Filmmakers need to get it right

It’s evident from her article that Ms. Godlewski is all a ga-ga over “The Aviator” (Behind the scenes of “The Aviator,” Feb. 11 issue). I grant her there is much to recommend the film. But as a writer for an aviation publication, I would have expected she’d be at least a little critical of some of the film’s computer-generated flying sequences.

For instance, it’s true that Howard Hughes ran out of fuel and put his H-1 aircraft down in a bean field. However, the filmmakers, for dramatic effect I’m sure, have the plane in a straight-down dive with Hughes pulling out at the last second for a belly-landing in the field. Ohh pleazzze…The shot not only defies belief, but also the laws of physics. There wouldn’t have been a belly-landing. There would have been a crater.

Similar sins by non-pilot computer artists and their directors are seen in “Flight of the Phoenix” (the flight characteristics of a C-119 — not C-82 as Ms. Godlewski writes (“Flight of the Phoenix — 2004 vs. 1965) — in a sandstorm) and “Sky Captain and the World of Tomorrow” (a P-51 just cannot fly like they show).

A movie works as long as the viewer suspends disbelief. Filmmakers depicting flight ought to get it right to keep us aviators involved with the story.

Christian Holtz
Seattle

Speak Your Mind

*