Redwarmin This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

Pluskylang Great Film overall

Matialth Good concept, poorly executed.

Sameer Callahan It really made me laugh, but for some moments I was tearing up because I could relate so much.

quarterwavevertical "Hell's Angels" is a movie about WW I aviators. From what I understand, it was originally meant to be a silent film, but, after the introduction of sound, many scenes were re-shot.What makes this movie stand out is that the dogfight scenes are authentic. Apparently, many of the pilots who flew the planes were themselves war veterans, giving authenticity to those parts of the film.It clearly influenced a number of later movies, such as "The Dawn Patrol" (featuring Errol Flynn and David Niven) and "Twelve O'Clock High" (starring Gregory Peck). Even 1986's "Top Gun" used many of the same techniques for its flight scenes.As for the story itself, I found it to be rather ho-hum. The plot drags at times and the acting was often wooden. One should remember, though, that sound in movies was still a new feature and studios were learning how to incorporate it into the films that they were making.Despite those shortcomings, "Hell's Angels" is still worth watching as it pioneered a number of special effects techniques.

jacobs-greenwood This is truly an historical film which not only contains the only color footage of Jean Harlow in a movie, and helped make her a star ("would you be shocked if I put on something more comfortable?"), but some of the best WW I airplane aerial sequences ever put on the screen (it was nominated for a Cinematography Oscar). Of course, this is due to the fact that aviator gazillionaire Howard Hughes produced, directed, and even filmed part of it. In fact, this film was initially going to be a silent with Greta Nissen in the Harlow role. But, during the time it was being made, the transformation from silent films to "talkies" was taking place. So, having more money than God, Hughes decided to reshoot most of it, requiring that he replace the Norwegian actress with Harlow.The story begins with three Oxford classmates, brothers Monte (Ben Lyon) and Roy (James Hall) Rutledge and their German friend Karl Armstedt (John Darrow), sharing a flat in pre-war Germany and fully enjoying the perks. Roy has a girl, Helen (Harlow), back home who he's constantly referring to, while Monte plays the field to excess. In fact, he's even gotten mixed up with a Baroness (Jane Winton), the wife of a German officer Baron Von Kranz (Lucien Prival, a recognizable character actor). When the Baron returns home prematurely, he catches Monte with his wife and challenges him to a duel. Since Monte is a man of little character, he flees back home to school at Oxford. His noble brother, Roy, pretends to be Monte, accepting the challenge to protect his name from disgrace. Though he is wounded, he returns to school and never mentions it to his brother.War breaks out and classmate Karl is summoned to return to Germany to serve. Roy enlists, but of course Monte does not. However, while wanting to kiss the pretty girl at a recruitment station, he accidentally signs up too. Before they go off to war, Roy wants to introduce his brother to his girl, whom Monte assumes must be a "dog". When they meet, both are pleasantly surprised (with Harlow winning the "look 'em over" staring contest;-) and we learn that Helen isn't as faithful to Roy as he thinks she is. This leads to a first "date" affair (and Harlow's signature line, above) but when Roy regrets his infidelity, perhaps for the first time in his life, it causes a rift between the two illicit lovers before he and his brother head off to war.One spectacular visual sequence involves Karl as the bombardier on a German Zeppelin that infiltrates London. Unbeknownst to the ship's commander, he guides it through the fog in order to drop its bombs harmlessly into a lake on the outskirts of the city. Alerted to the Zeppelin's presence, the Allies send several planes to intercept it and the chase is on. When the ship's commander needs more height to avoid their pursuit, and after throwing all non-essential equipment overboard doesn't work, he has the bombardier's pod's cable cut, dropping Karl to his death. He then orders all unnecessary personnel to jump overboard. The commander's ruthlessness almost succeeds, as his gunners shoot down all but one of the planes. However, the last plane utilizes a kamikaze maneuver, sacrificing himself and plane into the heart of the "big balloon".Roy and Monte are both trained as pilots and must fly nightly patrols. Since nearly every night means the end of at least one of the pilots, Monte does his best to avoid the duty. However, when Roy finally learns Helen doesn't love him (serving as a waitress on the war front, he catches her with a ranking officer) and signs up for a risky mission of great importance, his brother's bravery convinces Monte to also volunteer for the effort.The film's most spectacular visual scenes follow and dominate the rest of the film, but there is also a rather clever plot device used to end the drama between the brothers and involving Von Kranz.

