Warbird Information Exchange

I was just watching the repeat of M3 Doolittle Raiders on History Channel. Why is it that every time footage of Pearl Harbor is shown.....even now, they must show those three SBD's diving down on Pearl Harbor? Maybe we all can start wrting to the History and Discovery channels and the major networks and implore them to please edit out those airplanes. With the state of video editing equipment these days, there's no reason for this footage to be included on any show any more. I can't count how many times I've seen this footage...enough is enough!!!!

John

Hear, Hear

I'm with you guys!
The information , interviews and live re-enactments were great.

Budgets are a consideration when purchasing footage to use. The stuff owned by the US Government is usually free or very inexpensive, hence the "SBD" Val's from the WWII documentary about Pearl Harbor are always used extensivly. Also the editors see the title of the footage as "Attack on Pearl Harbor" (or whatever) and assume that these are actual Japnese aircraft that have been filmed during the war.

Unfortunately, the producers of these shows generally are not as concerned with historical accuracy as most of us. They use whatever is available that "looks good". You also saw on the show last night, film clips of B-24's subbing for Doolittle's B-25's on the bomb run, vintage Kate footage to represent Zeroes, and wildly inaccurate animation of B-25's throughout the program.
Since I am involved in the Television industry, my immediate thoughts were that the animators were given one of those horribly inaccurate, "Phillipine Mahogany" B-25 models to measure, examine and perhaps photograph to create the wire frames for the animation. The look was horrible, but the general public was probably none the wiser.

I guess that's what they call "Show Biz!"
Blue skies,
Jerry

The footage is from John Fords movie, Dec 7th. Itwas the best way to recreate the attack. If you look at the shots of the straffing , it was done with P-36s. I agree, there are more efficient ways of recreating the Attack, and without Ben Affleck

i broached this subject some time ago with the same squawks. the thread is in this site somewhere. may take some digging to find it.

_________________
tom d. friedman - hey!!! those fokkers were messerschmitts!! * without ammunition, the usaf would be just another flying club!!! * better to have piece of mind than piece of tail!!

C'mon. A Prewar Stearman/Spitfire/P40/B25 flyin guy, who digs J-Lo? I got the vapors watching him do video game type maneuvering to trash Nips at Pearl Harbor. I was hoping they would follow it up with a sequel, where he went to the Dieppe raid as air support, Ploesti, shot down Yamamoto, won the battle of the Phillipine Sea, and then for filmaking integrity's sake, showed the "real story" how the Air Corps wrought vengeance by sinking all of the carriers that attacked Pearl Harbor and the Yamato with an atom bomb at Okinawa. Speilberg and Oscar material, I tell you... Where's Oliver Stone when you need him?

_________________
REMEMBER THE SERGEANT PILOTS!

They could have inserted a few 4 stackers and St Lake City class types to give it some class instead of the post vietnam box type merchants in th ereserve basin!!!

All through the "Doolittle" documentary, I kept saying to Mrs. Mudge, "Why, with the state of the art CGI that they have access to, are they using all this inaccurate stuff?" She kept answering, "Shut up and watch the show. And by the way, stop telling me that 11 shots were fired from a six shot revolver and stuff like that."
She gets a bit testy when I keep pointing out inaccuracies in films.

Mudge the pedant