Horrible movie


The Tuskegee Airmen deserved a better story than this. And a much better cast to portray them.

I was offended by the stereotypes and reducing all these men to caricatures.

It looked like a made for teevee movie from the 80's. And the music was pulled out of some sad Air Wolf vault.

Yeah this is how I feel. I was pissed. I haven't walked out of a movie in years, but an hour into this tripe and we put on our coats and left.

Someone should have made sure that this didn't happen. This is history for cripes sake. And this is 2012! We know how to tell authentic stories and portray real people on the screen. This is such a good opportunity to make something special, why reduce it to Netflix fodder?

And people should be outraged that in these final days of these Vet's lives that a film was made on a scrap budget, with a poor scriptwriter and an even crappier director. But the final blame falls to the producer who obviously just slapped his name on it and turned a blind eye. I can't imagine anyone of George Lucas' stature seeing this and thinking it is good story-telling. There is no way he paid any attention to this at all.

Terrence Howard, stop acting. It's not your calling. And if I never again see Cuba Gooding Jr. with a lopsided colonel's hat and a pipe in his mouth, it'll be too soon.

reply

Do you feel btter now and are you off your period?

Last Movies Seen:
Theater: Red Tails
DVD : The Ides Of March

reply

What gives you the right to say which actors should and should not act. Too bad Terrence Howard's been acting for twenty years now, a little too late might I add.

reply

Ummm yeah the acting in this movie was and is horrible Im literally in the middle of it and I dont want to waste my time.

If you want a good, well made Movie about the Tuskegee Airmen, then watch The Tuskegee Airmen with not Lawrence Fishburn (Morpheus yes) and guess who else...Cuba Gooding Jr. both pilots both pretty cool, better character development better acting, better story better everything.

The Director and the Writer where the problem. Anthony Hemingway has a cool last name but no where near the story telling talent...personally Im certain he got this job because he was black.

he is a TV director and this movie was crappy tv campy. I mean seriously stupid, and too much information jesus. Same with the Biopic Carlos, about Carlos the Jackal just too much information, too much redundancy.

Like they said it in one scene and a few minutes later they wanted to re-say it just incase the people were sleeping. Chances are they were with this piece of crap.

This is what happens when Terrence Howard gets pissy over money doesnt make Iron Man 2 and makes this piece of crap.

Cuba is been doing straight to DVD action films his career is pretty much dead as a big time actor.

All these other people just sucked, seriously seriously I mean jesus how could they be that bad.

Buy it but whatever you do don't watch it.



George directed 1 movie that hit the times hard because it was futuristic, he created a great world, Empire and Return of the Jedi where directed by other people who told the story better. George was a producer ie money man only.

He screwed up the beginning trilogy hence why he wont man up and do the last trilogy.

Dont waste your time.

This guy has directed crap. Manchurian candidate couldn't have been any worst unless it was playing Gigli inside of it, Changing lanes yikes, and freedomland can we say crappy career...he didnt direct them he was assistant director and obviously didnt learn jack from it.

The Writer of this dreadful movie...barbershop (need I say more), Undercover Brother (again need I say more), and MARTIN (really!!!!) Dude after finding this out Im surprised Chenaynay didnt play a role in this movie cause damn.

I get the whole making a black movie about black history, with black actors, black writer, black director but Im thinking there were better choices than this cause DAMN!!!!!!!!!!!!!

reply

The fact that this is a Forum for precisely those different viewpoints.
If you can't take points with which you disagree, I suggest you don't read them and stop whining.

reply

Well, I don't have periods. I'm sure your next one will be danndee though.

reply

[deleted]

What a jerk! he was absolutely correct about this stinker.

reply

And people should be outraged that in these final days of these Vet's lives that a film was made on a scrap budget, with a poor scriptwriter and an even crappier director. But the final blame falls to the producer who obviously just slapped his name on it and turned a blind eye. I can't imagine anyone of George Lucas' stature seeing this and thinking it is good story-telling. There is no way he paid any attention to this at all.


The quality was sad, and I was hoping for a better film, but George Lucas ponied up his own dough to get this film made, and he's been wanting to see it made for decades, so he didn't just slap his name on it. Big Hollywood studios don't want to spend the money it takes to get a film like this made, because they don't want to take the risk.

