It is currently Sun Jan 21, 2018 6:35 pm

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 74 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

How Would You Rate This Episode?
10 (Perfect!) 0%  0%  [ 0 ]
9.5 (One of the Best) 3%  3%  [ 2 ]
9.0 (Excellent) 4%  4%  [ 3 ]
8.5 (Very Good) 18%  18%  [ 13 ]
8.0 (Pretty Good) 41%  41%  [ 29 ]
7.5 (Decent) 18%  18%  [ 13 ]
7.0 (Average at Best) 4%  4%  [ 3 ]
6.5 (Not So Good) 8%  8%  [ 6 ]
6.0 (Pretty Bad) 1%  1%  [ 1 ]
5.0 (Just Awful) 1%  1%  [ 1 ]
Total votes : 71
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:01 pm 
Offline
Founding Father
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 9:54 pm
Posts: 3912
Location: Suburbia, USA
This is the official MM thread for From Moscow to Maui (2.4). All discussions and reviews for this episode should go here. If you wish to rate the episode, please do so with the poll. The avg. score will be the official 'community rating', which will be used on the episode page (updated monthly).

This thread is also linked in the episode page of the Episode Guide.


Original Air Date: 10/29/1981
A fighter pilot who defected from the Soviet Union wants Magnum to help his girlfriend, a Soviet athlete visiting the island for a track meet, defect as well. But, since she is under close scrutiny by the KGB, Magnum, T.C., Rick, and Higgins must organize a precision-like plan to free her.


Last edited by J.J. Walters on Fri Dec 28, 2007 3:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu May 03, 2007 10:25 pm 
Offline
Master Flub Spotter
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:08 am
Posts: 729
Additional Flubs for "From Moscow To Maui":

1. This flub involves the use of three different pair of F-4 Phantom jets, which are made to believe that they are the same pair of "USAF" F-4's. FIRST, in the opening scene you see two U.S. Airforce/Hawaii Nat'l Guard F-4 Phantom fighters take off to intercept the Soviet Mig 30 (Pair #1). The shot of the two F-4's taking off, you can see that the nose cones of both jets are completely black. You can also see under the left wing of each jet "USAF" indicating that they are U.S. Airforce aircraft. SECOND, the two F-4's are next shown flying in tandem formation (one behind the other), and then the F-4's are shown flying by with the left side of the aircraft exposed (Pair #2). You can tell that these are not the same F-4's they showed taking off, because on the side of these aircraft shows that they are "MARINES", not "USAF." This looks like file footage. In addition to being Marine F-4's, the nose cones on these two F-4's are not completely black as in the opeining scene. The nose cones on this pair of F-4's have a black strip from the front of the canopy to the tip of the nose, but the bottom half of the nose cone is not black. THIRD, the third pair of F-4's they show is a close-up view looking at the left side of the aircraft at the canopy area. Here you can see one of the F-4's has the number "23" on the side and that its nose cone is completely white.

2. This flub involves the supposed "MIG 30." To my knowledge there is no such thing as a MIG 30. There is a Mig 29 and Mig 31, but to my knowledge no Mig 30. Even if there was, it is highly unlikely that a movie or television studio could get their hands on one anyway. The key to this flub is to watch as the F-4's intercept the Mig 30, and you can clearly see that the Mig 30 is not a MIG, but another F-4 Phantom. Now, this isn't really surprising because it is common for television and movie studios to use file footage of other aircraft posing as enemy aircraft. An example would be the movie "TOP GUN." In that movie they used U.S. F-5 Freedom Fighters to substitue as MIGs. Anyway, in this scene, where the two F-4's have intercepted the F-4 posing as a Mig 30, that aircraft appears to be light gray in color, however, when they cut to the scene of the Mig 30/F-4 landing and taxiing to a stop, this aircraft is painted in a camouflage paint scheme and has a red star painted on the side of the fuselage to indicate a soviet Mig.

3. As the pilot in the supposed Mig 30 opens the canopy and starts to take off his shoulder harness you can just see a watch on his left wrist, under the left sleeve of his flight suit. However, after the pilot descends down the ladder you can see he has a watch on his right wrist and nothing on his left wrist.

One of my favorite scenes in this episode is when Magnum goes into see Higgins about recruiting Higgins to assist him in his plan to help Yuri's girlfriend defect. Higgins asks Magnum if it's important and Magnum says "very" and Higgins assumes that Magnum is willing to negotiate for his participation, in which Magnum responds, "not in the least."

