Roger Ebert Does Not Like It.

[Dadtallica]

Of course everyone is different but his critiques were mostly what I was fearing. Linear characters, pretty planes, shiny skies, and computer booms.

https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/masters-of-the-air-tv-review-2024

[oboe]

   There simply aren’t enough airworthy B-51 bombers and P-53 Mustangs available for these large-scale scenes, nevermind the fact that the antiques still flying certainly can’t endure precision sequences.

Ummm.   To my mind there is just no excuse for this.   I don't care if he's right or wrong, or makes a fair point or two.  I can't take him seriously.

[Dadtallica]

Ummm.   To my mind there is just no excuse for this.   I don't care if he's right or wrong, or makes a fair point or two.  I can't take him seriously.

I think he was more referring to the fact that the better WWII air movies had real planes once and they created the correct environment by default. He is willfully acknowledging that is no longer possible but he was disappointed that the show chose to recreate them without attention to historical ambience. Shiny planes…

He also used BOB and the Pacific as benchmarks and I think he was further pointing out how Masters doesn’t achieve that realism.

[oboe]

Hey Dad,

Here's another, more favorable review:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/obsessed/masters-of-air-review-good-enough-to-be-the-next-band-of-brothers

It offers some criticisms, but overall says its a worthy addition to the other two (Band of Brothers and The Pacific).   Looks like, as much as I wanted it to be, it's not an out-of-park home run-- more like a solid base hit.   

 

[xanax]

I'm avoiding all reviews and previews to keep my palate cleansed for this one. Ebert is long dead and his replacements are plebeian at best anyways.
I almost purchased the audiobook yesterday but didn't as to avoid the "it was nothing compared to the book" thing I always seem to fall towards. With this one I hope to enjoy the screenplay first and have the book nicely complement or supplement it later.

[potsNpans]

As it has been noted, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. However studies have shown people are sheep and succumb to peer review.

[Brooke]

I wanted to see what the reviewer, Robert Daniels, thought of anything I've seen.

But out of 21 shows he's reviewed, I haven't seen even one.

I would not be surprised if he and I do not think the same thing about any given show.

[xanax]

I wanted to see what the reviewer, Robert Daniels, thought of anything I've seen.

But out of 21 shows he's reviewed, I haven't seen even one.

I would not be surprised if he and I do not think the same thing about any given show.

I think you meant 21 rows or 84 movies. Nevertheless, I just did the same. How are there 84 movies he has reviewed but I haven't seen? Are they Canada-only movies? Of all of them, I've only heard of maybe six and Sisu and Devotion are the only ones I want to see.
He must go to that weird theatre downtown where they show the obscure foreign films and avant garde stuff while having a requirement that you have a Camus or Chekhov paperback in the inner pocket of your vintage Chesterfield coat for admittance.

[Brooke]

I think you meant 21 rows or 84 movies.

Ah, yes.  84 movies.  I would have thought there'd be at least one or two out of that many, but nope.

while having a requirement that you have a Camus or Chekhov paperback in the inner pocket of your vintage Chesterfield coat for admittance.

Lol.  Nice!

Yeah, also so many I've never heard of.  Of course, I don't watch nearly as many movies as I used to because so many are nauseatingly saturated with ideological pandering.

[Alpo]

Oh pleeeeeeasse... if the show was not released at Cannes, how wooorthy can it truly be?? 

[xanax]

Oh pleeeeeeasse... if the show was not released at Cannes, how wooorthy can it truly be?? 

I like to rudely mispronounce "artisanal" when I order artisanal anything. It deflates pomposity rather nicely. That and reading a comic book in the lobby of the Savoy in London.

[Animl-AW]

This is the post I was referring to, Roger Ebert’s take. He’s/they’re bought and paid for.