JBOHMSS

I really don't like to be patronised. I come on here for enjoyment not sniping. Last time I looked this was a forum to talk about models and share opinions. As for other members adding to this look at the thread - I am sure I am not the only person to re visit this thread and chat. Or is this big brother? Sorry if I am over reacting but at my model club no one would say lets get off this subject and move on.

Actually I think we can talk about the merits of a poor kit in context with Tom's amazing Halifax, as he says he has used the 1/48 spectacle at Telford as inspiration. And we could use a new tool 1/48 Halifax that is in no doubt Whatever - the 1/32 Halifax is gorgeous that Tom is doing , he's putting a lot of us to shame.

Believe me I am inspired by the modellers here but there is no way I would have ended with the result I would have craved after seeing that masterpiece (all be it with Merlin engines) at Telford. The Fonderie kit is very reminiscent of the kits of the 1960's. The Tamiya Lanc has issues because of it's age but it is 100 times better than the Fonderie Halifax. The Tamiya Lanc would not require as much after market/scratch building as the Fonderie Halifax. As for blank canvas I like your philosophy but for me I like half the battle done for me - that means parts fitting reasonably well, some semblance of good interior etc. All problems the Fonderie kit has. I actually think a vac form would be preferable as mentioned elsewhere on this thread.

The one that was at Telford a few years back - I don't know who did it, I took a whole bunch of photo's and then it was featured in a couple of Magazines - it was/is gobsmacking right down to the slings to lift the bombs up for the underwing bomb bay. Well I have to say that I was disgusted... disgusted with the fact that the Fonderie kit that I had was never going to end up looking that good. That's why I got rid of it. The panel lines all needed rescribing, the fuselage and wings were warped, the engines were primitive and clunky, the undercarriage was pliable and not man enough. I knew it was going to take a hell of a lot of after market detailing to sort out as well as scratch building and surgery. Before seeing the masterpiece at Telford I had gone ahead and obtained the sprues from Tamiya to replace the engines with beaufighter engines but then I saw that work of art and basically shrugged my shoulders grabbed the laptop and placed the Fonderie effort on ebay. I feel that the model companies are missing a trick by not doing a Halifax in 1/48. It is just as significant as the Lanc. For me to attain what I wanted in that masterpiece at Telford there was no way that I could have what I wanted with the Fonderie - I would have been so fed up with the result - I do desire half a fighting chance with a model - so Tamiya, Airfix, Trumpeter et al - hop to it chaps lets have a 1/48 Halifax please.

The Fonderie Kit is a real pig. I had one and sold it on ebay a few years back, it needs major work to make it anywhere near half decent. The engines (Bristol) are primitive and will benefit from replacements - best way for this was Tamiya Beaufighter replacements. But believe me the Fonderie kit is ancient and primitive and will require new everything. Better to campaign Airfix, Tamiya, Trumpeter to do a new 1/48 kit.

Dear All just to let you know - the old Modelzone stock which is in the basement of the old Allders in Croydon is now 50% off.

Just had word that all the stock that is in the old Allders in Croydon is now 50% off.

The Stigler/Brown film sounds like a winner. Glad to hear that news.

Drop dead gorgeous

I am on my way there

By the way The Final Countdown is now playing in your head!!!

