Midway (2019) User Reviews

Account of Crucial Naval Battle in Emmerich Style

[3xHCCH · 8/10 · 29 October 2019]

This film is a straightforward retelling of the events in the first months of the War in the Pacific beginning with Pearl Harbor and culminating in the Battle of Midway (June 1942). In between, it also touched on Doolittle's Raid on Tokyo (April 1942) and the Battle of Coral Sea (May 1942). The story was told mainly from the point of view of two American soldiers, namely pilot Lt. Dick Best (Ed Skrein) who led his dive bomber squadron at Midway, and intelligence officer Lt. Comm. Edwin Layton (Patrick Wilson) who with his code-breaker team predicted the Midway attack.

Along the way, we meet other famous American soldiers: Admiral Chester Nimitz (Woody Harrelson) Commander in Chief of the US Pacific Fleet; Vice Admiral William "Bull" Halsey (Dennis Quaid) who led the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise; Rear Admiral Raymond Spruance (Jake Weber) who took over the Enterprise for the Battle of Midway; Best's fellow aviators Lt. Comm. Wade McClusky (Luke Evans), Lt. Comm. Eugene Lindsey (Darren Criss) and Lt. Comm. Jimmy Doolittle (Aaron Eckhart); cryptographer Commander Joseph Rochefort (Brennan Brown) and Aviation Machinist Mate Bruno Gaido (Nick Jonas).

The side of the Japanese Imperial Army and their unique military culture were also given fair screen time in this film. Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto (Etsushi Toyokawa) of the Imperial Japanese Navy and the Commander in Chief of their combined fleet, was portrayed with calm and quiet dignity. We also get to meet other Japanese officers and their own brands of leadership Rear Admiral Tamon Yamaguchi (Tadanobu Asano) who commanded the Hiryu with nobility, and Vice Admiral Chuichi Nagumo (Jun Kunimura) whose controversial battle decisions had negative impact against the Japanese campaign.

The execution of the critical battle scenes are the main draws to watch this film. Director Roland Emmerich will always be remembered as the man who brought us "Independence Day" (1996) and "2012" (2009). Of course, there are big explosions and massive destruction here as well. The massive scenes showing fiery exploding seacraft and aircraft were rendered with crisp cinematography and meticulous visual effects to create impressive screen spectacles. The aviation scenes, particularly the dive bomber runs by Dick Best, were excellently staged, shot and edited to elicit an exhilarating rush.

For its 2 hours 18 minute run, the story of the crucial naval battles and the heroism of its real-life protagonists were front and center here in "Midway." There were no fictional characters or cheesy love stories like in the first "Midway" film or "Pearl Harbor." While seeing some popular young actors like Criss or Jonas can be distracting, the all-star cast generally rendered honor and respect to the heroes they portrayed. Focusing on soldiers of lesser rank allowed for some intimate personal drama in actual battle situations, perhaps with not much depth as possible. As this movie is rated PG, so do not expect to see graphic injuries at the level of "Saving Private Ryan."

Both good and disappointing - depends on the target audience

[jimschultze · 6/10 · 10 November 2019]

As someone very knowledgeable about the subject, I was somewhat disappointed. Whether it was the wrinkled uniforms, the painful dialogue, the over-the-top dramatics and exaggerated explosions (hey, it's Emmerich!)... it was clear the film was not made for people like me who know the details and the characters very well.

The rating depends greatly on the target audience. It's clear this film was made for a younger audience, and as such, it does a very good job of conveying the history quite accurately. It's a lot to take on with a 2:20 movie (complete with a 6-month summary of events leading up to the title battle) and it does a fine job of that.

Correct history of this great nation tragically just isn't taught anymore, so I heartily applaud any effort to do so. I just wonder if younger audiences have any desire to learn it. So if I'm rating from that perspective, it jumps up a few points.

I just wish a little more care with the details and script had been taken to leave the older audience satisfied from our knowledge level.

More than you'd expect

[xhalonick · 8/10 · 9 November 2019]

Critics are trashing this film, I went into it skeptical. After, I'm not so sure why. They tell a simplified story of the events leading up to, and eventually the battle of midway. You get to see two sides of life, the Japanese and the American forces. The script is fine, acting is pretty good in my opinion as well (shout out to Dennis Quaid, he is a great salty kinda guy). CGI was not that bad, especially for fast paced scenes. Only complaint is it is a bit long, which I understand due to how much they wanted to include. But there were 2-3 times I thought it might end, but there were still a few minutes left. In the end, a solid war movie that, in my opinion, does a great job showing some brutality of war, in addition to brothership and slice of life of the time. A solid film to honor the brave men and women that died for a better future.

