i guess you can say that for ANY film. I've stopped trying to see if there are ANY good aviation films. There's so many parameters to consider.. really. You couldn't possibly satisfy everyone which is why you satisfy the masses, therefore, realism out of the window (not entirely necessary but to at least some extent). I saw TokoRi as a teenager and liked it a lot. I'd probably say the same thing as you today...who knows.
I guess Viper Pettigrew (the real Viper and Topgun instructor by ...invitation
) said it best: ''If I had it my way it would turn out more of a documentary than a movie". If aviations films are to be enjoyable to the masses rather than the few aircrew and a few maniacs (like me) watchin'em then they have to move away from realism by definition me thinks...
You want accurate portrayal of proper (kick-a$$) USN tactical flying? Picture Tom Cruise and his backseater (no shades on), visors down (no pretty eyes for the gals I'm afraid), combat spread (Iceman off to starboard and a tiny dot on the horizon), 20mile AIM-7 shots, sound comin on to the effect of the Jaws as the movie fanatic is biting his/her finger nails watchin a thin white trail of smoke then switchin to the backseat and watching Goose's radar screen and the enemy Dot disappearing from screen! Fantastic! Then instead of the "heeeeeeeehuuh" triumphant rt transmission you'd get something like a "vector 330, lets get the hell outta here" (which is similar to what the Tomcat leader said in the 1989 Libyan Mig shootdown).
Aviation films probable struggle making money because you're tryin to make money out a very specialised...hobby.. by tryin to make it appealing to the masses as well.
Far better and more realistic war films out there and pleased to say the newest as well.
Band of Brothers: excellent portrayal of company atmosphere!!