Another great scene is at the end of the episode, when Magnum has Higgins' toy soldiers lined up in a certain formation, and leads Higgins to believe that it concerns a military skirmish Magnum had been involved in. Higgins inquires further as he is interested in the outcome of the skirmish, only to find out that it involved an Army/Navy football game.

This last scene where Magnum is talking about the Army/Navy game, raises an interesting question about Magnum. We know he played quarterback at the Naval Academy, but listening to the dialogue it seems that he may have played on defense also. In this scene, Higgins evaluates the deployment of Magnum's troops (still thinking it's a military skirmish), and saying "very sound deployment." Magnum responds by saying "that's what we thought." Higgins asks "what happened?" Magnum says "they broke through just the same, I felt responsible, it was my plan." Higgins trys to make Magnum feel better by talking about the burden of command, and saying "I'm sure you did your best." Magnum responds by saying "I suppose, but a touchdown so soon in the first quarter." Then it is revealed to Higgins that Magnum was talking about the Army/Navy game. Higgins walks off deflated, and Magnum looks into the camera like he just put one over on Higgins. The way the dialogue went, it seemed that Magnum was on defense, not offense. I suppose Magnum could have thrown an interception or someone could have fumbled, but that's not how it played in the scene. Anyone have any thoughts on this, i.e., whether Magnum played defense as well as offense?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2007 12:45 am 
Offline
Maniac Emeritus
User avatar

Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 7:16 pm
Posts: 1738
Location: Detroit
I always took it as he was on offense as QB, but then again, I could be biased from "One More Summer" (even though it aired after this one).

Maybe he was talking about the O-Line and the defense broke through and he fumbled or something?

Especially when they talk about "breaking through", I would assume its the defense breaking through into the pocket.

It just seems weird to me that the offense would "break through"

HOWEVER, back in the day, a lot of people played Ironman, so it could be feasible that he played on both sides of the ball.

Maybe its like how many licks it takes to get to the center of a Tootsie Pop?

"The World Will Never Know"

:lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2007 2:08 am 
Offline
Master Flub Spotter
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:08 am
Posts: 729
You are probably right Doc Ibold, but what made me think Magnum was on defense was when Higgins was evaluating the positioning of his men (toy soldiers) and said something about having sufficient men in the rear. When Higgins said this, it made me think of linebackers, safeties and other defensive backs. However, those pieces could have represented the quarterback and running backs too.

In addition, Magnum said "and a touchdown so soon in the first quarter" so matter-of-factly, as if it was expected, just not so soon. How often do defenses score touchdowns? Not as often as the offensive team.

The offense might 'breakthrough' the defensive line if it was a goal line stance, and the offensive team needed to breakthrough to get into the end zone. However, I see your point that typically the defensive team breaks through the offensive line to sack the Quarterback.

You are right, Magnum was depicted as a Quarterback in "One More Summer." He also relives his old Quarterback days in "No More Mr. Nice Guy." Remember, in "No More Mr. Nice Guy" Magnum, in his narration said that he was 21-30 with two touchdowns in the air and one scrambling, and one of the passes he missed was intercepted by Army's fastest man, and Magnum wasn't going to get beat by his own mistake and chased him down and tackled him, just as he runs down the bad guy (El Gato) in the episode and tackles him. So, whether Magnum played on defense or not, we know he can tackle.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri May 04, 2007 5:53 pm 
Offline
Founding Father
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 9:54 pm
Posts: 3912
Location: Suburbia, USA
IH, thanks for the info regarding the MiG. I didn't realize there is no such thing as a MiG-30. Definitely a flub. The fact that they didn't use a real MiG is understandable, however. This was 1981, the height of the Cold War!

Regarding the toy soldier scene at the end, I always assumed Magnum was talking about the defense "breaking through", causing a turnover (probably caused Magnum to fumble), and scoring a touchdown. The "my plan" bit leads me to believe he "drew up" the play, maybe even on the spot, in the dirt (which QB's were known to do at that time) during the game.

Of course, in Magnum's world, Army/Navy once played in the Rose Bowl (No More Mr. Nice Guy), so anything's possible! Maybe he really did play on both sides of the ball, as a really tall CB, or an undersized D-lineman, maybe! ;)

This is a good episode from Season Two, and a fitting episode for the times. LOVED the beginning with the fighter jets and that awesome in-episode music. And that great scene with Magnum "interrogating" the Soviet in the guesthouse, while slowly putting bullets into his revolver. Jack Bauer's got nothin' on this guy!