Historicaly correct but visualy not

[todorgergely · 6/10 · 11 November 2019]

I'm just coming from the cinema, Midway is a worth to see movie, but the filmmakers used a bit too much CGI, sometimes you feel like watching a Medal of Honor game trailer.

Poorly written dialogue

[clarkstephen-78091 · 12 April 2020]

Especially when it comes to Ed Skrein's lines, the writing of this script was so bad. Attempts at drama come off as embarrassing. Also for some reason I just don't like Ed Skrein in this role. This movie could have been good, but it just had me shaking my head the whole time.

You sunk my battleship!

[BA_Harrison · 6/10 · 8 November 2019]

Midway is not just the name of the place where a historic WWII sea battle took place between the Americans and the Japanese, it's also the point in this film where I realised I didn't know what was going on. Director Roland Emmerich (Godzilla, Independence Day, 2012) is obviously no slouch when it comes to action scenes, bringing us some truly astonishing battle sequences that provide much bang for your buck, but he struggles to tell his complex historical story with any coherence.

As the movie cuts back and forth between the American and Japanese forces, with numerous ships, locations, characters, and much detailed wartime strategy to take in, it's easy to lose track of what's what and, more importantly, who is who, making it hard to feel anything when they meet their inevitable fate in a ball of flames and twisted metal (the most emotional part of the whole film comes right at the end when photos with captions show the real-life people who were instrumental in the battle).

Of course, those who are watching, not for a history lesson or for heart-rending pathos, but for thrilling scenes of destruction and derring-do, are more than catered for with countless huge explosions, plenty of machine-gun fire and loads of impressive aerial combat. While most of this is realised through the use of CGI, it's well-handled and, for the most part, very convincing.

5.5/10, rounded up to 6 for IMDb.

10 Stars from 26-year Navy veteran

[subcmdr · 10/10 · 10 November 2019]

If you want to bypass the quibbles and get straight to the meat of this review, please skip to my last paragraph.

The Battle of Midway is a story that's well known to most Annapolis graduates of my generation and earlier. The battle was a key inflection point in World War II, perhaps the pivotal moment changing the course of the Pacific War.

Although I loved seeing Henry Fonda as Nimitz in the 1976 version of "Midway" (Fonda was to play Nimitz in "In Harms Way" as well), unfortunately, I found that movie to be surprisingly dull, historically inaccurate, unnecessarily melodramatic, and generally not very good.

Because my experience is that more recent movie renderings of historical subjects usually don't improve the historical accuracy (I'm thinking of 2001's God-awful Ben Affleck "Pearl Harbor" vis-à-vis 1970's "Tora Tora Tora"), I did not have high hopes for this new "Midway."

I was wrong.

In short, "Midway" is a terrific movie. Not only does it get the history (mostly) right, it's a tight, elegant, and superb rendering that does the historical figures proud. It succeeds to pack way more into its 2 hour, 18 minute run length than you can imagine. It covers the attack on Pearl Harbor, the PACFLT-Washington tension & dynamic, Nimitz's ascension to command of the Pacific, LCDR Layton's contribution to the intelligence picture, Joe Rochefort's robe-wearing genius, Yamamoto's soul-searching, Halsey's tenacity, the ascendency of naval aviation, a tiny bit of the submarine contributions to the battle, and-oh yeah-the actual battle itself, to include the incredible, unbelievable jaw-dropping (but true!) heroism of our Yorktown and Enterprise naval aviators. And it does all this justice, in a superb bit of moviemaking.

Can a 26-year Navy veteran like me find nits to pick on? Of course:

• I saw a few collar devices that weren't pinned on right (I'm talking about you, Layton!)
• At least one scene that is historical legend but didn't really happen
• The substantially underrepresented submarine role in the battle (being a submariner, perhaps my biggest regret)
• Some Annapolis grads wearing their class ring on the wrong hand (tradition has us wearing our rings on our left hand, not the right)
• Sailors not "squaring away" their Dixie cup hats the way they would have back then
• I wish the Pearl Harbor officers' club was as nice as they portrayed it in the movie!
• They placed a non-existent cemetery on Pearl Harbor's Hospital Point
• Kimmel didn't watch the attack from the Pacific Fleet headquarters, he watched it from his office on the Pearl Harbor submarine base (which later became my office and is on the national register of historic places)
• They would not have worn their service dress khaki in the Officer's Club-- they would have worn service dress whites (chokers)
• The band in the O-club would have been locals not sailors (they missed an opportunity to have somebody like Gabby Pahinui playing!)

