New Angel in the skies movie Trashes original IRVIN JACKETS!

[Dumpster Diver]

So, to me This is the Equivelant of a record store throwing records into the Trash compactor.

Nobody wants to see this thing happen, but yet Ive already paid my money and watched it happen now.

hate to even be the guy saying this to you, the movie started off with potential. But After the plane in the movie goes down the Props Jackets Stay on the entire time and Just fall to peices..like being worn as if they were not 70 years old and fragile.

I almost couldnt watch in disbelief.

Stalag 17 ok, yeah wreck a Jacket, But this day and age...christ look here at the amazing repos here that should have been worn.

enough said. (except maybe this movie is like ever Faltering to stay average entry-level War movie at every step and no one could help it, like a wounded soldier limping behind with two mates keeping it going..pretty much sums the actual movie itself up in an ironic way)

This movie I just sat through was LITERALY an hour and a half of taking half a dozen or so Original looking Irving Bomber jackets and Pointlessly and needlessly Putting them through the wringer for a cheap film no one will ever remember...and worn like combat Jackets basically.

Imagine the damage to your jacket if you got in a bar fight.. got grabbed, flung around, and knocked to the floor.

I was Horrifed and outraged, the cool aspects of the JAckets werent exactly captured, less trashed. If you love irvin Jackets in war movies, this will sorely upset you.

I hate to tell you this, and cant describe what I was watching but the whole movie I KID YOU NOT was literally tormenting me.

Whos the props guy for this movie, out of ALL the war movies that truly and actually NEEDED repros in it, ironically you choose originals to destroy....shame on you.

You can spot the sleeves splitting on a few of the bunch used, and then just getting worse and worse to describe it..like AAACKK!!!


I would have traded you whatever you wanted for those Jackets man, and they werent even IN wearable shape, Im a dumbass and even I could see what was gonna happen to them in this movie.


so the irony is all I have left of-

A-Cheap movie spends the props Budget on several Mottled ORIGINAL Jackets (instead of the usual movie grade repro) of all the things and prettymuch destroys them.

B-Most ironic of all, I feel Like Im fighting my own personal War preserving original Jackets out there, and Im Low on ammo and Losing. Just like in this actual movie.

Whered they get the JAckets,...and whos butts need a Huge Boot.

This to me, was pointless, disrespectful and ignorant. I Surely would love to see that these are Not genuine WW2 Jackets. My eye Simply tells me they look old old.. authentic. PLease dont tell me these were scooped down by th-- ebay or something

Anyway sorry guys...I dont have a movie clip or anything Its a new rental I just watched, The one I saw before that was those Pilots in the Norweigian Hut for the whole movie and used Like one original pair of flight trousers and repro Irvins..and they were fine.

blatant disregard for the Jackets as historical artifacts then eh...CHECK.

Ditch the Flight helmets but keep these fragile 70 year old Jackets on for every shot in the movie.

Cant tell you how I feel about that right off the top...Gotta cool down.

I will forgive whoever did this, if they send the damaged ones to me for repair instead of pitching them out in the trash. That is all I ask please.

 

[aswatland]

I have watched the movie trailer and noticed the original Irvins being used, but did not see them being trashed. Apart form some seams splitting, which can surely be repaired, what other damage was inflicted on the jackets? I suspect these originals were bought for less than high end repros. It really does make a pleasant change to see original Irvins being used in a film, giving it added authenticity. I always feel it is a shame costume department jackets were used in the iconic Battle of Britain film, when there were many originals around. There are still plenty of original Irvins around in the UK today, so damage to a small number in the film is not the end of the world and not something to worry too much about when there are so many more important issues facing us today. I will order the film once it is available here in the UK as it looks interesting.

 

[B-24J]

I looked at the trailers on Youtube.

To see the entire movie: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AvSaRfTsJ5A

For a change we get to see Liberators in action instead of B-17s.

This movie obviously had a very limited budget.

They use a hodge-podge of equipment to be sure. E masks, G masks, H masks and so on.

If you like to look at war movies and play "spot the mistake" in the kit then this should be your film. The German uniforms alone are good for a few giggles.

I suppose if the Irvins in the movie should find their way into the market place, people like Andrew can refurbish them if there is not too much damage.

If you use a repro in a movie and it gets damaged a replacement is easily obtained. I think for important movie props there is usually a backup just in case. For example there was more than one "Maltese Falcon" prop.

If a distinctive original Irvin were trashed at some point and a retake was necessary, you'd be in trouble!

John

 

[Meerkat]

The average theatre goer is totally unmoved by authenticity..sergio leone went to great lenghts as regard historical accuracy of his prop fire arms ..but no one cares except film buffs and anoraks lol so it is with low budget films with dodgy names..low budget means exactly that and accordingly that hardly merits forensic fashionista scrutiny.

