Midway

Bon film !

Bon film !

Bon film !

French

Bon film !

panood mo na to ate jelai ahamil

Bon film !

Overdone special effects. The story was historically accurate but the plot was pretty boring. Maybe they tried to cover too much time in one movie. The 1976 Midway was much better

I've read several of the critical reviews of "Midway"; they seem to reveal more about the cattiness of the reviewer than any understanding of the movie, or its message. I am part of the growing legion of American moviegoers who have pretty much given up on Hollywierd having any clue how to convince me to actually care enough about any of their offerings to part with the price of admission. I can wait a few months till they show up free on Youtube to confirm my suspicions that I haven't wasted my money. I made the rare exception this weekend to see "Midway", because I'm a history buff, and the previews I'd seen showed promise that the story would be properly told. That said, I went in with the full expectation that it might fail my already low expectations. Happy to say that it far exceeded my best hopes. Roland Emmerich has put together a gripping storyline that manages to get in all the important elements of an epic story in 128 minutes. For the story of the American victory at Midway is an epic tale that every American should become familiar with. Few Americans today can fathom what dire straits the US found itself in in 1942: Our battleships lay in twisted ruins on the bottom of Pearl Harbor; we had four aircraft carriers facing a Japanese navy with twelve, equipped with aircraft which were far superior to anything that was then available to American fliers; those aircraft were piloted by experienced men who had honed their craft in four years of war in China. We helplessly watched as thousands of American soldiers, sailors and Marines in the Pacific Islands and the Philippines were made captive, beyond the reach of our aid. All the Japanese had to do was to concentrate on Midway, overwhelm our inferior naval and air forces, and Hawaii and the West Coast would be wholly at their mercy. The essayist Matthew Arnold once said, "Have something to say, and say it as clearly as you can. That is all anyone needs to know about style." Emmerich follows his advice. No actors involved in "Midway" will be nominated for an Oscar. Which is another way of saying that there are no star turns which detract from telling the story. I will say that the actors are very believable in their roles; as the son of a Marine who fought in the Pacific, I found their portrayals pretty convincing. I'm firmly of the opinion that CGI effects are overused to distract from thin or non-existent plotlines. I credit Emmerich for using them to reinforce an already strong narrative. To those critics who found them overpowering, I inquire: How in hell do you think the shock of modern warfare registered on the men who actually faced it at Pearl Harbor and Midway? They called it "shell shock" for a damned good reason.

This is an excellent historical portrayal of the Battle of Midway, and some of the events that led up to it. There is a lot of intensity throughout the film, and it shows how some of the decisions on both sides were truly a gamble in that time. There were no satellites, gps systems, or sophisticated radar systems. The only missing pieces to this movie, as noted by others, is the lack of US fighter planes. Maybe it is intended to focus mainly on the Dauntless pilots. I took my wife and kids to see this movie, as it seems much of the history of this country is being forgotten. I am so glad I did. The kids had no idea that any of this happened. As for the critics that wrote negative reviews and trashed this movie, I think attributes to a lot of what is wrong with this country today. People who decided not to see this movie, on Veterans Day weekend, based on the critics reviews, are truly missing an excellent movie. This movie is historically accurate, with no lame love story, or fictional substories.