After making a statement like that, I might question if you’ve ever watched a real aeroplane fly.
Gee, don’t get so worked up! I am a member of this forum because I have an interest in WWII aircraft. Of course I have seen them fly. Why be so insulting as to suggest that I know nothing?
Some people are saying they don’t like the CGI. What do you SPECIFICALLY dislike?
Here’s some issues: Me 262 roll rate: this looked overdone; P-51 ‘turning on a dime’ prior to the 262 destruction scene.
Lets think about it critically:
This is a movie trailer. Trailers often include scenes which are different in the actual movie, and perhaps these scenes were sped up to fit in with the feel of the trailer. We will have to wait and see how the movie really turns out.
Most of the sequences looked very believable to me (yes, I have seen real planes fly, I don’t need to have to have sat back seat during aerobatics to have a clue). Many scenes are done as if they were filmed from a stable platform like a camera-ship; some scenes looked like they were done from a wingman or chase plane position; and some were artistic shots, namely the P-52 ‘turning on a dime’, but consider this:- Picture a plane performing a manoeuvre. Now imagine a camera ‘floating’ in space around the plane, facing in a fixed position. What will it look like? As if the plane is ‘turning on a dime’? This is, I believe, what we are seeing. The director is experimenting with CGI as an artform. Does it work? We will have to wait and see the full scene in the movie.
What are the specifics which make the CGI look “Rubbish”?
Sign In