 

[aswatland]

I have just watched this low budget South African-made film. It is weak with a very predictable plot. The CGI is of very low quality. The RAF uniforms are post war with silver buttons for example. Several of the Irvins are too worn-looking for 1944 when they were made two or three years earlier! One four panel jacket has lost almost all its polyacrilate finish. It is evident that some of the jackets acquired "damage" after a the B-24 crashed, but these jackets were quite clearly not robust jackets in the first place and the rips to the shoulder and upper arms could be repaired by replacing panels.

 

[Dumpster Diver]

I dont know about you, if most regular movie watchers Cant tell the difference with a Repro and original, WHY use originals and then of ALL things totally mash up the Costumes and equiptment completely. Not necessary.

There is a combat scene where one of the crew loses it and has to be tackled back down and you can clearly see his Jacket gets COMPLETELY ahnihilated at the back on the Left Sleeve, and hes then wearing a different jacket for the remainder.

Anyway..Im still pretty pissed, Andrew, youre right that while theres plenty of worse things to gripe about.

But Still this was something that ruined the movie for me far beyond lack of plot or consistancy...or mix-matched costumes, hell one pair of goggles looked like cheap post War Repro pair of biker VIII goggles.

The ONLY thing that was genuine besides those jackets was all the blokes who pee on the wheel of the plane for luck before climbing on. Anyway It would have been Awesome to see expensive NEW Repros get gnashed up..But not something authentic. Andrew thanks for your vote of confidence...It just seems so shameful to me still though.

I feel like that tire.

 

[Edward]

I always feel it is a shame costume department jackets were used in the iconic Battle of Britain film, when there were many originals around.

Were these the civilian-market post-war type that were arund in the 50s? For soem reason I thought they'd used originals in that film, though the only one I really can recall offhand was clearly a late war, multi-panel affair. I'd assumed that it was an original in part because it was clearly wrong for the period depicted in the film, but that examples of those would have been cheap and plentiful at time of filming...

The average theatre goer is totally unmoved by authenticity...

Probably true, though I think possibly less so now than in the past. Most period films nowadays go to much greater lengths to get things generally right than they did in the Sixties, which is, I believe, market-driven.

Several of the Irvins are too worn-looking for 1944 when they were made two or three years earlier! One four panel jacket has lost almost all its polyacrilate finish. It is evident that some of the jackets acquired "damage" after a the B-24 crashed, but these jackets were quite clearly not robust jackets in the first place and the rips to the shoulder and upper arms could be repaired by replacing panels.

The wear point occurred to me too. I've not seen the film, but it seems logical to me that any notion of 'authenticity' added by wearing a real war period Irvin is immediately lost if it looks lits age today. By the sound of things, it seems these weren't exactly museum quality - not much cop for period accuracy, though likely significantly cheaper as a result. Maybe the film-makers somehow had the notion that's how Irvins should look? A bit like the popular myth that any Confederate soldier much after the first year of the ACW should look like a tramp...

I dont know about you, if most regular movie watchers Cant tell the difference with a Repro and original, WHY use originals and then of ALL things totally mash up the Costumes and equiptment completely. Not necessary.

Most likely budget. Last I looked, a reasonably wearable original Irvin was in the region of GBP600. Any Irvin type repro that looks anything like an original is now pushing GBP750-800. I think ELC and Aces High(?) are £800 or so; Aero's jackets with the corrected sleeve shape are £750ish. How many did they use in the film? That's going to represent a significant saving on costume budget if they're buying a whole bunch. Seems a shame to see originals wasted, I agree, though (questions of the right look aside) if they were really in such bad shape, was it possible that any of them were fit only to donate parts to pther restoration projects?

 

[rocketeer]

I know I have posted this before, the worlds worst Irvin.

 

[Foster]

It's nothing new. A friend of mine went through the items used in Saving Private Ryan, and most of the squibbed and trashed jackets were the original M1941 field jackets.

 

[Edward]

It's nothing new. A friend of mine went through the items used in Saving Private Ryan, and most of the squibbed and trashed jackets were the original M1941 field jackets.

Did he have any insight as to why those originals were chosen for this? I'd be guessing it was a combination of accuracy (for close-ups), but poor condition (so it didn't matter about trashing them)?

 

[Foster]

Did he have any insight as to why those originals were chosen for this? I'd be guessing it was a combination of accuracy (for close-ups), but poor condition (so it didn't matter about trashing them)?

He speculated it was because the originals were 'old' and the repros (at that time) had cost more. I looked at a few of them with him one day; it made me sad as well. Some of them were in poor condition, but some were not (well, not before they were squibbed and damaged).