MovieChat Forums > Stealth (2005) Discussion > Why is it there are no good films with F...

Why is it there are no good films with Fighter Jets in !!!


Top Bum ( I mean GUN Sorry )
Iron Eagle 1 - 4
Stealth
Firefox ( had a good plot only really let down by poor SFX )

And any other films I may have missed.
All have one thing in common - None of them are very realistic, they are full of silly faults and matter of fact errors.

Airshows in Britain attract the largest amounts of people for public events after Football Matches so its not like Planes (especially Jet Fighters) aren’t popular with people - of course unless you are Greek !!!

So someone please come out with a good idea & make a good film & correct all these awful Hollywood mistakes.



reply

[deleted]

Hot Shots.

So good in fact it had a sequel!

reply

Behind Enemy Lines had a good jet scene 15mins into the movie. But it may look crappy today as all action-packed Hollywood movies do. In fact, recently, all Hollywood action movies look like some high school project. The only movies that survive are those dramatic ones with remarkable plot and superb performance directed by those who practice filmm making as an art not as a hobby.

reply

Behind Enemy Lines had a good jet scene 15mins into the movie.

About 15 minutes into that movie is the shootdown scene.
That scene is about the pinnacle of ignorant bullsh!t modern hollywood crapfest.
There is not one thing realistic about that scene, and it was better suited to a Wile E. Coyote vs Roadrunner cartoon that a good scene in a good film.

It was just as bad as the later scene where our "hero" runs right through tripwires and actually outruns the blast and shrapnel of hundreds of Bouncing Betty mines.



I joined the Navy to see the world, only to discover the world is 2/3 water!

reply

I'll rather watch Top Gun fifty times, then this movie again!

And Top Gun isn't even that good but at least it has a cool 80s feel and slight homoerotic undertones.

reply

Really? I found Top Gun boring and far more idiotic then this movie. I had to look it up to find out what the hell happened in the first scene when they play tag with the "MIG-28s". I thought it was a training scenario at since A)There's obviously no such plane as a MIG-28 and B)Those were clearly F-5s which are still used for providing dissimilar air combat training to this day. I know they didn't have Wikipedia back then but would it kill them to call a few experts on the subject?

reply

This resentment is a bit unfair regardless of how cheesy the movie was. It was shot in 1986 so there was this small thing called "Cold War" which meant the Russians were less than enthusiastic to parade their military gear around to their class enemy.

The designation Mig-28 was acknowledgement to the simple fact that no American filmmaker could get their hands (or afford to) on actual Soviet weapon systems so they invented an aircraft type wich did not exist but was in its designation reasonable between existing types and used footage of aircraft regularly used to pose as the bad guys in training.

On top of there being the small thing cold war CGI was still in its early development and only reasonable usable for scifi or other scenarios where realism was not an issue in the first place.

reply

Yeah...the cold war was still going on back then, they had to settle for just getting help from the us airforce/navy when shooting the movie.

Did you know that the Taliban in "Lone Survivor" weren't real Taliban either? And they didn't use real african militias in "Tears of the sun" either? Crazy, right?
Why would they do that?

Light travels faster than sound,
that's why people seem bright,
until you hear them.

reply

Yeah Macross Plus has the most realistic fighting scene in animation

reply

Yeah Macross Plus has the most realistic fighting scene in animation


Old post to respond to, I know... but I have to disagree with this, I think "Wings of Honneamise" ( http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093207/ ) has better animated aerial combat scenes.

reply

Chevalier du Ciel (Sky Fighters), a french movie based on the comic book series by Uderzo IIRC. I can't think of any movie that had better aerial photography. Unfortunately they had to use blue screen in the climactic dogfight because they had very limited time to shoot the scene over Paris.

reply

Try "The Final Countdown". It's a good jet fighter film.

reply

Battle of britain did a good job despite the times.

reply

I can't really think of any good movies about Fighter Jets, but there are some good piston-engine films:

Battle of Britain (1969) is a good film, I don't really like the characters, though.

The Blue Max (1966) is pretty cool. The aerial photography isn't the greatest, but it's got a helluva story.

Flyboys (2006) isn't rated very good on imdb, but I personally thought it was pretty cool. Good combat scenes, though a little Hollywood at times.

Hot Shots (1991) terrible regarding the dogfights, but it's a really funny movie! And it has jets. The Oscar EW 5894 Fallis Tactical Fighter/Bomber.

I recommend checking out all of these movies, though I'd only watch the first two if you don't mind old special effects, the third if you don't mind movies being a little unrealistic every now and then, and the fourth if you can tolerate incredibly absurd comedies.

I don't poly-cotton to coping tropes, even my own.

reply

Flyboys was retarded. Star wars was a better WW1 movie...

reply

LOL! I just thought it was a fun little movie! It's not that realistic, the CGI was pretty shoddy, and the acting wasn't the greatest. At least it had planes! I guess you could say it's a step in the right direction, as far as WW1 fighter movies go. It's been so long since they've had one of those movies, but Flyboys didn't do the greatest job, so I'm sure Hollywood won't be putting their money into that cash cow for a while...

I don't poly-cotton to coping tropes, even my own.

reply

Independence Day.
Air Force One.


Denny Crane.

reply

Interesting question. You'd expect such an evocative subject as aerial combat to have produced at least one great film, on a par with Patton or Das Boot or Saving Private Ryan, but there's nothing. Given that advances in CGI over the past decade have removed some of the expense and technical challenge of hiring aircraft and having them pretend to dogfight, you'd expect there to be at least one decent film about the Battle of Britain, for example - the topic lends itself to a cinematic treatment - but again there's nothing. The same applies to tank warfare. There hasn't been a single great film involving tank warfare. There are several good submarine and ship films, but no great tank or aircraft films.

I assume it's because there isn't much scope for personal drama in modern aerial combat. A realistic war film involving jet planes, made by intelligent professionals aiming at the same audience that enjoyed Das Boot and so forth, would barely feature the jets; it would all be about long-range missile duels and flickering radar scopes and blips on a screen. The jets are flown by individuals or pairs who never see the enemy. Great films tend to be about people, whereas aerial combat is a depersonalised, mechanical form of war. Even a realistic Second World War film would feature a lot of darting ambushes on distant specks, and it's hard to feel sympathy with pilots. Rich, middle-class overachievers.

The sad thing is that there aren't even any *good* films - never mind *great* - about fighter planes, on a par with (say) Where Eagles Dare or Die Hard or From Russia with Love etc. Dogfights tend to be an incidental part of a greater story, as in Air Force One or Firefox, rather than the meat of the film. What kind of story can you tell with a bunch of people flying their machines against a bunch of other people flying their machines?

Still, it depresses me that the Battle of Britain, of all topics, hasn't been filmed well. It's the one aerial conflict that cries out for a film - spiffing underdogs in sexy Spitfires fight off the evil Nazis, there's your pitch - but all we have is that awful late-60s Michael Caine soap opera. Not many historical aerial battles have an engaging story, perhaps only the Eastern Front has the same "romantic underdog wins out whilst surrounded by ever-present death" drama.

reply

Not spitfires in the Battle of Britain, but Hurricanes. Spitfires did get the first kills in the Battle when they inadvertently shot down some of their own Hurricanes.

If you want a film with Jets fighting, you missed Hot Shots.

reply