jadavix "Hell's Angels" probably still boasts the most impressive aerial fight scenes in film. I've never seen anything like them. It was no great surprise to me that four people were killed during the making of the movie. Much of what you see seems incredibly dangerous. I'm not talking about the scenes where the planes are actually shot down or destroyed. Who could forget, for example, the scene where the plane crashes into the zeppelin? I assume that when the planes crashed or were blown up, no one was in any real danger. What is truly hair raising are the shots of planes whirling around and flying tightly like a swarm of insects. You expect an unscripted mid air collision.Aside from that, the movie is good, not great. I was not surprised that Jean Harlow was the only performer I recognised. The two actors who play the brothers are both pretty unimpressive. They serve the plot well enough, but it is plain to see that Howard Hughes had an eye for planes, not people.

calvinnme In 1927, Howard Hughes began production on a epic featuring the pilots of World War I that would be heavy on aeronautical thrills much in the same vein as "Wings". However, Hughes just could not stop tinkering with his pet project, eventually running the production cost up to four million dollars. This movie is a good example of not being able to tell where Hughes' OCD ends and his desire for perfection begins. However, it all paid off in the end, although it took years. Eventually the film did make eight million dollars, making it one of the top money-making films of the 1930's.There are two major flying sequences in the movie, part of which were actually filmed by Hughes since he couldn't get a professional cameraman to take the kind of chances involved. 1927's "Wings" had some great aerial combat, and had actually won a special Academy Award for engineering, but this film really outstrips it in daring and realism. For example, there are thirty or forty biplanes spinning around one another in one breathtaking combat sequence. Hughes pulled these scenes off largely by employing actual veteran flyers and ex-doughboys eager to show off their skill on camera in return for the big bucks Hughes was offering. However, after three of them died in the extreme sequences, the rest refused to fly for the final scene, saying that they were sure to crash. Hughes decided to fly the scene himself, getting the needed shot. However, just as the pilots had predicted, he also crashed the plane, although he escaped with relatively minor injuries. The main dirigible model was built on a vast scale, and when it explodes (in partial color) the effect is impressive. For the final aerial scene, Hughes used an authentic rebuilt German Gotha biplane bomber.Politically, this film has quite a bit of anti-German sensationalism. For example, the German dirigible commander decides to lighten his ship by ordering his own crew to jump to their deaths. In this film, although there is one "good" German - Roy and Monte's Oxford pal Karl - the women are all faithless. There are no adoring mothers or girlfriends waiting for our airmen to return home in this movie. This is especially true of Jean Harlow's character, Helen. She toys with Roy's heart while every man in uniform becomes her target of opportunity. Helen's outfits are all very revealing and definitely pre-code. There is also plenty of rough language between the pilots, especially when they are aloft. Although this is probably quite realistic in terms of what went on, this also could only happen in the pre-code era. Hughes knew the so-called "code" had no teeth in the era in which this film was made, although his stunts caused him real trouble in his later films.It's hard to tell from the film if Hughes had any real hard and fast feelings about World War I or war in general, or if it was just him inserting the right sense of showmanship at appropriate places to stir up the audience. For example, in one scene a man demonstrating in the street preaches that it is folly to fight a war that is really about capitalism being impeded by the petty inter-fighting of the various European powers, and is beaten by the crowd as a result. But strangely enough, when that line of reasoning is later adopted by the "bad" brother Monte, although much less eloquently, he is deemed a coward. Monte tries to redeem himself by volunteering for a dangerous aerial mission, but even then he has to be dragged to execute the assignment by his brother. When both brothers are captured and Monte wants to tell everything about the pending British attack to his German captors in order to save himself, brother Roy comes up with a clever but unpleasant solution.This is really great entertainment if you are at all interested in either film or aviation history.