But the good stuff way exceeds the nits:

• They got the Pacific Fleet headquarters right-- it's now the Pearl Harbor shipyard commander's building
• They got the torpedo failures right-- torpedoes were terrible early in the war
• They got the Yorktown repair in 48 hours in Drydock 4 in the Pearl Harbor shipyard right-- the shipyard rendering was near perfect
• They got the code breaking room in the basement of the PACFLT headquarters right (when I was stationed there the room was being used to store furniture and I petitioned to get it on the national register of historic places)
• It might have been a lot of CGI, but it was really good CGI. They rendered Pearl Harbor almost perfectly. I could even make out my Ford Island house from my time as commodore, as well as a historically accurate rendering of Pearl Harbor Naval Shipyard, the Pearl Harbor submarine base, and of course, the ships and planes.
• Something I never thought I'd hear myself say: Woody Harrelson was superb as Nimitz. He's no Fonda, but he was understated and believable, the way I've always seen Nimitz in my mind. Not a casting idea I would have thought of, but it worked!
• Except for the collar device issue listed above, the uniforms were exactly right for the period, from the flat shoulder boards that were being used in that era, to the beaten-up look the ship's laundry would have given Service Dress Khaki, to the way the sailors were dressed, to the way the pilots wore their wings, etc.
• It even brought out the fact that movie director John Ford was on Midway doing a documentary when the battle went down. The fact that Ford volunteered for the Navy, saw battle, and was injured, while John Wayne remained (in his mind) safely at home, become a point of tension between the two men, with Ford being one of the few who felt comfortable belittling Wayne for his lack of service as the years went by.
• I really liked the outtro mini-bios of the real characters at the end. I didn't learn anything new there, but thought they were extremely well done.

In the end the 2+ hours flew by for me. It was so good, I plan on seeing it again next weekend. What a terrific way to celebrate Veteran's Day.

Of course, Roland Emmerich's prior movies have been, on the whole, simpleminded blockbusters. But this time he took a risk by doing something thoughtful, respectful, accurate, and artistic. The only way to ensure movies like this continue to be made is for the public to show we care about history and accuracy, and to make this movie a success. I very much hope it does well. Then maybe we have a chance of getting the right movie made about the Indianapolis.

A final thought: I've been disgusted by many of the cynical, snarky reviews written by professional movie reviewers, many of which sneer at the bravery of the warriors depicted. Yes, the dialog in this movie is sometimes simple, tired, and trite. A few of the characters are not well developed, particularly the women. It's perfectly appropriate for reviewers to criticize elements of moviemaking. One reviewer made fun of the line of dialog where Best says "This is for Pearl Harbor." There is nothing silly or unreasonable about that line. You can bet one of the pilots actually said something like that that day. As somebody who survived 9/11 attack on the Pentagon, when I later went to Afghanistan, you can bet if I had the chance to do so I would have said, "This is for Gerry DeConto," one of my friends who didn't make it out that day. But many these sneering reviewers have gone on to say to readers that because of these weaknesses, they should not see "Midway." Keep in mind that there were similar elements of Spielberg's "Lincoln" that could be considered inaccurate and/or over-the-top movie-making (most of the scenes depicted in Congress, for example), but on the whole the events portrayed in that movie are important for Americans to understand. Same is true here. So the point I want to make is this: a movie can have elements of poor moviemaking, and yet be an important movie for viewers to watch. "Midway" is one such movie. It depicts a poorly understood event in American history, but one that Americans should be exposed to. The events depicted, and the people depicted, are real. They really did these things. The bravery was real. Americans need to know this, and reviewers who have likely never risked anything in their lives should have the good graces not to sneer at those who have.