Yep, I agree look at Die Another Day - Pierce Brosnan as 007 para surfing - looks like a nintendo game of yesteryear. I am not defending Pearl Harbour but I am playing devils advocate. The film is pants for many reasons but tell me where else wil you see Zero's coming in low and chillingly in any other film? Where else will you see B25 Mitchells taking off for China? Where else will you see a Warhawk giving it the business? For me the best section was the Cuba Gooding Jr. section the attack itself. And the film makers wanted to put the audience in the thick of the action and to many cinema goers it worked...it is only picky modellers like me and the rest of you that will watch PH and say "Oh C'Mon!!! That would never work." You and I make up less than 1% of the cinema audience...do the studios care? No I could wax lyrical about movies for ever - take Thunderbirds Are Go - without Gerry Anderson we all knew it was going to be crap - but did the studios listen to the fans? No...because the fans only make up 1% of the audience - the studios want to bring in the mighty buck from everyone. If Pearl Harbor were to be made now and no one knew any the wiser we'd all go and see it and we'd all criticize it...yet would the studios listen to us? No Because we are a tiny little squeak of a voice...Battle of Britain is pretty much recognised as the best aviation movie ever...particularly on this forum...what if the studios were to remake it? I know right now everyone who reads this will say such a film shouldn't be remade...well do we say that about Dam Busters? I know I do...but there are plenty out there who are younger than I that will probably go and see it with CGI and the wrong name for the dog and all. If Battle of Britain were to be remade we'd all g and see it and we'd pick it apart...but we would not be listened to by the studios. That is why Pearl Harbour was made. PH is ok...go anywhere and get that scene of the Zeroes coming in at naught feet - you can't. Check out Red Tails - the plot is poor the CGI is obvious but it's acceptable as is PH. In Red Tails P51's, Warhawks, Me109's and Me 262's are zipping across the screen and they all seem to fly at supersonic speed but hey it's entertainment...you will never get any footage like this unless they make another WW2 aviation movie...personally I'd like to see the US Marine's in the Pacific with their Corsairs going at it...it's cheaper to CGI than get a warbird in the air let alone a squadron of warbirds. As for Pearl Harbor it's a Marmite film - but if you want good footage of Zeros and lots of em it's about all you will get nowadays. Tora, Tora, Tora is a fine movie but it don't have as many Zeroes as PH. Now where's that F14 to chase down the Zeroes? What film was that....Oh yeah The Final Countdown. Remember The Battle of Britain while being an excellent film was made to entertain as well as tell a story.

Looking Great - hope to see it in close up one day.

I am going to search out Appointment in London as I haven't seen it in ages. I picked up A Yank in the RAF yesterday at a car boot sale - £2 As for CGI and movies - the problem we have is that any warbirds out there will be increasingly ever more expensive to put on film...as you say we have the classics to rely on and like most of us we will rely on them. That is one of the reasons I am against a remake of Dam Busters. But then I think of the possibility of seeing a full squadron of Lancasters in flight even if it is CGIed does get my boat floating. Memphis Belle is an excellent film in many ways, it certainly does a better job than Pearl Harbour and all the aircraft were CGIed - pretty much - yes there were a few close ups of the Sally B and other flying examples but the full squadrons were CGIed and early CGI at that. Pearl Harbour was aimed at the 15-25 year old's as was Titanic (disposable money age)and it was aimed at the Titanic crowd - romance and epic set against factual history - the love story was pants no two ways about it and to be honest it was the film that killed off the romantic epic because it did flop but hey that shot of the Zero's coming over the Hawaiian coast was a real fright. The whole attack on Pearl Harbour was extrememly well filmed - in fact the Cuba Gooding Jr. character was really what the film should have been about. But the reason behind the love story was to get the women in the audience spending money as well. Colour me cynical. War movies are traditionally guy's night out money...the studio tried to double ticket sales to get couples going along to see the film. Battle of the Bulge was a spectacular film and as you say acting was good (Robert Shaw cut an excellent figure) but how many women do you know will willingly go along to see that film? It's a guys movie. Great Escape only sold well to women because of Steve McQueen...if it was say Horst Buckholz in the Great Escape would it have done well with women? Noo-ooo. Bulge had guy actors and no eye candy for the women, Where Eagles Dare had Clint Eastwood and Richard Burton - good actors and eye candy for the women it was a good yarn too. Pearl Harbour had two eye candy guys as well as a gorgeous gal and an insipid love story with planes and explosions and ships and all that jazz. In the studios eyes a good mix to sell tickets. Even in Battle of Britain there was a love story of sorts with Susanah York and Christopher Plummer. But it was the fact with the British Stiff Upper Lipped Underdog historical story - in fact I'd go so far as to say that The Battle of Britain is an historical document set down on film. There isn't much left out of that film from history. Conversely Pearl Harbour didn't leave much out of the history side of things - the mighty thrashing the Japanese gave the unsuspecting Americans and the blowing up of the US Navy...of course what did happen was this yawning add on story that we all complain about. In my humble opinion Pearl Harbour is worthy of mention in aviation films, the attack was very atmospheric and chilling in it's surgical preciseness - not even historical film footage can deliver the horror that was conveyed with those zero squadrons coming in. As for CGI speed of aircraft I would venture to offer a thought. I think with CGIed warbirds it comes down to the perspective of the film that conveys whether the computer aircraft is virtually "supersonic" or not...certainly if you watch Red Tails the Mustangs can be trolling along at a fair old whack and then the camera angle zooms in and the plane speeds up seemingly accelerating into megaspeeds. Just a though. Lastly - I can't remember if anyone has mentioned the Series We'll Meet Again...worth a mention for the B17's.

