Midway

The effects work rivals the likes of “Saving Private Ryan” and, well, “Independence Day.” It’s spectacular and realistic-looking. That’s to be expected. What’s not expected is how serious-minded and well-acted the picture is.

In ways both large and small, Midway may be the most realistic war movie you’ve ever seen, as those involved in the production of this World War II action film, including Naval historians, have touted it to be. That’s not to say it’s as real as “Saving Private Ryan.”

Steel battleships and raining fire are Midway’s primary colors; the movie flaunts its hugeness at every turn. You’ll never mistake it for the real thing, but Emmerich’s eye for historical detail is scary.

Midway is a choppy bore, its main source of intrigue centred around whatever New Jersey-ese accent British actor Ed Skrein is attempting as dive bomber Richard Best.

A stolid film that largely rests on its director’s competence at helming extravagant aerial views of pyrotechnic destruction.

Midway is a big, bold, brazen attempt to detail one of World War II’s most significant moments. But in a post Saving Private Ryan-Dunkirk landscape, it feels astonishing anyone is still making war movies like this.

The first thing director Roland Emmerich should do after his latest movie Midway hits theaters is apologize. Apologize to the visual effects crew, the stuntmen, the carpenters, the costumers and artists. He has squandered their considerable visual skill in retelling the crucial World War II battle at Midway by melding some of the best action sequences in years with the most banal of words.

For once, Hollywood presented the correct rankings for the military. In addition, although I am not a WW2 buff and was discharged in 1963 from the U.S. Naval Air Corps, other aspects of the movie that would not have existed during my enlistment, could have been 20 years in the past. The movement of the plot was interesting, the soap kept to a minimum, unlike the Charleston Heston film of the 1970s and the action was believable. If, though, you prefer to watch unbelievable car chases and fighting where a single emaciated male, employing martial arts, defeats a dozen weight lifter, this film would not, in the least, interest you

Midway is not your typical historical action movie. It tries to resemble old glories and strives to give the spectator a good representation of the historical facts that happened before the Battle of Midway. It is certainly BETTER than Pearl Harbor, but it's sluggish on most of the scenes before the actual battle. There are many characters involved so you have to keep your attention up and running, especially if you are not a history buff or you do not know what happened in the Battle itself. The air battles are good, but sometimes, especially in the Pearl Harbor introduction, feel ARCADEISH and GAMEY. But the graphical representation of a task force at sea seems to be taken directly from photographs of the era. Dive bombing attacks are done really well but exaggerated in some points due to drama and script requests. Midway, in the end, is a DECENT war movie, it has the taste of old glories with a side of modern quirks. Does this save the movie ? Nope. But it's 'fun'. Definitely not for the historical buff, but it's ok.

While the film is entertaining overall, it also has extremely outdated CGI that is very noticeable as well as some B movie acting.

Features Upchuck Heston, Hank Fonda, Jimbo Coburn, Bob Webber, Glenner Ford, Clifford Robertson, and Bobo Wagner.

Decent movie that totally ruined the entire experience by giving a dedication at the end to American and Japanese soldiers. So disrespectful to American soldiers.