Frankly, I don't really understand why people complain so much about this movie. Top Gun ripoff? Maybe - so what? As something of a "military otaku", I've seen both, and I'd say I know enough about the matters portrayed, as well. Is it realistic? Not really, but it does provide simple, enjoyable entertainment and great viewing experience for the aviation fan in you. The footage is indeed great.
People keep bringing "Top Gun" up over and over. Just as unrealistic, if not worse. I'd say, TG is far more far-fetched than Fire Birds. Why does everyone hold TG in higher regard? It came first, but... that's about it.
I hear complaints about bad acting... I can't really tell, as the Polish edition has, just like everything else, that annoying lector instead of subtitles, efficiently making all the original dialogs inaudible. The dialogs, however, seemed quite okay in translation.
Honestly, I really like this movie. It's been in my collection for a dozen years now, and I've gotten myself a DVD recently. What's important to understand, is that it's one of those movies that are NOT supposed to have a deep storyline. The plot is nice and simple, just enough to keep a story going and show off the Apaches.
I love Top Gun, for its beautiful F-14 footage and a simple story that doesn't get in the way of the viewing experience. And i don't really mind the corny lines and obvious lack of any realism. It's not a documentary, it's an action movie, one of the few of its kind (aerial action movie?) As for Fire Birds...
I love Fire Birds for the same reasons - beautiful AH-64 footage and a simple story that keeps the thing going and doesn't get in the way of what I want to see there in the first place - the Apaches in action. I don't mind the corny lines nor flaws in realism. Just like TG, it's not supposed to be a documentary. It's an action movie of the same, rare genre as Top Gun. I wish there was more of those...
