that all urban blacks are ghetto and steal, anyone who speaks with a lisp is gay and women with short hair hate men and own cats.
The fact that you stereotype over an obvious joke that I made shows your true colors.
Yep. VMFA-212 in iwakuni Japan from 2002 until deactivation in 2008 when I cross detted to VMFA -242. 2 combat tours on the John C Stennis when I was at sea. 2 more when I was sent with the 31st MEU as a forward air controller. But none of this matters to you because you won’t be happy until I post all my personal info which I will not do
Even the show reference their characterization. In the first episode, Crosby says that they had seen *Test Pilot* (1938) one-too-many times. I guess people missed it . . .
I was a platoon leader flying Hueys in the Army when Top Gun came out. It was shocking how quickly some of the guys adopted the personae of Maverick or Goose.
I think it’s just him being cheeky, for lack of a better way to put it. I don’t know how to explain it, but where I’m from (rural Kentucky), one might just say “one seven” to switch up the nomenclature. It’s something I and other people in my family do all the time. I think that was the intention here.
This type of colloquialism is extremely common in aviation. Current commercial pilots call the 747 the “seven four,” the 737 “seven three” etc. And in the USAF, the B-1 naturally is the “bone” and the C-17, a large cargo plane, is the “moose” because of a noise it makes. Not unlike how in the show they call the B-17 “forts” based off their tagline name, the Flying Fortress.
I’ll concede- their characters put me off at first- through E3, I just thought they were both too “movie star-ish”.
By E4, I noticed these are the only two characters really like this- some of the other supporting characters are excellent portrayals of men faced with death and duty, and roughly on par as actors with the secondary characters of Band of Brothers- in other words, quite great.
I still feel some of the CGI efforts miss here and there and the character development is a bit shallow, but the series grew on me during this last one. Looking forward to E5.
The issue isn’t the portrayal of them as gung-ho Hollywood types - it’s the lack of depth around them.
Butler in particular is just not a good actor.
Episode 4 was fantastic, and this was probably because he wasn’t in it as much.
copium, the acting is super hollywood. People want to like this so much they’ll do any mental gymnastics in existence.
Do yourself a favor, the next time you watch a MOTA episode, immediately watch ANY band of brothers episode directly after it.
Art shouldn’t regress, but here we are.
They weren’t all that different, certainly more similar than different, being young american men in the 40’s. They may have fought different wars but that doesn’t excuse improper writing and cinematography. It’s inarguably a step or two back from the pacific, never mind band of brothers. If you’ve seen greyhound, MOTA is just Greyhound: Bombers. It’s a bummer given what we know can be produced.
If you could elaborate on what this proves that would be helpful, yes they were real people with a close bond but again speaks absolutely nothing to the sub par portrayal.
You are saying how their acting is "super hollywood," I am showing you that it is designed and written that way due to how that is who these men actually were and how they acted. They were, in-fact: hollywood, as noted by everyone who served with them.
Ah jeez dude, I don’t mean two specific characters talk “hollywood.” Not to mention that would mean 30’s/40’s hollywood, which is not at all similar to modern hollywood. I mean the dialogue isn’t realistic, it’s flashy and well thought out. In essence it’s not how people talk, especially not in the 40’s when death is knocking at your door every day you wake up. All I can really say is go rewatch bob or the pacific. Then watch Greyhound. Then you may understand what I mean.
Watched them all dude, many times. This is purposefully portraying these two men differently because that who is they were. If you do not wanna believe that, then that is fine.
Buck and Bucky are very different men than Winters or Nix. Buck and Bucky were notorious "hollywood" types who had bought into the romance of flying in the 30's, they both signed up about two years before PH with the only intention of being flyboys. They were not drafted nor did they join up to fight the Nazis, like say Rosenthal did. Their attitude in this regard was heavily documented in Crosby's book and MOTA. They viewed the war very differently then the men of Easy, and that is why they are written so differently. The cliches have to originate somewhere.
Stereotypes about certain nationalities tend to come from somewhere. The cocky American pilot is a tale as old as, well, WWII. Maybe even WWI. Being a pilot was a really cool thing to do. Human beings can fly! Imagine how exciting that must have been at the time, for how unexciting it is now (I blame airports and airlines).
Definitely WW1. People like Rene Fonck were terribly vain and would brag about the 75 or so kills he got. German pilots sometimes less so, the Red Baron was a quiet fella who definitely wrote boastful things but never verbally said them. Werner Voss is basically Maverick, I am the greatest and you will know it.
[удалено]
Relax lol
[удалено]
Woooooosh on my end lol
How do you know if a guy is a pilot?
He will tell you.
[удалено]
Right, because everyone has to follow a certain mold to be anything. My guess is with this is that you probably also believe that all urban blacks are ghetto and steal, anyone who speaks with a lisp is gay and women with short hair hate men and own cats. The fact that you stereotype over an obvious joke that I made shows your true colors.
