Aggiungi una trama nella tua linguaAlcoholic pilot struggles to turn his life around.Alcoholic pilot struggles to turn his life around.Alcoholic pilot struggles to turn his life around.
Lee Bonnell
- Capt. Wallen
- (as Terry Belmont)
Pamela Blake
- Nurse
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Joe Bordeaux
- Mechanic
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Jane Buckingham
- Miss Ross - McLean's Secretary
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Eddie Dunn
- Plainclothesman
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Thornton Edwards
- Court Clerk
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Paul Everton
- Banker
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Roy Gordon
- Judge J. Doran Fox
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Denis Green
- Col. Kolbec
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Trama
Lo sapevi?
- QuizThis film features the original 1935 Hughes H-1 RACER. It set the transcontinental non-stop speed record on 1 January 1937 over a distance of 2,490 miles at and average speed of 332 mph taking 7 hr., 28min., 25 sec. The plane is on display at the National Air & Space Museum and was also featured in the movie The Aviator (2004). Only one was ever built, but subsequently several replicas have been fabricated.
Models were mostly used, but also notable is the use of footage of the experimental Hughes H-1 Racer during Howard Hughes record-breaking trans-American aircraft flight from Burbank, Calif., to Newark, N.J. in 1937.
- BlooperTutte le opzioni contengono spoiler
- ConnessioniReferenced in Kim Newman on 'The Day of the Locust' (2020)
Recensione in evidenza
The film has two main themes. A world-famous aviator (Dix) has slowly destroyed his once amazing career and he has his pilot's license revoked for being drunk in the cockpit. The film is about his rebuilding his life, though through very long stretches of the film he is absent or practically absent as the second plot took precedence during most of the film. A small aircraft manufacturer is trying to design a fighter plane in order to win a lucrative government contract. So much of the film concerns the struggles they go through as well as a budding relationship that never seems to get off the ground between the project manager and a female draftsman.
As far as the plane goes, I know most who see the film won't notice some of the problems with how they executed the flying sequences and the plane itself. While the plane is supposed to be "the latest thing" and capable of flying over 400 m.p.h., the design is actually similar to experimental craft being produced from 1932-1936 (looking a lot like the airplane used in the old Universal Studios intros), so in so many ways the craft was totally obsolete. This isn't a real issue for the average person, but hey, for us aviation buffs it is noticeable. But what IS noticeable even for the casual viewer are the silly physics of the plane as it flies. It's very obviously a model and it executes turns that no plane EVER could make--making the tiniest loop-to-loops and spins in history! A little more money and effort could have made for much more realistic and less silly flying sequences. However, even despite these problems, the movie is about a seldom discussed topic and I found it very interesting from a historical standpoint.
As for me, personally, I would score this movie a 6 or 7, since I am a huge fan of the history of aviation and am a school teacher. However, I also understand that for the average viewer, this film will no doubt be pretty dull stuff and provide little entertainment. Also, as far as a the romance goes, it never really made much sense and never seemed to get past minor infatuation. Plus, for fans of Richard Dix (and there must be a few out there), his role in the film is pretty small and not especially heroic--despite him receiving top billing.
As far as the plane goes, I know most who see the film won't notice some of the problems with how they executed the flying sequences and the plane itself. While the plane is supposed to be "the latest thing" and capable of flying over 400 m.p.h., the design is actually similar to experimental craft being produced from 1932-1936 (looking a lot like the airplane used in the old Universal Studios intros), so in so many ways the craft was totally obsolete. This isn't a real issue for the average person, but hey, for us aviation buffs it is noticeable. But what IS noticeable even for the casual viewer are the silly physics of the plane as it flies. It's very obviously a model and it executes turns that no plane EVER could make--making the tiniest loop-to-loops and spins in history! A little more money and effort could have made for much more realistic and less silly flying sequences. However, even despite these problems, the movie is about a seldom discussed topic and I found it very interesting from a historical standpoint.
As for me, personally, I would score this movie a 6 or 7, since I am a huge fan of the history of aviation and am a school teacher. However, I also understand that for the average viewer, this film will no doubt be pretty dull stuff and provide little entertainment. Also, as far as a the romance goes, it never really made much sense and never seemed to get past minor infatuation. Plus, for fans of Richard Dix (and there must be a few out there), his role in the film is pretty small and not especially heroic--despite him receiving top billing.
- planktonrules
- 1 gen 2007
- Permalink
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Gusari neba
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Azienda produttrice
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 15 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.37 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Men Against the Sky (1940) officially released in Canada in English?
Rispondi