Mon Jan 03, 2005 2:36 am
I thought the movie was fantastic. It was an aviation movie done well!
Compared to trash like Pearl Harbor, I thought it was well acted and pretty factual (not that I'm an expert of course). There are always a few nits to pick, but only a fraction of those seen in other recent Hollywood blockbusters that come to mind.
It was long but interesting, unlike Titanic- which was just long!
Compared to trash like Pearl Harbor, I thought it was well acted and pretty factual (not that I'm an expert of course). There are always a few nits to pick, but only a fraction of those seen in other recent Hollywood blockbusters that come to mind.
It was long but interesting, unlike Titanic- which was just long!
Mon Jan 03, 2005 8:58 am
The H-1 flew with two kind of wings :
- short ones for the speed record
- long ones for the cross-country flight.
No?
In the movie you see the shor-winged one, while Jim Wright's had the long wings.
- short ones for the speed record
- long ones for the cross-country flight.
No?
In the movie you see the shor-winged one, while Jim Wright's had the long wings.
Model Connie
Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:41 pm
Noticed that Trippe had a model of the Connie on his desk, in a scene before that program had even begun. Thoguht the S-38 shots were CG for some reason - can't tell real from fake anymore! And what wsa the CG bomber - a Keystone? Martin?
Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:58 pm
The CG bad-ass plane is the Hughes XF-11, a recce bird!
CG bomber
Mon Jan 03, 2005 7:34 pm
If you mean the one in the "Hell's Angels" sequence, it was supposed to be the Sikorsky S-29A in its final role as a Gotha. By the way, whose Boeing 100/P-12 was that - the one they knocked the top wing off of to make it go faster 
Movie
Mon Jan 03, 2005 7:36 pm
I thought the movie was well done. For some of the little things they were alittle "off" on they did ALOT right! Radial engine noises were different between aircraft... Glow of the exhaust on the S-38 at night!
I think you might be wondering about the bomber in the Hell's Angels part. Roscoe Turner rented his Sikorsky "bomber" to Hughes as a "Gotha Bomber" for Hell's Angels and I thought maybe that is what they were trying to depict. It crashed during the filming.
Yes... the H-1 had two different wings. Many sharp eyes caught that both were depicted!
I think you might be wondering about the bomber in the Hell's Angels part. Roscoe Turner rented his Sikorsky "bomber" to Hughes as a "Gotha Bomber" for Hell's Angels and I thought maybe that is what they were trying to depict. It crashed during the filming.
Yes... the H-1 had two different wings. Many sharp eyes caught that both were depicted!
Mon Jan 03, 2005 8:56 pm
S-38 is a real one, hence the nice glow!
And that was aboot the bipe bomber, eh? Sorry!
So, was the replica Hughes H-1 used in the movie or not?
And that was aboot the bipe bomber, eh? Sorry!
So, was the replica Hughes H-1 used in the movie or not?
Re: Model Connie
Sun Jan 09, 2005 2:36 pm
mexchiwa wrote:Noticed that Trippe had a model of the Connie on his desk, in a scene before that program had even begun. Thoguht the S-38 shots were CG for some reason - can't tell real from fake anymore! And what wsa the CG bomber - a Keystone? Martin?
Thinking about it later, it's probably a Boeing 314. Anyway, just a model in a movie... Thanks for the info about the bomber.
H-1 RACER ,
Sun Jan 09, 2005 2:56 pm
Your right about the canopy, I noticed that too, I believe there where real shots of it where taken at Reno
Sun Jan 09, 2005 6:06 pm
That sure did look like a Connie in Juan Trippes office! But a darn fine movie! I have to say Leo DeCap played a pretty fair H.H. I might even forgive him the Titanic(forgive, not forget 
) I noticed in the credits that he was one of the Exec Producers. Suppose he'll do more movies in this vein?
I have to say Leo DeCap played a pretty fair H.H. I might even forgive him the Titanic(forgive, not forget ) I noticed in the credits that he was one of the Exec Producers. Suppose he'll do more movies in this vein?
Sun Jan 09, 2005 9:16 pm
No Leo Decap romance like in the Titanic? Arghh, my lady friend won't want to see it.
Mon Jan 10, 2005 12:14 am
There is some female interest in the movie. My wife liked it.HarvardIV wrote:No Leo Decap romance like in the Titanic? Arghh, my lady friend won't want to see it.
Sun Jan 30, 2005 1:38 pm
Excellent movie yes ! 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Hughes
through the link you'll find the XF-11 crash site in Beverly Hills.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Howard_Hughes
through the link you'll find the XF-11 crash site in Beverly Hills.
Mon Jan 31, 2005 3:46 pm
Hi all--
Let the nitpicking begin, eh!
Saw The Aviator Saturday evening (at a genuine 1930s Art Deco single-screen theatre, no less). Pretty decent overall, I think, from the limited knowledge I have of Mr Hughes' bio. The rivet-counting, of course, is one of the more enjoyable aspects of viewing a piece like this. Compared to something like Pearl Harbor, this one comes off pretty well with just minor niggles:
...would they really have assembled the H-1 completely, with rivets that look like they came off a warship, knowing what HH wanted? I think not...
...The H-1 wasn't really variable geometry, but yeah, as has been pointed out, she taxies out and takes off in her short-wing pylon racer configuration (BTW HH withdrew from the NAR one year because the H-1 would have waxed the field so thoroughly...rather gentlemanly that), then does her flybys with the long transcon-record wings (and a closed cockpit)! I kept thinking what a crying shame it was that they did not have the gorgeous Jim Wright H-1 at their disposal.