Feels like a made-for-TV movie

[cricketbat · 6/10 · 11 February 2020]

Midway feels like a made-for-TV movie. It's full of cliched dialogue, acting, and plot points. When most of your movie hinges on the lead actor's performance, and that performance turns out to be melodramatic and cheesy, you've got a problem. Also, the visual effects were inconsistent, swinging from impressive to corny. This isn't a bad movie, but it's going to be easy for me to forget about it.

Hollywood actually made a decent war movie without pushing a political agenda

[brian-carter-110-625553 · 9/10 · 10 November 2019]

This is probably the first time in over 50 years Hollywood made a solid war movie without inserting a sappy, contrived romantic sub-plot, pushing some radical political agenda, or re-writing history. The movie is good. The dialogue is believable, natural, and convincingly delivered in almost all cases.

While no movie is perfectly accurate historically - historians don't even agree on much, so who is to say - the few errors here are trivial and immaterial to the how events progressed. As somebody who is a buff on this period of the early Pacific war - reading every book by Prange, Lord, and many others - I was very impressed.

I went into this movie expecting the worst from Hollywood, but this was their best historical piece in generations. Even the casting seemed to echo the real people in looks and demeanor.

The Japanese point of view wasn't neglected either. While I can't say whether the Japanese dialogue was believable or well-delivered, by all outward appearances this acting was also top notch. The similarity between the real Admiral Nagumo and the actor was particularly striking. They made the right call in using solid Japanese actors speaking Japanese.

The accurate portrayal of the friction between the Imperial Navy and Imperial Army with Emperor Hirohito almost powerless to restrain the militarists was very refreshing. This was a very important, complex contributing factor to the war. Few outside Japan and some narrow historical circles ever learn about this dynamic.

About the worst I can say about this movie is the pace was too fast. Unless stretched into an 8 hour mini-series, I can't imagine they could have avoided this. With my background, I could fill in gaps and context the movie seemed to miss. Others might be left confused. Even though not well-read on this chapter of history, my spouse followed the storyline without issue and really enjoyed the movie as entertainment.

Kudos to the producers, writers, actors, and entire crew. This was a job well-done and a fitting tribute to heroes like Layton and Best.

Better than the 1976 version.

[planktonrules · 7/10 · 28 September 2020]

While I know a lot of reviewers liked the 1976 version of "Midway", for someone who knows about aircraft, it's a frustrating film. Again and again and again, the film uses old footage...much of which show planes which never fought at this famous sea battle! And, in a few cases, you'd see fighter planes turn into dive bombers and the like....all due to sloppy editing and a 'it's good enough' attitude. Because of this, I strongly recommend you see the 2019 version, which gets around this issue by using CGI...and modern CGI is incredible and looks real. Well made, but not perfect, but a very good film for folks who are interested in war films and history.

By the way, I wrote a review for this a few months ago and it never appeared on this site. It was much more detailed...but I just haven't seen it recently enough to review it more in depth.

Can't get on board with the positive reviews

[rbstern · 5/10 · 18 November 2019]

First, I'll agree that the filmmakers got a lot of details right: The timing of the U.S. attacks when the Japanese were caught in the rearming process. The poor performance of the Devastator TBD. Faulty torpedoes. The politics of the Japanese military. The fast turn-around getting Yorktown out to sea again. And lots more.

But the errors, embellishments and omissions were glaring: The Marshal Islands attack was ridiculously inflated. The Kamikaze hit on Enterprise during that battle (complete with Nick Jonas saving the day) never took place. The complete absence of American fighter planes on the American carriers. American attackers going in and facing anti aircraft fire without having first been jumped by Zeroes, and the missing dogfights via F4F fighter escorts. SBDs blowing Zeros out of the sky. Taking the time to depict John Ford as a brave movie maker on Midway, yet not showing Marine Fighter Squadron 221, flying antiquated equipment, going out to meet the incoming Japanese attackers against overwhelming odds and pretty much getting slaughtered. Yorktown's involvement in the battle reduced to one scene where she is burning, depicted from afar. The Nautilus getting depth-charged U-571 style. The ships in both fleets in such tight formations, it's more like a photo op than a battle formation.

So many worthwhile details that could have been made right in the same screening length, if they would have simply ditched the goofy Doolittle sequence. I love Aaron Eckhart, great actor, but his scenes in China had no place in a movie called "Midway," if the price was cutting out major elements of the Midway battle.

Maybe I'm being picky, but when they go out of their way to glorify John Ford, while leaving out a squadron of Marine fighter pilots that sacrificed themselves so valiantly, it just strikes me as typical Hollywood b.s.

