vincem41

Here is an absolutely incorrect statement - "WWII war movie about the fabled "Flying Tigers" who battled the Japanese over the skies of China as early as 1937, four years before the attack on Pearl Harbor, and amassed a record of air-to-air combat kills against the Japanese air force of something like 40 to 1."

The foregoing is NOT true - the Flying Tigers flew their FIRST combat mission on 20 December 1941 MORE THAN TWO WEEKS AFTER PEARL HARBOR!!! They were disbanded on 4 July 1942 - they were only in combat for about six months. During that time they did establish an astonishing air-to-air kill ratio of somewhere between 29 to 40 to 1 (it is still in dispute). Gen. Chennault had been in China since 1937 working for the Nationalist government as an adviser and trying to develop a Chinese air force, with limited, if any success. Someone made a comment that the original AVG pilots refused to fly the 4 July 1942 mission- I'm sure they did, the unit had been disbanded by that time and most of the pilots had been treated like dirt by the Air Corps general, Bissell by name, who was tasked with trying to get them to stay on in the American army air forces. Read about that debacle sometime. By the way, Scott never flew with the Flying Tigers, he was brought in as the unit commander after it was integrated into the Army Air Forces, a few, but by no means all, of the original Tigers transferred over and continued to fight in China. Quite a few others went back to the States and re-joined their former services. Boyington went back to the Marine Corps, quite a few others into the Air Corps and served in Europe.

The movie takes quite a few, in fact it takes a whole lot of,liberties with Scott's book, but the general idea is there as is the wonderful lack of "political correctness". This country knew how to fight a war back then and how to let it's military people "close with, engage and destroy" our enemies and they were allowed to refer to them as they saw fit. Krauts, Japs. Wops whatever, they were the bad guys. Let me assure you when someone is actively engaged in trying to kill you, you really don't care about hurting their feelings. For me VC & NVA will always be "gooks" and if that offends someone - well all I can say is "Tough! deal with it"! God help the Soldier or Marine today who calls an Islamic terrorist a "raghead" in front of some prissy journalist. These days - the poor S.O.B. would be court martialed and in the brig before he knew what hit him. Ah, for the good old days. This movie will take you back to them and remind you of a time when this country actually stood for something and had pride in itself.

First comes the disclaimer – I admit to being a big time Kay Francis fan. I particularly love her in movies like this – light romantic comedies. She simply shines – she is sophisticated, enchanting, elegant, seductive and absolutely inimitable; while at the same time projecting an impish charm and sense of humor that simply captivates - hell, I admit to even adoring her slight lisp – it's the minor "imperfection" that enhances the whole! This movie was released a good ten years before I was born, but I finally got to see it last week and it was worth waiting for. Other reviewers have outlined the plot, so I will only add that this movie is Kay Francis at her best, as good as, or better than her role in "Trouble in Paradise". She and William Powell play beautifully off each other, and the supporting cast – each and every one of them – is nothing short of terrific. This movie is really a gem and a wonderful example of what Hollywood could do (and did) in the early days of "talkies" before the Hayes Office Code made a travesty of film-making. They could not have made this film in 1935, just three years later. The sexual innuendos and situations would have been verboten – yet everything was merely insinuated, not blatantly exploited. This small three or four year "window" in the history of movies was able to be sophisticated, witty, erudite and adult without the necessity of crudity, gratuitous sexuality or the use of language and violence simply for it's shock value rather than for what it adds to the story or plot. Yes, yes, I know – I'm old and need to move with the times. However, this movie shows just how entertaining, funny and charming and sexy good writing, good acting and good direction can be. If you haven't seen it – do so – you won't be disappointed.