Flight World War II

It's a low budget production and lacked smoothness within scenes. Faran Tahir was good though. Simple things like the cockpit; it would have been more realistic if a ready-made cockpit installed from Saitek for a couple of thousand dollars. Some of the mistakes : The front landing gear was dropped manually then just before landing it was folded then dropped automatically. Then at the scene where the plane is landed with a big hole; some movement inside would have made the scene more realistic. By the way, whats a saw machine doing in a plane !!! So I enjoyed the movie only by forwarding the scenes from time to another and the finale was good with older Nigel in the plane.

The lead actor deserves better material to work with. He is very engaging and professional. Basically, that's the only compliment I can give this abysmal rehash of Final Countdown. I can suspend belief that even though the 757 has travelled back to an alternate June 1940, there are more holes in the locations and the plane than in the script. So Dunkirk is now a complete disaster and the British lost everyone, the Me262 rules the skies and somehow a remote British radio location equipped with very accurate SAM's somehow exists near Metz?? But we have been told RADAR doesn't exist in this alternate reality. France was overrun before Dunkirk which means Metz was occupied, no RAF fighters could have reached the 757 in less than 30 minutes, the Me 262 which didn't become operational till 1944 fired 30mm cannons which would have ripped the wing off the 757 in the first pass, ending the movie at least 30 minutes earlier. A writer, some technical advice and a little bit of consistency would have made this a much better film.

This was a great Sunday Afternoon movie which is exactly When I viewed it. This review is for the arm chair writers and directors that couldn't write their 5th grade essay on what i did on my summer vacation . So what some of the facts were off. No one's life was in danger.It's all make believe for entertainment Why do we find so much fault. I didn't understand the last part when the old man showed the pilot his journal on the events I agree it could have been better ,,,,But BEN HUR could have been better also . I think the Actors in this film were well cast and the FX WAS good for a (B) grade film .

Based on the title, description and photo for this movie, I expected a war movie, but nothing could be further from what I expected! Just moments into the film the action started and never stopped! We kept saying "Wow!" as we were glued to the edge of our seat. All of the actors were likable and believable characters (and how is that nobody is commenting that Matias Ponce resembles Jimmy Fallon?), and we just kept getting surprised by plot twists that we didn't expect. At one point the movie reminded me of Stephen King's "The Langoliers." The ending blew us away – never saw that coming at all! I love to watch movies to be entertained, and like to get caught up in the movie without watching for technical errors, inaccuracies or physical impossibilities. Unless this movie was labeled a war-time documentary, I don't expect it to be accurate, and don't hold that against them, as it was pure entertainment. Because of my desire to enjoy myself and just accept the film at face value, I'm a lot more accepting than the critics. All I can say is that I think it was a wonderful movie, and I enjoyed it so much, I'm planning to watch it again in the near future!

There will be a lot of reviews pointing out the historical inaccuracies and errors made within the film, and I won't refute that. When viewing for the first time I expected these faults in the writing and took them into account. It isn't the worst movie of all time, nor is it the best. The acting is sketchy and the graphics are average at best, but that's not what this flick is for. Of course there are things wrong with it, but that's the point. The film wasn't made for the purpose of historical accuracy, but as a simple sci-fi, action picture that would provide 90 minutes of entertainment. But when you see a description of a passenger aircraft from 2015 travelling through time to 1940, what did you honestly expect? Not a horrible movie, I'd recommend it to anyone who likes basic action and a bit of corny drama.

*A couple huge spoilers contained below* A blatant ripoff of 1980's "The Final Countdown" starring Kirk Douglas and Martin Sheen, with about 1% of the acting and effects quality. That said, not the worst bad movie I've ever seen. If you go into this movie with the full knowledge that this is not going to have anything approaching high production values then you won't be disappointed. It's a bad movie. But I kind of enjoyed it. There are some eye-rollers to be sure but the movie was for the most part uniformly mediocre so most of the issues with it didn't bother me. It is somewhat self aware that it is a bad movie and I'll usually give a bad movie a pass if it is a bad movie that knows it's a bad movie. The flying sequences with the German jets were surprisingly well done. The airliner itself is a joke but the exterior scenes of the fighters was better than anything else in the movie. The British radio operator acts quite well given what he is working with. The thing that bothers me more than anything else in the entire movie is how in ten minutes they were able to remove the radar, make a parachute and get it to the correct people. Oh, and the radar fits into a backpack? It looks like someone went to the salvage yard and pulled the grill off a '65 Riviera and called it a radar. Of all things for some reason this was the worst for me. In response to the folks saying it is historically inaccurate. Yes...but they kind of address it in the movie. One of the historians was surprised by something the British radio operator said that made it sound like this was a bit of an alternate history. Sorry, I can't recall what it was right now. The premise gets accepted a little too easily by the crew and the technical errors are too many to count but if you just relax and enjoy your popcorn and overlook the glaring errors you might not hate it too bad. There are a couple decent actors that help ground it a little bit and then there are a bunch of mediocre actors. And a couple downright horrible actors. Meh. It is what it is. My first impulse was to give it a five star rating but that is too much. I give it four because I was never tempted to shut it off. Even though it was relatively predictable and executed poorly, I kind of enjoyed it. Just turn off your brain a relax a little. If you are going to spend almost two hours watching a time travel movie, check out the excellent "The Final Countdown." If you've already seen it and can relax and not over think it, go ahead and give this one a shot.