GREAT WATCH!!!!!

[rhease · 10/10 · 9 November 2019]

I am a veteran and this was a hit. The special effects were good and I don't understand why people were saying it was too much. The characters were evenly played out in the movie and there was no stupid romance part that was in the last Pearl Harbor movie. It told the story amazingly and it dived right into what it's all about. You don't need too much character development to tell a story of four people during that time. It was such a great watch and I Definatley recommend it. It ranks up there as we were soldiers! It's been a long time a good war movie came out and this was it. And when you see other reviews about it's a disgrace to veterans don't listen to those reviews. Obviously they haven't been through tough times such as how these people lived. I was in live fire so I can compare. Enjoy the movie is amazing!

Just an OK movie

[jrougeux-71286 · 6/10 · 17 November 2019]

Overdone special effects. The story was historically accurate but the plot was pretty boring. Maybe they tried to cover too much time in one movie. The 1976 Midway was much better

A bad movie, very disappointing

[haegint · 3/10 · 20 August 2022]

Why? Bad script, bad acting, bad CGI.

For me, the movie gets it all wrong right at the beginning when "Dick Best" pulls off his totally unbelievable, ridiculous cowboy stunt landing on the carrier, trying to impress his rookie gunner. Ed Skrein has not one single redeeming scene or dialogue thereafter in the whole movie where he might actually resemble a real person. Of course he must contend with the terrible, infantile script he was given but maybe he really is just a bad actor. For me this issue got aggrevated due to his character getting the most screen time of them all.

It is also there that it is impossible not to notice right from the start the badly done CGI that pervades the whole movie and reduces it to the visual experience of a video game. Everything is always clean and in excellent repair or condition. The planes always look like they are on their maiden flight, clean and shiny, no specks of leaked oil or traces of exhaust fumes, no dings, no flaws. They still look good and clean even with a lot of holes in them from enemy fire. It is just very ridiculous and easily identified when comparing them to photos of operational combat war planes from the era. They were gruffy, got used and were banged up.

The general cleanliness of the movie irked me at other times too. The actors never seem to sweat or look too distressed. Most silly example of that was the scene of Bruno Gaido and his pilot in the life raft after crashing down into the ocean. Despite the stress and agony they must have gone through over the last few minutes, hours or perhaps days, Gaido looks clean, fresh and cheerful like having stepped out of the bathroom right after his morning toilette.

The script offers only a few moments of intelligence, credibility and genuity and for the most part reduces the actors to mere caricatures of real people. The scenes involving Adm. Nimitz/Woody Harrelson are quite well-done. This includes his encounter with Rochefort in the "Dungeon". It is marred only by the highly improbable even embarrassing speech the script gives the Rochefort actor. Nobody would talk so lacking in respect and factuality to their commanding 4-star Admiral. But then Rochefort actually says some intelligent things too, and the actor Brennan Brown gave a very credible impression.

One other noteworthy, good dialogue I found the brief scene at the officers casino where McClusky explains Best's wife the real reason why her husband was not getting promoted because of recklessness and total disregard of his own and, above all, his men's safety. That actually made a lot of sense. And Luke Evans is a serviceable actor.

Speaking of the actors, of the main leads only Woody Harrelson and the Japanese officers (Yamamoto, Nagumo and Yamaguchi) I found convincing. Patrick Wilson suffers because he is incapable of any facial expressions or nuances in delivering his part. He reminded me of Kevin Costner in that respect, constantly looking like a beaten dog or having a tummy ache. Ed Skrein ruins his opening scene and it goes downhill from there. Dennis Quaid probably overdid the "Bull" aspect of his character a little bit, but was not terrible. Aaron Eckhart is a good actor but had nothing to work with.

The whole side story of the Doolittle Raid was I found a bit of a waste to see in this movie. But I can imagine it was in part a bow to the Chinese side of the production, as without the Chinese cooperation none of Doolittle's men would have survived when in fact some 71 of 80 returned while the Chinese paid a high price for their help, as correctly stated in the movie.

Overall this movie falls short for me on many levels to be enjoyed. I cited some things but there are many more (eg. Depiction of the actual fighting, confusing editing and plot holes, as well as some historical inaccuracies), while its redeeming qualities I can only find a few, like the good soundtrack and the outro mini-bio's before the end titles.