Wonderful

I disagree about it being one of the top 5 worst WW2 movies - it could have been a lot worse. There are a lot of flaws but it was released not for us piccy model fans that will almost count every rivet for detail. It was released in a time that epic films were garnered to fulfill the audience expectations to fill the gap that Titanic made, one of the most successful films ever produced. Titanic got bums on seats - Pearl Harbour was made to do the same. It didn't do as well as Titanic but it did fill that gap that Titanic had made. I can do without the insipid love story, the CGI is understandable and the main attack is well done...I find I can watch this on a lazy Sunday afternoon. It was well produced. But such a film cannot compete with Battle of Britain nor Tora, Tora, Tora...why? Because back in those days we still had the hardware available to make the film, we still had men that were actually in the thick of it either piloting the planes or advising...a film like that to be made today will rely on CGI - look at Red Tails...is this acceptable? You have to ask yourself with say the remake of The Dam Busters - A full 617 Squadron CGIed on screen...well it will be spectacular but there is now way we will have even three Lancs as they did in the original that will serve the job with clever editing. So a film like Pearl Harbour serves a purpose. Seeing Warhawks, Zero's and Mitchells in one film is pretty cool.

Forgot one to add Watched the Wild Geese the other night and although there is not much air action the C130 has to have a worthy mention especially with the free fall drop and of course the old Dakota toward the end of the movie has to be mentioned.

If we're talking Dakota's then Quantum of Solace has to be mentioned - however I seriously think that old warbird was filmed cleverly as if it had done all those stunts then the old gal would have fallen apart. As for A Bridge Too Far....possibly one of the best films made for any WW2 subject that flyby of the Spitfire taking Recce photo's still sends shivers down my spine.

I saw Battle of Britain and Where Eagles Dare first time round - my dad took me to see them and we subsequently viewed Videos and DVD's I have a special place for those movies because of my dad. The Sellers stills concerning Sellers in Flight suit were prelim shots and Kubrick tested sellers however his idea was always to have a larger than life American as the pilot. Sellers was an amazing comic actor but he lost his way after about 1964 making turkeys instead of movies (Panther films and Being There are exceptions) but looking at his early work in the Brit classics he was superb. Shame he had so many divorces to pay for we wouldn't have had Magic Christian and all the other garbage. Wings of the Apache - I'd forgotten that - liked Tommy Lee Jones but Nic Cage was never the best of actors. Talking of Tommy Lee Jones what about Space Cowboys? OK not much aviation but what about the SR-71 and the comment that Tommy Lee Jones made that this was his bird...there's a prequel I'd like to see TLJ too old but the guy who played him in Men in Black 3 could do it.

Meatbox There are rumours and myths around Kubrick - In fact Sellers, comic genius that he was, was also vain and would have played all the parts had he had the opportunity. Kubrick had always put the Slim Pickens role as a larger than life American - it depended on who he could get over to this country as Kubrick didn't like the USA.

Looked into getting the DVD for Red Flag - mightily rare at over £130!!! No the Slim Pickens role was always going to a larger than life American. That was a rumour that cannot be refuted or proven now. Kubrick enjoyed Sellers but he had enough roles in Strangelove.

That 1/48 Halifax build is awesome - I remember seeing the actual model at Telford about three years ago - just gob smacking. I knew I could never achieve that with the Fonderie kit so I sold my one on ebay. I photographed the kit and then got the build article. It has to be one of the best 1/48 bombers made world wide.

I actually don't think you are losing out in Liverpool - hey Telford is just down the road and once a year go knock yourself out! You will get bargains galore and new stuff by the bucket load!

Wow!

I think one of the problems is that as many have said on this thread Smiths have limited space...my point would be that if you are going to do a job then do it right. Smiths are a big enough company to fund the Model Zone project and make it right. The Croydon and Kingston stores have small representations of ranges that are over subscribed everywhere else. It appears to be a "that will do" attitude with a sample of this and that. I think it's a shame because it is obvious that Smiths are trying to attract younger folk when the core buyers of models and collectable die cast are adults.