And are you really suprised at the quality of film after you've had Indiana Jones 4 and the Star Wars Prequels for reference of the kind of quality Lucas churns out these days?

reply

I enjoyed the film very much and for what it was I thought it was good. I didn't go into this film expecting amazing dailouge given the fact that Aaron Mcgruder was making his feature film, and John Ridley has never written a dramtic piece. The film really does need the support though, so we can get the sequel and the prequel.

Last Movies Seen:
Theater: Red Tails
DVD : The Ides Of March

reply

If it's the same quality as this *beep* I don't want a sequel/prequel.

reply

The Documentary had already been done by HBO in 1995. It was more dialog as you want and more of a historical accounting to what happened, but not enough action. I've met some of the airmen at a special preview.

George Lucas wanted to put a bigger than life spin on it, because they were bigger than life.

I don't understand how people can claim to know that these men didn't have fun and act a little silly during their down times. They all had "nick names" that should be an indicator of who they were. They had input from several of the living airmen and I believe they were portrayed pretty accurately.

This was their story sensationalized, if it does well, the deeper training scenes will come, but overall I enjoyed it immensely.

People need to lighten up. If the original airmen liked it, who are we to complain.

reply

Being a fan of WWII films and of avaition, I thought the air sequences were
the best I've ever seen. There is no way this type of air action could be filmed
without CGI and that is where most of Lucas' 100Mil went. Like someone pointed
out, we've seen the HBO film and that was very good but without the air action.
I'll go see any film that has fighting P51's in it!

reply

Its very trendy to hate - or at least claim to hate - CGI effects. Not that I don't understand where its coming from, but some things are impossible to shoot.

reply

Being a fan of WWII films and of avaition, I thought the air sequences were
the best I've ever seen.


You might be a fan. But if you think these scenes were a realistic portrayal of the capabilities of the aircraft/armament portrayed here and/or the pilots who flew them, your knowledge base is severely lacking.

TNSTAAFL

reply

Original Tuskegee Airmen Talk Red Tails

http://www.chicagotribune.com/videogallery/67513673/Entertainment/Interview-Original-Tuskegee-Airmen-talk-movie-Red-Tails

AT 2:10 in to the interview Capt. Jack Lyle is asked if the spectacular dog fights were accurate. His reply, VERY ACCURATE. He says that he's never seen the part where the hero flew directly into the face with the jet fighter and explodes the jet and flies through the debris, that he said he's never seen.


So the pilots that flew these aircraft were incapable of flying like this?

reply

So what is he, like 90 or so? Know many 90 year olds? Do you really expect them to have clear recollections?

The kind of flying I was referring to was the "trick" maneuver of pulling back the stick, kicking the rudder over and immediately coming down to guns on the trailing enemy and blowing him out of the sky, all at high speed. Yes you can pull back the stick and kick the rudder, but it wouldn't look like it did in the movie. In the first place aircraft of that era and type were not capable of turning AS DEPICTED. Nor are human beings capable of withstanding those kinds of stresses with passing out.

That is just one of the problems I had with the flying as it was shown. Don't misunderstand me. I am not trying to diminish the accomplishments of these men. All I'm saying is that the movie makers jazzed up the performance of both planes and pilots to the point of looking unrealistic, 68 year old memories notwithstanding.

TNSTAAFL

reply

I found this very interesting read about the authenticity of the dog fights and Lucas keeping the maneuverability of the plans as true to fact as possible.


http://www.popularmechanics.com/technology/digital/visual-effects/the-furious-dogfights-of-george-lucas-red-tails

Red Tails spends much of its time in the cockpits of P-51s as the Airmen fight and dodge their way through a flurry of fire. And because Lucas spent a quarter century and millions of his own dollars to bring to the movie to life, it's no surprise that his team obsessed with getting the World War II–era details just right.

"There's historical footage everywhere," says visual effects supervisor Craig Hammack. "You can watch old John Wayne movies that were shot with real airplanes. So people have a general idea of the capabilities of the planes, and how to tell that story and stay true to those dynamics is a challenge."

reply

And because Lucas spent a quarter century and millions of his own dollars to bring to the movie to life, it's no surprise that his team obsessed with getting the World War II–era details just right.


Yeah. It's too bad they got it wrong.


So people have a general idea of the capabilities of the planes, and how to tell that story and stay true to those dynamics is a challenge."