If you want to learn more about the real Midway I can recommend the book "The Battle of Midway" by Greg L. Symonds as an excellent read.

Awesome movie

[loversofmovies · 7/10 · 9 November 2019]

Far better than what I thought it would be. Tense War movie. I really enjoyed this movie which is based on true life events. Please don't think this movie is anything like the pearl harbour movie because it isn't.

A solid film

[FloridaJoeH · 7/10 · 22 June 2021]

I enjoyed Midway- it is a solid film. Historically accurate.

Excellent Movie and Historically Accurate

[atomsmasher3 · 10/10 · 9 November 2019]

This is an excellent historical portrayal of the Battle of Midway, and some of the events that led up to it. There is a lot of intensity throughout the film, and it shows how some of the decisions on both sides were truly a gamble in that time. There were no satellites, gps systems, or sophisticated radar systems. The only missing pieces to this movie, as noted by others, is the lack of US fighter planes. Maybe it is intended to focus mainly on the Dauntless pilots. I took my wife and kids to see this movie, as it seems much of the history of this country is being forgotten. I am so glad I did. The kids had no idea that any of this happened. As for the critics that wrote negative reviews and trashed this movie, I think attributes to a lot of what is wrong with this country today. People who decided not to see this movie, on Veterans Day weekend, based on the critics reviews, are truly missing an excellent movie. This movie is historically accurate, with no lame love story, or fictional substories.

E for effort

[pmtelefon · 6/10 · 24 January 2021]

There is a lot of good stuff in "Midway". But for some reason, it doesn't work as well as it should have. One problem is the look of the movie. It took me quite a while to get used to it. A lot of the movie doesn't look real. A little actual location photography would have gone a long way. The characters were another problem. In real life these men were great heroes but in the movie they weren't that interesting. "Midway" does have its fair share of excitement. There's no denying that. It's just that, overall, this movie misses the mark.

ABSOLUTELY SEE IT

[mcsterg · 9/10 · 12 November 2019]

I've read several of the critical reviews of "Midway"; they seem to reveal more about the cattiness of the reviewer than any understanding of the movie, or its message. I am part of the growing legion of American moviegoers who have pretty much given up on Hollywierd having any clue how to convince me to actually care enough about any of their offerings to part with the price of admission. I can wait a few months till they show up free on Youtube to confirm my suspicions that I haven't wasted my money. I made the rare exception this weekend to see "Midway", because I'm a history buff, and the previews I'd seen showed promise that the story would be properly told. That said, I went in with the full expectation that it might fail my already low expectations. Happy to say that it far exceeded my best hopes. Roland Emmerich has put together a gripping storyline that manages to get in all the important elements of an epic story in 128 minutes. For the story of the American victory at Midway is an epic tale that every American should become familiar with. Few Americans today can fathom what dire straits the US found itself in in 1942: Our battleships lay in twisted ruins on the bottom of Pearl Harbor; we had four aircraft carriers facing a Japanese navy with twelve, equipped with aircraft which were far superior to anything that was then available to American fliers; those aircraft were piloted by experienced men who had honed their craft in four years of war in China. We helplessly watched as thousands of American soldiers, sailors and Marines in the Pacific Islands and the Philippines were made captive, beyond the reach of our aid. All the Japanese had to do was to concentrate on Midway, overwhelm our inferior naval and air forces, and Hawaii and the West Coast would be wholly at their mercy. The essayist Matthew Arnold once said, "Have something to say, and say it as clearly as you can. That is all anyone needs to know about style." Emmerich follows his advice. No actors involved in "Midway" will be nominated for an Oscar. Which is another way of saying that there are no star turns which detract from telling the story. I will say that the actors are very believable in their roles; as the son of a Marine who fought in the Pacific, I found their portrayals pretty convincing. I'm firmly of the opinion that CGI effects are overused to distract from thin or non-existent plotlines. I credit Emmerich for using them to reinforce an already strong narrative. To those critics who found them overpowering, I inquire: How in hell do you think the shock of modern warfare registered on the men who actually faced it at Pearl Harbor and Midway? They called it "shell shock" for a damned good reason.