The viewer will assume this is a time travel film, if only because the characters believe they have traveled in time, back to 1940. From the beginning, however, they are confronted with events that are apparently out of kilter, such as Dunkirk being a disaster rather than an inspirational evacuation, or Nazi jets, or Allied SAM weaponry, or the lack of British radar research, or...well, you get the idea--something is wrong, something even the professional historians aboard the airliner don't understand, and never really get. There is a temptation to dismiss the film as just a remake of The Final Countdown, but it goes past it in terms of theme, edging into more complexity, touching upon the idea of Intelligent Design, divine intervention, and the fluidity of time. Had the script actually addressed the issues directly rather than touching upon them tangentially, and also managed to remain above a certain level of pulpy mawkishness, the film would have been better. It might also then have risen above the mediocre acting. But the script writers did not, the director did not, and so we have a film that is highly entertaining and diverting, but is hardly challenging.

I love Asylum pictures, I will take an Asylum film over a Hollywood blockbuster any day, Asylum are good fun that you don't need to take seriously, most Hollywood films are over expensive, driven by very average fx and rarely character driven anymore, oh and almost no good story, ill stick with these films, also being a film maker i love the fact that they are willing to give it a go and not afraid to try something new unlike Hollywood who are only capable of doing remakes, i wont say reboots because they are crap remakes. The issue for Asylum is budget but they are NOT in the market to make 300 million dollar epics, but then nor are Hollywood any more, they do cheap fun entertainment, this is of course my opinion only.

I have read reviews of Flight 1942 here and elsewhere, which seem more than a little spiteful. I read one critic's opinion that there's a twist at the end that is absolutely predictable (I don't think it is and I often annoy myself by guessing big budget movie endings) and I also see an IMDb review that there are lots of problems with the historical aspects of this film (no, there is not). If anyone actually watched Flight 1942, they would be aware REALLY early on that the movie has a plot line about an ALTERNATE time line/parallel universe, which is then referred to repeatedly throughout the story. If anyone could miss that, then perhaps their review is a little suspect, bless them. As for reviews talking about wooden acting, I thought all the actors were brilliant. Especially my niece Aqueela Zoll. That's a joke, I have never met the lady, but she did fabulously in this role. Faran Tahir and Robbie Kay and Alberto Barros and Angie Dick and Vi Flaten were all excellent too. I actually feel bad for the actors that I haven't mentioned, because everyone contributed to a great ensemble cast. This is a lovely movie and I wish the best to everyone involved in its production. I hope you enjoy it too. Take care :) xox

Why all the negative reviews based upon the lack of factual accuracy in this movie? Did Hello Dolly really sing along with Walter Matthau, or how about 'Don't call me Shirley . . .' What's 'wrong' with ridiculous when it comes to totally fictional movies whose sole purpose is to entertain and not inform. The Kirk Douglas movie had a big budget and was meant to be taken a little more seriously, but if time travel is a fact then I missed it in physics class :) Point is, if you base an entire movie on what is currently a totally fictional premise why do you need to get other scientific 'facts' straight before the movie can be enjoyable. How many movies are based on the Zombie Loonies Threaten The Earth? Have you seen many real zombies kicking around the streets lately - and no, I'm not talking about politicians so you can't count them okay:) It was obvious that the director was on a restricted budget (it is a B movie after all) and wasn't going for realism, rather he made an entertaining somewhat tongue-in-cheek movie. Not the best acting in the world, not the best of anything, but like so many other movies it was a decent entertaining watch none the less. I didn't consider my time wasted at all but then I like Sci-Fi anything and especially time travel movies even if they are, or sometimes especially if they are in the B movie class. 5 stars from me.