Charlton Heston, Henry Fonda, James Coburn, Hal Holbrook, Glenn Ford, Robert Mitchum, Robert Wagner, Robert Webber . . . What could someone do with a cast like that? Well, in the pre-Star Wars era they tried to retell the Battle of Midway, a turning point in America's fight in the Pacific during World War II.
Oh, yes, and the Japanese. Pat Morita. James Shigeta (a favorite actor of mine, shamelessly misused by Hollywood) and Toshiro Mifune, sounding like Boris Badenov because he was dubbed by Paul Frees. Why even bother?
Let's face it, all historical movies and TV shows have the same problem. Eventually they sound like the old joke, "Apart from that, how did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?" But the old hands do their best. For half the movie. And then, because they are old hands, they're not up flying (with the exception of Heston) and their old bones are reduced to listening on loudspeakers to the chatter of younger actors.
Younger actors like Christopher George, Glenn Corbett and Monte Markham, all in their 40s. But that's okay because they fly with masks on and you can't see their faces, anyway. I'm assured they're there but Monte Markham was the only one I clearly recognized.
But none of that (nor the rear photography, which was the tops in special effects in our Bicentennial year) affects the enjoyment of the movie, per se. What does is that we're left with only a vague understanding of what's actually happening. They talk a lot over maps and move Monopoly-type ships over them . . . But it's not like "Gettysburg." In "Gettysburg" they talk about the "fish-hook" formation and show it on a map. Unfortunately, the Pacific being composed mostly of water the maps are mostly white space and it's difficult to grasp the strategy.
And, being the 1970s, they had to start laying a guilt trip on us with Roosevelt's stupid incarceration of Japanese Americans. Was it a good idea? Of course not. So they have to pack in an unnecessary Japanese/American love story to take up time better used for exposition or slaughter.
I first saw this on the TV screen, full of commercials, but with added scenes so it could be broadcast over two nights. Including another worthless romance. That's probably why I found it dull originally. And it lacked the "Sensurround" of the theaters. "Sensurround"?
In antique days, before someone thought up Star Wars, "Sensurround" was supposed to bring people back to the theaters, where attendance was dropping like Japanese planes in this movie. It was like those silly gimmicks of the 1950s, 3-D and its funny glasses and so forth. I felt "Sensurround" in "Earthquake" and it's just very loud and makes the seats quiver a bit. You won't miss it on DVD.
The two problems this feature has isn't the back projection (which was just the way it was) nor the padded script. The Miniseries format hadn't caught on and that's what this flick needed, so the padding wasted important time.
No, the two problems are, unlike with, say, "Tora Tora Tora" (some of whose footage is used here) we're left with only a vague knowledge of what the battle was about; and the big stars are, for all practical purposes, AWOL during the second half (if you want to see this movie for James Coburn, don't even bother; he's "blink and you miss him.")
These days I like "Midway" because I understand its place in the World War, which I didn't the first time I saw it. And i like to see old hams at work. But people who don't know their history will probably be left scratching their heads as to what it's all about. But one could say it exposes the eternal vigilance needed for the preservation of Freedom. And though it's not PC these days, the Japanese of the 1930s and 1940s were an imperialist Master Race. Allied to the Master of Master Races, Hitler and his gang. Perhaps that is all someone needs to know.
Oh, yes, and the Japanese. Pat Morita. James Shigeta (a favorite actor of mine, shamelessly misused by Hollywood) and Toshiro Mifune, sounding like Boris Badenov because he was dubbed by Paul Frees. Why even bother?
Let's face it, all historical movies and TV shows have the same problem. Eventually they sound like the old joke, "Apart from that, how did you enjoy the play, Mrs. Lincoln?" But the old hands do their best. For half the movie. And then, because they are old hands, they're not up flying (with the exception of Heston) and their old bones are reduced to listening on loudspeakers to the chatter of younger actors.
Younger actors like Christopher George, Glenn Corbett and Monte Markham, all in their 40s. But that's okay because they fly with masks on and you can't see their faces, anyway. I'm assured they're there but Monte Markham was the only one I clearly recognized.
But none of that (nor the rear photography, which was the tops in special effects in our Bicentennial year) affects the enjoyment of the movie, per se. What does is that we're left with only a vague understanding of what's actually happening. They talk a lot over maps and move Monopoly-type ships over them . . . But it's not like "Gettysburg." In "Gettysburg" they talk about the "fish-hook" formation and show it on a map. Unfortunately, the Pacific being composed mostly of water the maps are mostly white space and it's difficult to grasp the strategy.
And, being the 1970s, they had to start laying a guilt trip on us with Roosevelt's stupid incarceration of Japanese Americans. Was it a good idea? Of course not. So they have to pack in an unnecessary Japanese/American love story to take up time better used for exposition or slaughter.
I first saw this on the TV screen, full of commercials, but with added scenes so it could be broadcast over two nights. Including another worthless romance. That's probably why I found it dull originally. And it lacked the "Sensurround" of the theaters. "Sensurround"?
In antique days, before someone thought up Star Wars, "Sensurround" was supposed to bring people back to the theaters, where attendance was dropping like Japanese planes in this movie. It was like those silly gimmicks of the 1950s, 3-D and its funny glasses and so forth. I felt "Sensurround" in "Earthquake" and it's just very loud and makes the seats quiver a bit. You won't miss it on DVD.
The two problems this feature has isn't the back projection (which was just the way it was) nor the padded script. The Miniseries format hadn't caught on and that's what this flick needed, so the padding wasted important time.
No, the two problems are, unlike with, say, "Tora Tora Tora" (some of whose footage is used here) we're left with only a vague knowledge of what the battle was about; and the big stars are, for all practical purposes, AWOL during the second half (if you want to see this movie for James Coburn, don't even bother; he's "blink and you miss him.")
These days I like "Midway" because I understand its place in the World War, which I didn't the first time I saw it. And i like to see old hams at work. But people who don't know their history will probably be left scratching their heads as to what it's all about. But one could say it exposes the eternal vigilance needed for the preservation of Freedom. And though it's not PC these days, the Japanese of the 1930s and 1940s were an imperialist Master Race. Allied to the Master of Master Races, Hitler and his gang. Perhaps that is all someone needs to know.