As good as you can expect

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 19 August 2020]

MIDWAY is a WW2 epic that's about as good as it has any right to be given that the director is Roland Emmerich. It's one of those "does what it says on the tin" type movies in that it gets straight to the heart of the matter, beginning with the attack on Pearl Harbor and moving through the epic naval battle centred around the titular Pacific island. Emmerich's characters are cardboard cut-outs, but at least they're cut-outs occupied by an ensemble cast of familiar Hollywood stars, who have some talent to bring. The plot is lightweight but the action comes thick and fast and the CGI effects are certainly of a superior quality, generally convincing even when watched in high definition on a large television set. Expect plenty of drama, heroics and spectacle to keep the brain occupied, and if it's a little shallow for some tastes, you can rest assured that Emmerich has done much, much worse and that we're lucky to get this kind of standard from him.

Unbelievable

[sme3 · 5/10 · 27 November 2019]

Abundant, not-quite-realistic computer-generated images make Midway look more like a video game than a depiction of real-life events. The overuse of subpar effects is the most dominant - but hardly the only - problem dogging this film. Epic war stories are difficult to tell without focusing on a few characters. This film unsuccessfully juggles too many plot threads and too many characters to keep an emotional anchor to the simulated events unfolding. Woody Harrelson is outstanding, but other cast members cannot overcome the limitations of the material and the challenges of acting on computer-generated sets.

what a great solid movie

[Kc-movie-thoughts · 10/10 · 10 November 2019]

Agree with other reviewer, this is the best war movie in a long time, it went through three historical events, attack on pearl harbor, doolittle Tokyo air raid and battle of midway linked together with a human story of a dive bomber pilot, and what a great history/story telling it was. The beginning of the massive Enterprise aircraft carrier, shaking the theater with the Dolby sound has the feel of Star War IV Battle cruiser opening scene, and a tight story line and pace ensues. The CGI is the best, you don't see AT-6 Texan painted as Zero fighters, you don't see modern warships disguised as battle-hardened WW2 ones,from this point forward I predict we will see more movies with period-correct war machines. The movie has moments that make you sigh (dud torpedo that hit but didn't explode, bombs missed after pilot braved through clouds of flaks) and cheer (bulls-eyed on the giant Sun on the deck, and chain explosion of the littered ammos because of tactic confusions), this is Hollywood at its best in rare moments, no over lingering love story, no cliche stereotyped GIs, what you have are characters in a war trying to survive, trying to outsmart the other side, and trying but dying ... you can read about those three events before or after the movie, but for me, I enjoyed a great movie, finished till the credit ends and walked out feeling great, grateful and blessed as an American.

Amazing technicality. Disastrous performances

[tiagocampos-02918 · 7/10 · 19 November 2019]

I will give this a 7 as a big compliment to the tech crew behind this movie. The visuals are amazing! You can't say the same for Ed Skrein. Bad and lame acting. He tried but failed miserably. I really don't understand what they see in this guy. Anyway, I think everything else aside from the bad actors' performances was pretty good although I prefer Pearl Harbor by a long shot.

Rather watch a good documentary on Midway

[RMS1949 · 4/10 · 12 November 2019]

While impressed with some of the CGI visuals, the overall storytelling of this event in history just felt too Hollywood. The scope of what laid before them and the true bravery of the men who fought that day seemed lost in all the visuals. The importance of how the intelligence gathering before the fighting was handled initially, then eventually was also poorly presented. They are some excellent documentaries on Midway, suggest you track them down..

Much better than expected

[asclepias45 · 10 November 2019]

Seeing the trailers and early critics reviews, I expected a movie similar the 2001 Pearl Harbor- a film dominated by the sappy "love triangle". "Midway" while not perfect, did not fall into the same trap. Overall, the film focuses on the battles from the attack on Pearl Harbor through Midway.

The best parts of the movie are the battle scenes, which in the end save the movie. The special effects are very good, although some are over the top, like the laser-like machine gun fire and powerful some over the top explosions.

The film would have been better without the omnipresent loud background music that over powered the dialog. The acting was decent, but the scenes switched rapidly from one to the next, so few individual scenes lasted more than a couple of minutes. This lead to little character development. War movie cliches in the dialog were frequent.

The film would have been better had it focused solely on the Battle of Midway- the intelligence effort to discover the Japanese attack plans, the preparations for the defense of Midway, the deployment of the U.S. naval forces, the actual battle.

In the end it was decent entertainment; saved by the battle scenes. Not a war movie at the level of quality as "Dunkirk", but not as disappointing as "Pearl Harbor".