A challenge they failed at.
TNSTAAFL

reply

It was a challenge because they had to keep reminding them to slow down to the actual speeds the planes flew in those days. Did you even read the article?

But I'm glad you are expert enough to know they got it wrong. He should have hired you as a consultant.

reply

No. I didn't read your article. If you are too lazy to make it clickable, I can be too lazy to type it out.

And yes, it being a challenge is not in dispute. The difference of opinion is if they met that challenge. I say they didn't. I may not be an "expert". But I know enough to know they did indeed get it wrong. It doesn't take an expert to see that. So, "hired me as a consultant"? Well, if my only duties were (as you imply) to judge if it looked right or not, sure. I would have done a much better job.

TNSTAAFL

reply

Lol, type it out? Copy and paste - look it up. Children know this stuff.

reply


You missed the point.
TNSTAAFL

reply

Actually the impossible "trick" maneuver you are referring to is well documented to have been performed by a USAAF pilot in a P-51 Mustang.

0:25

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pg1GbJP0Q2k&feature=related

I recommend knowing before speaking...

reply

Actually the impossible "trick" maneuver you are referring to is well documented to have been performed by a USAAF pilot in a P-51 Mustang.


Not in the WAY it was shown. A speeding aircraft just doesn't behave like it WAS SHOWN. Several people, including a FIGHTER PILOT have explained that. You are wrong.

I recommend reading before running your mouth.

TNSTAAFL

reply

I agree with you RoadKillBill1. WW2 era planes can NOT turn so sharply at so close range, making them able to still shoot down other fighter with guns.
Modern planes with their thrust vectoring jets and canard ailerons (Su39 etc) might do this, not a damn P51.

reply

One of the worst and rasist movie i have ever watched in my life...i was skipping all the tme..watched only flight scenes...awful... 1/100000 score....

reply

I have to agree with you. I do feel the film could have been much better. I always enjoy reading about these men that sacrificed so much but have gotten so little credit for just how hard it was to be one of the first black pilots in the US Military. A big thrill always, to see those beautiful silver P-51 Mustangs have the red paint coated on their tails!!! I hope the surviving Tusgekee Airmen truly enjoyed this film. Not one bomber was lost!!! All you have to do is count the unbearable losses the UK & USA absorbed 41-44 in Europe to realize that this was an amazing feat of courage and expertise as pilots. I'm waiting to go see the film again!

reply

Not one bomber was lost!!!


It's a myth that no bombers were lost while under escort of the 332nd Fighter Group. In truth, at least 27 bombers were lost to enemy fighters while escorted by the 332nd.

All you have to do is count the unbearable losses the UK & USA absorbed 41-44 in Europe to realize that this was an amazing feat of courage and expertise as pilots.


The loss rate was entirely bearable once long-range fighters were able to escort the bombers all the way to the targets. For the 8th Air Force, long-range escort with Mustangs began in December 1943. The crisis period was before that, mainly August-October 1943, with the infamous Schweinfurt missions. The 332nd started bomber escort for the 15th Air Force in the Summer of 1944, well after the crisis period, and well after bomber losses had become bearable. The movie Red Tails is misleading on that point, and others.

UK bomber losses were not very relevant to US fighter escort, since the RAF operated their heavies almost exclusively at night.

Live long and prosper.

reply

The Documentary had already been done by HBO in 1995


Uh, it wasn't a documentary. It was a feature length film. Not enough action -- what are you, 12 years old? A good historical movie doesn't need Michael Bay action every 3 minutes.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/9177339/a_haiku_in_winter.htm l?cat=47

reply

No I'm not 12, I'm 54 to be exact. You sound like the 12 year old trying to denigrate my opinion because it doesn't line up with yours.

The HBO movie was an attempt to DOCUMENT the story of the Tuskegee Airmen as we've never seen it before. If I offended you calling it that, get over it.

Here's what you don't understand, it wasn't a HISTORICAL movie. It was about a historical group, but it was sensationalized with the technology of our time to try and put us in the air with the men.

A lot of people including me, liked it. Even the living airmen liked it. To those of you that didn't and want to call it a "Horrible" film. That's your opinion. I don't know what you came to the theater expecting. To the person that said they walked out of the film midway.... well all I can say it that sounds like a pompous piece of self righteous work.

