I'm quite a bit older than you, but I also had a hard time with silent films as a kid; as I matured I developed an appreciation for the silents and probably had a better experience as a result. I find it amazing that the filmmakers took a chance on having the lead actors fly the planes with cameras mounted on them in order to get the shots (an insurance company would never go for that in the years that followed). I agree with your opinion that the film is worthwhile and the restoration gives us a sense of what the original theatrical showings were like. Much has been made of the kiss, but I don't see it as anything out of the ordinary; if my best friend was dying in my arms, I would kiss his face too. Thanks for offering your insight and hopefully you will encourage others to take in this movie.
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts. This was a really incredible movie to watch and just another reason why I love the silent era now. This is really one that will stick with me.
So much to say so forgive me for the long comment lol. I wholeheartedly agree with almost all of your review. It's wild how much this influenced subsequent war movies, both in its visual language and narrative tropes. It's so ahead of its time and the action scenes are still incredibly impressive. And the kiss, whether you interpret it as romantic or not, is still surprising and ahead of its time. My only issue with the movie is that Clara Bow definitely gives the beat performance here, but the movie doesn't really know what to do with her and she's never really incorporated into the plot in any meaningful way. I was also surprised that you didn't mention the restoration here. I'm assuming the restoration was the version you watched since it's the widely available version of the movie. I really, really hate the fact that they added sound effects to the restoration. It's distracting and makes the lack of audible dialogue or any other sound jarring in a way it otherwise wouldn't be. It's still a great movie, but the restoration is questionable.
Thank you for the awesome comment! I definitely agree they really don’t know how to incorporate Clara Bow especially after her exit from the war. Also, it’s been at least 2 weeks since I’ve watched the film and I’m guessing I had to have watched the restoration because it was the one available on Tubi so I can’t really remember that part too well, but I will definitely pay attention to it on rewatch!
The restoration recreates the way it would have been seen (and heard) by audiences in 1927 in theaters that could do it. The music score is the same that was distributed to theaters that could sync a pre-recorded audio to the film. The sound effects of gunfire, machine guns, etc were also recreations of how they would have been produced behind the screen at theaters that could do it. William Wellman's son endorsed the restored version and said this was the way his father had intended it even though not all movie theaters in 1927 were capable of providing the full effects. Clara Bow's part was added to the script because studio execs didn't believe Buddy Rogers and Richard Arlen were known enough to bring in audiences. in fact, the studio wanted to use famous and popular stars Charlie Farrell and Neil Hamilton, but Wellman nixed them and insisted on using unknown actors to play the parts; he didn't want audiences watching their favorite stars, he wanted audiences to identify with unfamiliar faces and to that extent he was right. Rogers and Arlen became stars overnight; Arlen became one of Paramount's hottest stars and remained so well into the 1930s. Clara Bow's part was an afterthought, a bit of insurance to bring in audiences who might not otherwise have bothered.
Seriously?? That’s so cool! Eyes of the Mothman is one of my favorite documentaries period and such an underrated gem. I watch it at least a few times a year now. I’m absolutely honored you contacted me! I hope he’s doing well. I actually had plans of doing an updated review of his film because that was one of my very first reviews on the platform.
Funny how I mentioned Top Gun in review and I cut out a moment where I talked about the movie 1917 but couldn’t find the appropriate clip for Wings to correspond with that film!
I'm quite a bit older than you, but I also had a hard time with silent films as a kid; as I matured I developed an appreciation for the silents and probably had a better experience as a result. I find it amazing that the filmmakers took a chance on having the lead actors fly the planes with cameras mounted on them in order to get the shots (an insurance company would never go for that in the years that followed). I agree with your opinion that the film is worthwhile and the restoration gives us a sense of what the original theatrical showings were like. Much has been made of the kiss, but I don't see it as anything out of the ordinary; if my best friend was dying in my arms, I would kiss his face too. Thanks for offering your insight and hopefully you will encourage others to take in this movie.
Thank you so much for sharing your thoughts. This was a really incredible movie to watch and just another reason why I love the silent era now. This is really one that will stick with me.
So much to say so forgive me for the long comment lol. I wholeheartedly agree with almost all of your review. It's wild how much this influenced subsequent war movies, both in its visual language and narrative tropes. It's so ahead of its time and the action scenes are still incredibly impressive. And the kiss, whether you interpret it as romantic or not, is still surprising and ahead of its time. My only issue with the movie is that Clara Bow definitely gives the beat performance here, but the movie doesn't really know what to do with her and she's never really incorporated into the plot in any meaningful way.
I was also surprised that you didn't mention the restoration here. I'm assuming the restoration was the version you watched since it's the widely available version of the movie. I really, really hate the fact that they added sound effects to the restoration. It's distracting and makes the lack of audible dialogue or any other sound jarring in a way it otherwise wouldn't be. It's still a great movie, but the restoration is questionable.
Thank you for the awesome comment! I definitely agree they really don’t know how to incorporate Clara Bow especially after her exit from the war. Also, it’s been at least 2 weeks since I’ve watched the film and I’m guessing I had to have watched the restoration because it was the one available on Tubi so I can’t really remember that part too well, but I will definitely pay attention to it on rewatch!
The restoration recreates the way it would have been seen (and heard) by audiences in 1927 in theaters that could do it. The music score is the same that was distributed to theaters that could sync a pre-recorded audio to the film. The sound effects of gunfire, machine guns, etc were also recreations of how they would have been produced behind the screen at theaters that could do it. William Wellman's son endorsed the restored version and said this was the way his father had intended it even though not all movie theaters in 1927 were capable of providing the full effects.
Clara Bow's part was added to the script because studio execs didn't believe Buddy Rogers and Richard Arlen were known enough to bring in audiences. in fact, the studio wanted to use famous and popular stars Charlie Farrell and Neil Hamilton, but Wellman nixed them and insisted on using unknown actors to play the parts; he didn't want audiences watching their favorite stars, he wanted audiences to identify with unfamiliar faces and to that extent he was right. Rogers and Arlen became stars overnight; Arlen became one of Paramount's hottest stars and remained so well into the 1930s. Clara Bow's part was an afterthought, a bit of insurance to bring in audiences who might not otherwise have bothered.
I watched this film and I am utterly impressed, it is much better than many of today's films
It’s one I think about far after the film is over. As you said, it’s impressive!
Hey a few years ago you reviewed eyes of the mothman I just wanna say that my dad is Matthew J Pellowski and he made the movie
Seriously?? That’s so cool! Eyes of the Mothman is one of my favorite documentaries period and such an underrated gem. I watch it at least a few times a year now. I’m absolutely honored you contacted me! I hope he’s doing well. I actually had plans of doing an updated review of his film because that was one of my very first reviews on the platform.
@@ImJaredRoss there’s also a eyes of the mothman podcast coming out this year
I will be tuning in for sure! That’s so exciting to hear!
more clara bow
Isn't this basically Top Gun 1917?
Funny how I mentioned Top Gun in review and I cut out a moment where I talked about the movie 1917 but couldn’t find the appropriate clip for Wings to correspond with that film!