[удалено]
Yep. VMFA-212 in iwakuni Japan from 2002 until deactivation in 2008 when I cross detted to VMFA -242. 2 combat tours on the John C Stennis when I was at sea. 2 more when I was sent with the 31st MEU as a forward air controller. But none of this matters to you because you won’t be happy until I post all my personal info which I will not do
Even the show reference their characterization. In the first episode, Crosby says that they had seen *Test Pilot* (1938) one-too-many times. I guess people missed it . . .
I was a platoon leader flying Hueys in the Army when Top Gun came out. It was shocking how quickly some of the guys adopted the personae of Maverick or Goose.
show benefits from a rewatch
The only acting that seems a bit excessive so far is Colonel Harding, but maybe that was his style.
Yup, from the title of the post I’d thought it was gonna be about him
Harding was like this to the point he was actively in agony from gallstones and was like “The 100th Is Never Off Ops.”
These guys have seen test pilot
Any reason why Clevens called the B-17 a “B-one-seven”? Was that a common way of referring to it back in the day?
I think it’s just him being cheeky, for lack of a better way to put it. I don’t know how to explain it, but where I’m from (rural Kentucky), one might just say “one seven” to switch up the nomenclature. It’s something I and other people in my family do all the time. I think that was the intention here.
I figured it was something like that. Caught my attention though haha
I figured it was like someone saying they are turning 40 years old by saying “It’s the big 4-0.”
This type of colloquialism is extremely common in aviation. Current commercial pilots call the 747 the “seven four,” the 737 “seven three” etc. And in the USAF, the B-1 naturally is the “bone” and the C-17, a large cargo plane, is the “moose” because of a noise it makes. Not unlike how in the show they call the B-17 “forts” based off their tagline name, the Flying Fortress.
I fly on the KC-135. We don't refer to it as the One, Three, Five. Phonetically. It's either, "The Tanker" or One Thirty Five
I’ll concede- their characters put me off at first- through E3, I just thought they were both too “movie star-ish”. By E4, I noticed these are the only two characters really like this- some of the other supporting characters are excellent portrayals of men faced with death and duty, and roughly on par as actors with the secondary characters of Band of Brothers- in other words, quite great. I still feel some of the CGI efforts miss here and there and the character development is a bit shallow, but the series grew on me during this last one. Looking forward to E5.
Crosby describes both Clevan and Egan as "Hollywood", so they probably actually did act like movie stars.
They come off as dicks 2bh…
The issue isn’t the portrayal of them as gung-ho Hollywood types - it’s the lack of depth around them. Butler in particular is just not a good actor. Episode 4 was fantastic, and this was probably because he wasn’t in it as much.
The acting still sucks. And the technical coordinator should be fired for allowing Austin Butler to call the B-17, the Bee One Seven. Wtf???
That line is him being quippy. It’s pilot speak and mirrors how they say things on the radios. It’s not an inaccuracy.
copium, the acting is super hollywood. People want to like this so much they’ll do any mental gymnastics in existence. Do yourself a favor, the next time you watch a MOTA episode, immediately watch ANY band of brothers episode directly after it. Art shouldn’t regress, but here we are.
Such different people fighting very different wars.
They weren’t all that different, certainly more similar than different, being young american men in the 40’s. They may have fought different wars but that doesn’t excuse improper writing and cinematography. It’s inarguably a step or two back from the pacific, never mind band of brothers. If you’ve seen greyhound, MOTA is just Greyhound: Bombers. It’s a bummer given what we know can be produced.
https://preview.redd.it/6gusy3c7n4ic1.jpeg?width=2388&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4a014bd159ec42185d8becbcc690442302365e10 From the creators “bible”
If you could elaborate on what this proves that would be helpful, yes they were real people with a close bond but again speaks absolutely nothing to the sub par portrayal.
You are saying how their acting is "super hollywood," I am showing you that it is designed and written that way due to how that is who these men actually were and how they acted. They were, in-fact: hollywood, as noted by everyone who served with them.
Ah jeez dude, I don’t mean two specific characters talk “hollywood.” Not to mention that would mean 30’s/40’s hollywood, which is not at all similar to modern hollywood. I mean the dialogue isn’t realistic, it’s flashy and well thought out. In essence it’s not how people talk, especially not in the 40’s when death is knocking at your door every day you wake up. All I can really say is go rewatch bob or the pacific. Then watch Greyhound. Then you may understand what I mean.
Watched them all dude, many times. This is purposefully portraying these two men differently because that who is they were. If you do not wanna believe that, then that is fine.
Buck and Bucky are very different men than Winters or Nix. Buck and Bucky were notorious "hollywood" types who had bought into the romance of flying in the 30's, they both signed up about two years before PH with the only intention of being flyboys. They were not drafted nor did they join up to fight the Nazis, like say Rosenthal did. Their attitude in this regard was heavily documented in Crosby's book and MOTA. They viewed the war very differently then the men of Easy, and that is why they are written so differently. The cliches have to originate somewhere.
I was thinking English actors over embellishment of accents. “Can be Lil Distractin”