Your preference does not make you right and a million others wrong. You didn't like it, you said your piece, now get on while I go back and enjoy the movie again.

It's really not a life changer.

reply

You called the film a documentary, which it is NOT. Every movie documents the story of something but that doesn't mean it is a documentary. When you can't even identify a genre of film, don't even try to accuse others of not understanding something.

It's funny because you don't seem to understand the idea of an opinion yet you're spouting off about yours while trying to undermine others just because their opinion isn't like yours.

Take your own advice: if you like the movie, fine, but allow others to express their opinion even if it doesn't "line up with yours".

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/9177339/a_haiku_in_winter.htm l?cat=47

reply

its for kids you morons.

"It was Hell down there." Inspector Clouseau

reply

its for kids you morons.


Then I suppose you think it is preferable to feed kids a diet of bad history as as opposed to giving them the real thing and making it interesting at the same time? Guess what? Kids aren't stupid. Eventually they figure out when they've been lied to (well, most anyway) and they lose interest in the real thing. And THAT is the real tragedy here.

TNSTAAFL

reply

Then I suppose you think it is preferable to feed kids a diet of bad history as as opposed to giving them the real thing and making it interesting at the same time?


In all fairness, since when have historical movies been about 100% accuracy? I can name plenty of movies based on real events that weren't 100% accurate. Titanic, U-571, Enemy at the Gates, Munich, JFK, Saving Private Ryan, Patton, and the list goes on.

Movies always put entertainment first. If kids see an entertaining movie about a historical event it will get them interested in further researching the history. If a movie is accurate, but boring, no one will care.

Don't try to cash in love, that check will always bounce.

reply

In all fairness, since when have historical movies been about 100% accuracy? I can name plenty of movies based on real events that weren't 100% accurate. Titanic, U-571, Enemy at the Gates, Munich, JFK, Saving Private Ryan, Patton, and the list goes on.


And that's why 1/3 of the kids in school in the US today can't even find their own country on a map.

TNSTAAFL

reply

Source?

reply

"Kids aren't stupid."

oh yeah?

The Dumbing-Down of America

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumbing_down

reply

http://www.chicagotribune.com/videogallery/67513673/Entertainment/Interview-Original-Tuskegee-Airmen-talk-movie-Red-Tails

Interview with the man that was there. He enjoyed the movie and understands that it was the entertainment side. He also says the dog fights were very accurate, the only non accurate things he could find was that the same German pilot kept showing up at the dog fights. He also said that there was no time to glare at the Germans while you were flying by.

Other than that, HE enjoyed the portrayal by Lucas, and HE should know.

Lastly, I believe you insulted my intelligence calling me 12. Others have posted that anyone with intelligence or production skills should be insulted. Get real.

I never said you didn't have an opinion. My point is simply that, it is YOUR opinion but that doesn't make it right for everyone. Now you have a good day.

reply

A lot of people including me, liked it. Even the living airmen liked it. To those of you that didn't and want to call it a "Horrible" film. That's your opinion.


And that is your opinion. So, now we recognize that everyone here is espousing their own opinion. That leaves us precisely where we came in. In other words, that is a pointless comment.

Your preference does not make you right and a million others wrong.


Nor does yours. So.........see above.

TNSTAAFL

reply

"George Lucas wanted to put a bigger than life spin on it, because they were bigger than life."



no, he wanted to do it because he is a man-child who has the outlook of a 10 year old boy who thinks war is a *beep* video game.

you can have action in a historical film. band of brothers, private ryan, perfect examples.

Miracle at St Anna's. another perfect example. its not 'historical' per se, but at the very least, it is both interesting, while not managing to blatantly disregard the nature of warfare.


people who just want to see a bunch of action thrown together are subliterate troglodyte uneducated, ignorant morons who are responsible for the world moving rapidly down the toilet bowl. read a *beep* book, educate yourselves, and stop ruining film for everyone else.

reply

Everybody in the world who saw the 1995 and 2012 versions would all say that it was a film about the Tuskegee Airmen. Their story could be told a thousand different ways, the George Lucas version was very good for what it was. As we get further and further away from the history of our country the harder it will be to accuratly portray what really happened. No one will ever get it 100% right. But we keep on trying to bring the spirit of the film to the people who will never ever experience the same emotions or life and death that our soldiers experienced back then.

