This is undoubtedly a colossal production about an aspect of WWII that has already been extensively covered in cinema, and now it is revived with all the current cinematic power and the resources that the Spielberg-Hanks duo are capable of deploying. Much of the criticism often compares this series with the legendary "Band of Brothers," also produced by the same duo, but I believe that it is a mistake because, despite the common historical moment, they are two completely different worlds, each with its own peculiarities and narrative needs.
"Band of Brothers" is undoubtedly the most grandiose and well-structured war epic about a group of men united by a common destiny, a group of soldiers who have been together from their training days until the final days of the war. There, the spirit of camaraderie becomes very strong, and the bonds very tight. This has allowed for a narrative depth in these characters that has no parallel in cinema on this subject, and the very title of the series already gives a clue and is also entirely explanatory.
In "Masters of the Air," the title also gives us a clue. It is not about a brotherhood of comrades; it is about masters, dominators of the sky, masters for having survived when many other comrades have not returned home. They are masters of survival, not of camaraderie. In the Eighth American Army, camaraderie was very difficult to establish when half or more of the crews did not return from missions, and new replacements were coming in day after day. In this context of infrequent interaction, it is difficult to find elements to delve into camaraderie and the psychological portrayal of the characters. Furthermore, it must be said that aviators are made of a different cloth; they are not simple soldiers; they are the elite of the armies, a sort of gentlemen who have rarely set foot in the mud of the trenches and have seen firsthand the deaths that their bombs have caused, except for the losses of their own crews.
Therefore, I believe it would be better to compare this series with another historical one, much more complete in terms of the number of episodes and seasons produced, such as "Twelve O'Clock High." Despite the many differences, if we want, we can see "Masters of the Air" as a summary, in color and with all kinds of special effects, of something that has already been extensively covered in historical series. Indeed, almost all the events narrated are already present there.
Certainly, comparisons are odious; both productions have decades of differences between them, but both undoubtedly complete a chapter of the war history that leaves little room for cinematography.
What else can I add? "Masters of the Air" is impressive in its visual power, with very well-executed reconstructions, both physically and materially, as well as in terms of CGI. The music is also very apt, and the dialogues, always very believable and well-structured, allow the excellent cast to superbly portray those young heroes who, in their innocence, faced the most feared enemy forces in the skies.
"Band of Brothers" is undoubtedly the most grandiose and well-structured war epic about a group of men united by a common destiny, a group of soldiers who have been together from their training days until the final days of the war. There, the spirit of camaraderie becomes very strong, and the bonds very tight. This has allowed for a narrative depth in these characters that has no parallel in cinema on this subject, and the very title of the series already gives a clue and is also entirely explanatory.
In "Masters of the Air," the title also gives us a clue. It is not about a brotherhood of comrades; it is about masters, dominators of the sky, masters for having survived when many other comrades have not returned home. They are masters of survival, not of camaraderie. In the Eighth American Army, camaraderie was very difficult to establish when half or more of the crews did not return from missions, and new replacements were coming in day after day. In this context of infrequent interaction, it is difficult to find elements to delve into camaraderie and the psychological portrayal of the characters. Furthermore, it must be said that aviators are made of a different cloth; they are not simple soldiers; they are the elite of the armies, a sort of gentlemen who have rarely set foot in the mud of the trenches and have seen firsthand the deaths that their bombs have caused, except for the losses of their own crews.
Therefore, I believe it would be better to compare this series with another historical one, much more complete in terms of the number of episodes and seasons produced, such as "Twelve O'Clock High." Despite the many differences, if we want, we can see "Masters of the Air" as a summary, in color and with all kinds of special effects, of something that has already been extensively covered in historical series. Indeed, almost all the events narrated are already present there.
Certainly, comparisons are odious; both productions have decades of differences between them, but both undoubtedly complete a chapter of the war history that leaves little room for cinematography.
What else can I add? "Masters of the Air" is impressive in its visual power, with very well-executed reconstructions, both physically and materially, as well as in terms of CGI. The music is also very apt, and the dialogues, always very believable and well-structured, allow the excellent cast to superbly portray those young heroes who, in their innocence, faced the most feared enemy forces in the skies.