"Red Tails" Stukas

[Zac Yates]

I watched "Red Tails" for the first time this week and was pleasantly surprised at the film, despite the knocking it's had online.

My aim with this thread isn't to go over the pros and cons of it yet again but instead to ask about these:





We can presume CGI was used to enhance numbers of aircraft on the ground as well as flying, but it looks like several physical replicas were used (various 109s being destroyed). The first Stuka looks to me very much like an actual replica rather than CGI, and as such I have questions about it.

Who built it?
Did it survive filming?
Where did it go?
Was there just one built?

If anyone has any ideas, or anything to add, I'd much appreciate it from a pure curiosity standpoint.

[Jerry O'Neill]

The third photo doesn't look like there's much weight on the mains. A regular CGI error since many use aircraft models for modeling the CGI.
Jerry

Last edited by Jerry O'Neill on Tue Nov 06, 2012 7:56 pm, edited 1 time in total.

[PbyCat-Guy]

That movie was crap. I didn't like the way it betrayed the bomber pilots or the Luftwaffe, nor the red tails themselves and I hate a war type movie with a romance plot. Booooooooo

[p51]

That movie was crap. I didn't like the way it betrayed the bomber pilots or the Luftwaffe, nor the red tails themselves and I hate a war type movie with a romance plot. Booooooooo

In all fairness, the original poster didn't ask what anyone thought of the film:

My aim with this thread isn't to go over the pros and cons of it yet again but instead to ask about these

The man was asking about the Stuka mockups. I too would like to know if anyone knows more, been wondering that myself...

[Wildchild]

I watched "Red Tails" for the first time this week and was pleasantly surprised at the film, despite the knocking it's had online.

My aim with this thread isn't to go over the pros and cons of it yet again but instead to ask about these:

Look inside the cockpit. I'm going to bet fiberglass replica's

[Jerry O'Neill]

After looking more closely, the first image is of a full-size mockup. The third is CGI definitely. If you look at the wheel pants on the first, they differ in shape from the third image. Also, the first image rudder and elevators are one piece and apparently not moveable as a control surface should be. The first image has obvious weight on the main gear and tail wheel, and the lighting reflects correctly. The third image should have harsher shadows and glow from the explosion in the background. It doesn't.
Jerry

[Zac Yates]

Some of the boys at the Key Publishing forum really ripped into me with this one, saying I couldn't pick CGI from the real thing. I should've clarified i believed the aircraft in the *first* screencap looked real to me. Turns out it was:
http://www.network54.com/Forum/149674/t ... u.87+model

[JDK]

Absolutely agree with Jerry's take, and that photo on network54 clarifies it. Questions remain though - where, when, and where is it /they now?

[airnutz]

Looks like they dropped the mock-up hard enough to bust the pants. Wonder how they did that?

[b17engineer]

I read, or saw somewhere that all of the aircraft in the movie were CGI. No live or mockup at all. Rick

[Zac Yates]

I read, or saw somewhere that all of the aircraft in the movie were CGI. No live or mockup at all. Rick

Perhaps in the end result, though I doubt that. Several mockup P-40s and P-51s were used, as well as at least one real, flying P-40 and the French B-17.

[Wildchild]

[Jerry O'Neill]

I believe there were at least 3 flying P-51's, one P-40, a C-47 and a B-17 that actually were flyers and were filmed for the movie. I'd have to agree that most scenes in the film of flying aircraft look CGI.
Jerry