I am a Viet Nam veteran and there has never been a film that portrayed what I went through, probably never will be. I just thank those people out there that have the vision to bring some of the that to the screen so you can experience a small part of history.

I've seen a lot of war movies and they are all done just a little different in everyone, so before anyone bashes this movie any more try to understand what the whole thing is supposed to be about and represent.

I liked both versions of this story, for what they were.

reply

The problems were in order

1> Hack writer only given the job because he made a bunch of noise on Star Wars 1 & because he is black. He has NEVER EVER written a feature film that caused to have drama & action. He wrote BOONDOCKS for Christ-Sake.

2> Over His Head Director. This guy can barley direct a high school play. His direction was no where to be seen. The characters were all from Central Casting and no reality in any of the flying scenes, when we saw the pilots fly

3> Drunken/Lasy Ass Editors - There must have been 12 or more scenes that just started & ended without any connection between them.

4> Over-The-Hill Exec. Producer> Lucas is done, and wasted all his money. He used all this talent & energy on Star Wars. Look what he did to the Indiana Jones franchise, - its toast. Now he takes a great story and gives us a story straight out of a box top of cereal.

5> Hack Actors > Cuba & the rest just shows us that this is how you spiral down into being a "D-Listed" actors. It just shows that 1> You give stereotype performances 2> You can't be a serious actor 3> You just wanted to hang around a movie set, get free room & board for 18 weeks & screw with all the local women telling them that you are a big ass movie star. LMFAO on that one

What a waste of money & that's after Showtime already did the movie & did a much better job. The only cool thing about getting the Bul-Ray was the extras. The rest was just up there as bad a movie as Disney's "John Carter".



reply

Could not agree with you more. This was one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Let me start with a few observations.

1. No one had a girlfriend, wife, or significant other to write home to.

2. It was never explained (for those unaware of what WWII was about) how these brothers wound up in Italy.

3. Over 50 Tuskegee Airman died in WWII. All we got to see was one. Some battle that was.

4. Speaking of flight school, no reference to training, the rigorous math and chemistry courses.

5. No one mention of anger regarding the contraction of dying for a country that would not serve them a cup of coffee when they returned "home".

6. No mention of how German prisoners where treated better than the Brothas.

I could go on and on. But fact remains that Hollywood cannot tell our story or stories. And Black people (especially Tom Joyner) should be ashamed of themselves for helping the white man (Lucas) sell this garbage. It was nothing more than feel good history. Now we will have ignorant Negroes (like those that saw Malcolm X, thinking they know all there is to know about the Tuskeegee Airmen just because of that damn movie. Now now books will be read or again written for that matter. Instead of us going to a library or going online to seek the truth about us, we'd rather sit around and wait for the Geoge Lucus' of the world to allow us to order popcorn and gummi bears and think we're being educated. How pathetic.!!!!! We can do better. We must do better!!!

reply

2. It was never explained (for those unaware of what WWII was about) how these brothers wound up in Italy.


Are you serious?

3. Over 50 Tuskegee Airman died in WWII. All we got to see was one. Some battle that was.


You're upset because they didn't kill off more black characters? That's a first for the IMDb message boards.

I could go on and on. But fact remains that Hollywood cannot tell our story or stories. And Black people (especially Tom Joyner) should be ashamed of themselves for helping the white man (Lucas) sell this garbage. It was nothing more than feel good history. Now we will have ignorant Negroes (like those that saw Malcolm X, thinking they know all there is to know about the Tuskeegee Airmen just because of that damn movie. Now now books will be read or again written for that matter.


This is the reason why most "black" movies are not fun to watch. There are too many members of the black community that romanticize suffering and neglect entertainment.

Yes, slavery and Jim Crow happened and it was awful and continues to be awful in modern day, but why must that fact strangle the fun out of every single movie featuring black characters? No one's going to start rewriting books and pretending that Uncle Tom's Cabin was real, that's just ridiculous.

Is it so bad for young people to go to see a movie with black characters and have a good time watching escapist entertainment?

Don't try to cash in love, that check will always bounce.

reply

6. No mention of how German prisoners where treated better than the Brothas.


That was truer than much of what they did include.

There was a show "Double Victory" on the History Channel, in which a Tuskegee Airman choked up describing how German prisoners held in the States were allowed into movie theaters, where black servicemen could not go. Just outrageous. That may be what you refer to.

