He's not my favorite host but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt in the sense that he's just reading a script that I don't think he wrote. But his delivery is not my favorite, however a job's a job I don't take him personally nor will I be maliciously negative just a constructive criticism
As if I didn't have enough respect for this movie already, you come in and tell me so just how much dedication was put into this and now I love it even more
The dogfight never happened, but it was probably added in for more action and to pay diligence to the pilot that did take out a mig. The only reason why the bridge scene exists is to lead into brown explaining that if anybody else would have done something like that, they would get off Scott free
The reason officers aren't allowed to get married while still in training is twofold...First: the military doesn't want junior officers getting distracted unnecessarily while trying to learn their profession...Second: starting military pay (even for lieutenants) is quite low and they want to make sure they are financially capable of supporting a wife...
Jonathan Majors is really getting his chance to shine not too mention he looks just like his character..... between this, the other leading roles he's had in the last couple years to him now taking on the role of Kang the Conqueror in the MCU will make him the new Thanos in the MCU....a villain that fans will love as well as loathe...can't wait to see this and him in Ant-Man 3.
Nobody wants a one to one true to life adaptation of events. This is entertainment. Not a documentary. So sick of people jumping on the "it didnt happen that way in reality" bandwagon.
It's someone's life and I'll bet you'd feel differently if somebody portrayed you or someone you loved in a way that removed certain truths about them. What if someone lingered around certain rumours about you and made an adaptation that substantiated them? What if you were accused of having paedophilic mannerisms and that factor was the focus of the narrative whereas you were simply loving, would you find that entertaining? It's someone's life, you're naïve
@@Luciphell A story based on or inspired by an historical event is not the same as a portrayal of an historical event. This is a portrayal, there's certain responsibilities one must abide by regarding historicity, you can't take certain liberties with events and amalgamate them into the narrative, else it's perceived as truth and you're mature enough to understand how common that confusion is. People adopt the whole narrative as being factual since it's considered a portrayal of history, you cannot be naïve to dismiss that.
This is a serious story, and the host is working on his stand-up routine throughout the video.
Agreed!
He's not my favorite host but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt in the sense that he's just reading a script that I don't think he wrote. But his delivery is not my favorite, however a job's a job I don't take him personally nor will I be maliciously negative just a constructive criticism
This is why I watch my videos on playback speed x2 so I can get through just in case videos try to do this.
As if I didn't have enough respect for this movie already, you come in and tell me so just how much dedication was put into this and now I love it even more
Great movie. Reminded me of "The Tuskegee Airmen" 1995. Love the track 26 "Accepting What We Can't Accept" from the soundtrack.
The dogfight with the Mig did not happen. Brown did not make a solo attack on the bridge. Read the book and the other great books by Adam Makos.
The dogfight never happened, but it was probably added in for more action and to pay diligence to the pilot that did take out a mig. The only reason why the bridge scene exists is to lead into brown explaining that if anybody else would have done something like that, they would get off Scott free
The reason officers aren't allowed to get married while still in training is twofold...First: the military doesn't want junior officers getting distracted unnecessarily while trying to learn their profession...Second: starting military pay (even for lieutenants) is quite low and they want to make sure they are financially capable of supporting a wife...
Jonathan Majors is really getting his chance to shine not too mention he looks just like his character..... between this, the other leading roles he's had in the last couple years to him now taking on the role of Kang the Conqueror in the MCU will make him the new Thanos in the MCU....a villain that fans will love as well as loathe...can't wait to see this and him in Ant-Man 3.
He's a fantastic actor, glad to see him in the spotlight! And we're also super excited to see him in Ant-Man 3 and the rest of Phase 5/6!
1 year later a White Woman took him down Career Over
Not to be one of those critics but I believe Jesse's plane number the day he crashed was 203
Maybe spoilers ahead warning would be nice
Maybe don't watch a video that explicitly states that it will list information about the films narrative in contrast to it's historical counterpart?
Interesting
What?
The movie?
@Serious Business y'all already trying to be offended hahaha
I concur…
The military was only segregated American citizen of color starting Wilson and stopped with Eisenhower.
Nobody wants a one to one true to life adaptation of events. This is entertainment. Not a documentary.
So sick of people jumping on the "it didnt happen that way in reality" bandwagon.
It's someone's life and I'll bet you'd feel differently if somebody portrayed you or someone you loved in a way that removed certain truths about them. What if someone lingered around certain rumours about you and made an adaptation that substantiated them? What if you were accused of having paedophilic mannerisms and that factor was the focus of the narrative whereas you were simply loving, would you find that entertaining? It's someone's life, you're naïve
@@altustalent410
As are most stories and movies based loosely on real people and events.
@@Luciphell A story based on or inspired by an historical event is not the same as a portrayal of an historical event. This is a portrayal, there's certain responsibilities one must abide by regarding historicity, you can't take certain liberties with events and amalgamate them into the narrative, else it's perceived as truth and you're mature enough to understand how common that confusion is. People adopt the whole narrative as being factual since it's considered a portrayal of history, you cannot be naïve to dismiss that.
Hi!