_________________
Higgins: It's not a scratch! It's a bloody gouge!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 05, 2007 6:29 pm 
Offline
Master Flub Spotter
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:08 am
Posts: 729
It is common for Hollywood to use U.S. or NATO aircraft disguised as MIGs in the production of movies and TV since the actual enemy planes are not available. In "TOP GUN", U.S. F-5 Freedom Fighters were supposed to be MIG 28's. To my knowledge there are no MIG 28's either. The French Mirage jets are often used by Hollywood as MIG's also. I believe they used the French Mirage jet as MIGs in the movie "IRON EAGLE." However the special effects in IRON EAGLE were not nearly as good as they were in TOP GUN. In IRON EAGLE, you could easily tell that models were used when an enemy fighter was blown out of the sky by a missile fired by one of the U.S. F-16's, because the model blowing up was static or stationary, not moving as if in actual flight at the time it was destroyed.

_________________
The answer is obvious, old man. Logic is irrelevant. It's simply Tropical Madness. (J.Q. Higgins)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat May 05, 2007 9:00 pm 
Offline
RENLEDUN, Protectrix of the Realm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:56 pm
Posts: 1017
Location: Sunny Southern California
Wow! Love reading all the discussion about "flubs" in this episode. Knowing nothing about football or about Soviet aircraft (by choice), although I did attend the very first Superbowl game in my youth, I now know that I have been laboring under the assumption that this episode was "flubless"! I have also noticed that what males look for in an episode differs drastically from what females look for. I wondered about the Soviet security measures at the stadium. Did it really only consist of one sweaty fat guy in a suit and tie, and the guy he speaks Russian to? (Just a rhetorical question there!)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 4:39 am 
Offline
RENLEDUN, Protectrix of the Realm
User avatar

Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 4:56 pm
Posts: 1017
Location: Sunny Southern California
Hello All,
I have spoken with my husband regarding Soviet aircraft. He is a veteran of 6 tours of duty on the aircraft carrier USS Constellation during the Viet Nam war. I consider him an expert on aircraft of that time since he was the "phone talker", which is like an air traffic controller at an airport. He had to study and know our aircraft and our enemy aircraft. He states that landing a MIG in Hawaii couldn't happen. The fuel tank was 1/3 the size of the F-4, and was made that way on purpose so their pilots couldn't defect to Japan. The fuel tank held just enough to get them within 200 miles of Japan, and they'd have to head back. He also told me that he knows of only one MIG that indeed made it to Japan, and when the pilot took off, he climbed to what's called "military airspace" around 45,000 feet or so, and ran out of fuel and glided the 200 miles to Japan. This happened around the late 1960's, early 1970's. That is the only incident that he knows of. He added that the United States government at that time let it be known that it would pay any MIG pilot a million dollars to defect, for the sole purpose of being able to go over the MIG with a fine tooth comb. He says all the MIG pilots knew about the million dollars, but were too afraid to defect. The MIG pilot mentioned above, now lives in California and owns a convenience store.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun May 06, 2007 8:17 pm 
Offline
Master Flub Spotter
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 4:08 am
Posts: 729
That same offer was open to North Korean pilots as well. Obviously, they would only need to defect across the border to S. Korea. I doubt the offer to the North Koreans is still open today considering our technology blows away anything they may be flying today.

_________________
The answer is obvious, old man. Logic is irrelevant. It's simply Tropical Madness. (J.Q. Higgins)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Jan 08, 2009 6:37 am 
Offline
Founding Father
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 02, 2007 9:54 pm
Posts: 3912
Location: Suburbia, USA
Noticed something odd - Marianne Muellerleile receives a 'co-starring' credit (as "Olga"), but, as far as I can tell, she never actually appears in the episode! I don't see an "Olga", or anything close to an "Olga" anywhere. In fact, there's only one female character in the entire episode, the Nina Marcova character. They must have cut her footage in post-production, but left in the credit.

Marianne Muellerleile has over 150 credits on the IMDB and this episode is her first credited role.... and she's not in it! Odd.

_________________
Higgins: It's not a scratch! It's a bloody gouge!


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 74 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 8  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group