...I wondered about the Boeing 100 too; the wings were obvious mockups but the fuse and tail looked genuine. Kermit's hurricane-damaged one partially reassembled, maybe?? (Surely, though, not even the least knowledgeable moviegoer could be hoodwinked into accepting that the H-1 was a converted P-12...!)
...Alda accuses HH of misusing funds paid him by the USAF, which would, in 1947--never mind '44--have been a trick in itself since there was not yet a USAF to defraud!
...Yeah, the H-4 goes way higher than she really did...and what a sight, even in CGI! Hmm. Could she be restored and flown even today? The taxiing scenes of the H-4 were, I think, the most convincing CGI in the film. (Why oh why does the CGI WWI stuff move like RC models would??)
...That model on Trippe's desk does appear to be a Connie: but I wonder if they weren't trying to show us the DC-4E prototype, which had three fins. Would have to watch the scene again.
...Postwar stars-and-bars on the XF-11. Oh well.
...Yeah, the conversation in the S-38 was a bit sotto-voce for something with two big radials either side. But Kath Hepburn does mention that later on...admitting she talks so loud she can always be heard over the engines!
...I still think Leo diC is a mite youthful-looking to play HH, really; even in his earlier, saner playboy days he tended to have a stern look about him. But by the end of the flick he's got that perplexed, faintly angry look down very well. Are a cuiple of the B&W TV-monitor shots during the hearings actually Hughes, or still Leo? I can't tell.
...And yeah, the Brampton SE gets seen, Billy Bishop markings and all, in the first minute of the film; and also very clearly in one of the now-well-known publicity stills that show Leo diC getting in (or out of) the SE in period leather flight jacket--below the coaming can be read "Major William Avery Bishop VC"! BTW that SE is fullsize, and very convincing indeed. GWFM also have one of the 7/10 ones as a trainer.
Sooo...anyone have a few mil to put together a movie about the '49 NAR?
Cheers
S.
Let the nitpicking begin, eh!
Saw The Aviator Saturday evening (at a genuine 1930s Art Deco single-screen theatre, no less). Pretty decent overall, I think, from the limited knowledge I have of Mr Hughes' bio. The rivet-counting, of course, is one of the more enjoyable aspects of viewing a piece like this. Compared to something like Pearl Harbor, this one comes off pretty well with just minor niggles:
...would they really have assembled the H-1 completely, with rivets that look like they came off a warship, knowing what HH wanted? I think not...
...The H-1 wasn't really variable geometry, but yeah, as has been pointed out, she taxies out and takes off in her short-wing pylon racer configuration (BTW HH withdrew from the NAR one year because the H-1 would have waxed the field so thoroughly...rather gentlemanly that), then does her flybys with the long transcon-record wings (and a closed cockpit)! I kept thinking what a crying shame it was that they did not have the gorgeous Jim Wright H-1 at their disposal.
...I wondered about the Boeing 100 too; the wings were obvious mockups but the fuse and tail looked genuine. Kermit's hurricane-damaged one partially reassembled, maybe?? (Surely, though, not even the least knowledgeable moviegoer could be hoodwinked into accepting that the H-1 was a converted P-12...!)
...Alda accuses HH of misusing funds paid him by the USAF, which would, in 1947--never mind '44--have been a trick in itself since there was not yet a USAF to defraud!
...Yeah, the H-4 goes way higher than she really did...and what a sight, even in CGI! Hmm. Could she be restored and flown even today? The taxiing scenes of the H-4 were, I think, the most convincing CGI in the film. (Why oh why does the CGI WWI stuff move like RC models would??)
...That model on Trippe's desk does appear to be a Connie: but I wonder if they weren't trying to show us the DC-4E prototype, which had three fins. Would have to watch the scene again.
...Postwar stars-and-bars on the XF-11. Oh well.
...Yeah, the conversation in the S-38 was a bit sotto-voce for something with two big radials either side. But Kath Hepburn does mention that later on...admitting she talks so loud she can always be heard over the engines!
...I still think Leo diC is a mite youthful-looking to play HH, really; even in his earlier, saner playboy days he tended to have a stern look about him. But by the end of the flick he's got that perplexed, faintly angry look down very well. Are a cuiple of the B&W TV-monitor shots during the hearings actually Hughes, or still Leo? I can't tell.
...And yeah, the Brampton SE gets seen, Billy Bishop markings and all, in the first minute of the film; and also very clearly in one of the now-well-known publicity stills that show Leo diC getting in (or out of) the SE in period leather flight jacket--below the coaming can be read "Major William Avery Bishop VC"! BTW that SE is fullsize, and very convincing indeed. GWFM also have one of the 7/10 ones as a trainer.
Sooo...anyone have a few mil to put together a movie about the '49 NAR?
Cheers
S.
the aviator
Fri Feb 04, 2005 11:24 pm
finally saw the aviator picture. it was very good. some minor quirks though..... flying sequences were great, but did anybody notice usaf star & bar on th xf 11 in 1946?? it was still army air force then. also no mention of hughes drug abuse after that crash, which really put him on the spiral down to the day he died, & his dope was central in his life from that time on. i was rather mystified at the portrayals of hughes repeating the same statement multiple times while slipping in temporary catatonic stupors?? after reading 4 books about him i never knew he did that!! an interesting question though....... is the hercules flying boat still the biggest plane to this day?? or is it the massive russian antonov cargo jet?? or does the new french airbus jet that is being built take the prize?? regards, tom