But events in the States are difficult to show in a movie set in Italy. I suppose they could have had one of the characters remember it from his training days.

But any German prisoners in Italy were held in prison camps.


Live long and prosper.

reply


There was a show "Double Victory" on the History Channel, in which a Tuskegee Airman choked up describing how German prisoners held in the States were allowed into movie theaters, where black servicemen could not go. Just outrageous. That may be what you refer to.


There was also a scene in Tuskeegee Airmen where German POWs were given preferential seating on a train when the main characters were on their way to flight training. IIRC the TA were even kicked off the train.
TNSTAAFL

reply

"But fact remains that Hollywood cannot tell our story or stories."

And my question remains, WHY? Why, why, why... it's so frustrating. I'm white, friend, and I'm human. I want to see good story-telling, accurate history in historical films, depth of character and dimension built into human stories of human lives. Someone here called me a snob and you know, if wanting (begging) for truth-telling and justice to the stories of real human beings makes me a snob, that's fine. I'll even wear a badge.

I didn't go into the theater looking for escapist fodder. I went in looking for a realistic, rich, deep, epic, beautiful, tragic, exciting, fantastic, breath-taking, heart-stopping (and award winning!) war story from the perspective of the Airmen (not the myth of them, or the cardboard cut-out of them, but the "real" them) and their role during World War 2 which completely changed the face of war.

"Good enough" for me was not good enough.

I'm done here. Thank you.




You're kind to strangers and children, and when you stand in the snow you look like an angel.

reply

I agree with you 98%. I was tempted to walk out, just wanted to see how disastrous it was all going to be. But I don't blame the actors, just the writers. They weren't given anyting to work with, I honestly think they did as well as can be expected. Except for the main arrogent pilot. He was horrible all the way around.

reply

I agree 1000% with everything you say - and yes, Terrence Howard can't act! I was so dissapointed with this film. No clear character development (why did Easy have an alcoholic problem), no substantial subplot (POW story was weak), unrealistic diaglog (did they really use terms like 'punk' and 'man up' back in the '40s Terrence Howard?). Very disappointing all around.

"I have immunity from the Risen Jesus. And nobody beats the Riz!"

reply

1 Terence Howard is a very good actor.

2 If you watched the movie, Easy and Lightning disscused that he drinks to handle the war. He also drinks before missions more than likely to take the edge off of leading these men into combat.

3 This is a Hollywood movie. It's job is to make money. It's job is to be entertaining. If you want a movie with all historically accurate dialogue, watch Iron Lady.

4 The movie was marketed, more than likely, towards younger people who really don't know who the Tuskegee Airmen were. You have Ne-Yo in the movie.

5 Be happy the movie was done! Schools dont even mention the Tuskegee Airmen. My girlfriend of 26 didn't know who they were until this movie, just like none of you know who the 761st Black Panther Tank Battalion were.

Final Note: This is the type of movie you take younger people to go see (12 to 18) who dont know who the Tuskegee Airmen were. If your a historical buff, then tell them the true story of who they were after the movie so that they have a refrence. Think of 300, all action based on an historical event and now everyone who the Spartans are.


No Number is best. 3 builds better than 2. 2 loves better than 1 and 1 mind is better than 3.

reply

What fuvking stereotypes?

I'm sick of everybody damn movie with Black casts someone brings up stereotypes.

And Terrence Howard is one of the talented Black actors out there, why the hell should he stop acting. Why stop at something you're good at?

reply

I haven't seen it, but it looks like comic book pulp fun.

So in your world ONLY ULTRA REALISTIC ADULT WAR MOVIES are allowed to exist?

Scrap budget? You snob. So not only do they have to be realistic, they have to have 100 million + budgets too?

Just say you thought it sucked and why. Stop pontificating and preaching like some sort of movie fascist.

reply

Terrence Howard, stop acting. It's not your calling

I thought Howard was awesome in Hustle and Flow. I can't disagree with Cuba Gooding, though. He is terrible.

We all got it comin', kid.

reply

So how does this film compare for realism with "Pearl Harbor" ? :)



"S h i t happens in mysterious ways, its wonders to perform"

reply

Pearl Harbor was worse.

TNSTAAFL

reply

Agreed, Bill.

reply