Best movie of this year hands down!

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

This was no Oscar winner, and the story played like a bunch of thrown together scenes from a diary. The acting was mediocre to poor, even the few talents I recognized didn't elevate the status quo. What I was amazed at were that the special effects were so superior for a low budget movie. I read that all of the plains were digital as they couldn't afford to have real planes. You could have fooled me, the plains looked plenty real. The aerial battles were superior, and I hope the company that did the SFx has a lot of success...they deserve it.

Can't understand why this attempt at a serious subject received any attention at all. It was just silly! If you really want to get some idea what it was like in WWII in B-17's don't waste your time on this clichéd CGI cartoon. Watch "Twelve O'clock High", then watch "Fortress" if you must, then write your review. The CGI was good for a video game, distracting for a movie. The acting was typical for today, OK but over acted mostly. B-17's don't do loops. Other reviews have covered all of the goofs but I can't let this one go by, the enemy did not put up flack while their fighters were attacking! This crew had more unbelievable situations then 100 crews had on all their missions, and still survived. I had to watch two episodes of Charley's Angles just to come back to reality.

I wish that whomever is making films would have a greater concern for accuracy. The CGI of the aircraft was superb. The B-17's, the P-40's and the ME-109G's were great. That being said. Uniforms were consistently incorrect. Rank insignia is worn on the collar or epaulets; not both (base commander). Mis-matched or mis-aligned collar displays; rank was incorrectly worn. One officer had his rank displayed on one side of his collar and Flight cadets insignia on the other collar. Come on guys. Speaking of wings; you wear your wings immediately above the pocket on your shirt, not on the flap of the pocket. At least everyone was wearing a uniform appropriate to the season and locale. Boots and skivvies work fine in the desert. Too many movie use every uniform worn during the time period. Winter service, summer service, dress and undress. All in the same scene.The movie line was OK. The long term bonding of a crew shattered by casualties makes for a tough entry by a "newbie". I know, I've been there.

I will always give a positive to any movie that attempts to show the horror, the bravery and the honor of soldiers on all side in any war. This one is unique in that it tells a story of a geographical area that is seldom seen. I don't care about the actors names as they only read the screenplay and follows the directors direction. That being said........This movie was released last year but the CGI has the quality of video games of the early 90's. In other words....dated and cartoonish. As another reviewer wrote "How some people can say the CGI is any good I really don't know. If you look at some of the outdoor scenes where the background has been mocked up it's really funny, look at the extras, you can tell they feel uncomfortable being there staring at the "green wall" in front of them, I'm sure you can even see their shadows against it at some points. Some extras in one scene (a mild party scene) even look at the camera! As for everything else: The planes look crap, the explosions are crap, the tracer fire is crap, the flak looks crap. Some damage on the plane doesn't look too bad in all fairness but is totally unreasonable. Way too much gore to try and drive it all home too, if they'd of made a half decent film in the first place they wouldn't of had to worry about litres of fake, pink blood to try and make up for it." Unfortunately I have to agree and add that, while an important story, the screenplay is sub par as is the direction. It was obviously a lower budget film and lack hardly any wide angle shots. All shots seem to be of small groups or individuals talking face to face with no depth of field or scenery. Looks like it was filmed entirely on a sound stage or in the CGI lab. That doesn't make for realism in a movie set in the expanse of the desert and the sky.While the young actors bring to life just how young these soldiers and airmen were, the "pretty boy" hair styles are completely out of place and time. Also the sparkling clean uniforms, undershirts and faces make the camp look like a frat house instead of a remote, desert air base where temperatures were 120 during the day and 40 degrees at night. And yet, nobody sweats! Or there is some gratuitous arm pit wetness occasionally seen but the pits are wet but the faces are dry.Again an entirely poor effort to tell what could have been an interesting story. Too bad! To bad as