Highly Overrated But Still Good

From my favorite movies..

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

I have to agree, the filming in this is just short of unwatchable. Whose idea was it to stretch out a film's segment to fit the 2.35:1 screen? This could have been a good film but it is like sitting in some doctor's or other office where they stretch out a 4:3 broadcast to fill a 16:9 screen. Many scenes cannot even be adjusted with the screen choices on my TV which allows format choices. B-52s and F-100s one and a half times their length in reality. An out-of-round X-15 rocket nozzle . . .Its a fair story. I see the often used picture of an F-100 losing flight control and ending up cartwheeling in flames is shown as seen in other films.It would have been acceptable to just leave the 4:3 screen film stock alone instead of stretching it. I hope there are no more films done this way. I have seen a lot of films but this is the first time I ever saw this resorted to. A very poor rendition is the obvious result.

Unfortunately, what could have been a good movie is turned into a major disappointment by a decision to take all the aerial photography done in 4:3 format and stretch it to fit the 2.35:1 format used for the rest of the movie. This makes the aircraft look strange and unreal. It ruins the experience.This should have been a "must see" movie for aviation buffs since it shows an important period in the development of aviation. But stretching the film to fit a widescreen format makes the scenes of the X-15, the B-52 mother-ship and the F-104 and F-100 chase planes look distorted and unrealistic. It is a real waste and a shame that the film producers were more concerned with using a widescreen than with a usable presentation.

Substantial good footage of actual X-15 flights, better than in some of the documentaries I've seen. The strongest points of this film are the flight footage and its technical accuracy.This film was produced with meticulous script review of technical details by NASA Dryden and by the Air Force. Even in shots showing actors faking flight actions in the cockpit what they show is accurate in the sense that it's the truth even if it's not the whole truth. The best way to appreciate much of this is to first study the X-15 flight manual. In any case the attention to technical accuracy is remarkable by the standards of sci fi & aviation/space movies made around 1961. It appeared that nearly the entire film was shot on location at NASA Dryden and Edwards AFB. All flight footage is real except for a couple short hokey segments showing a model for flight outside the atmosphere and during reentry.The rest (script, production, directing, & such) is fairly lame and underwhelming. If only Tom Hanks had an urge to redo this film the result probably would be a great one, but it wasn't Tom Hanks who did this edition.Bottom line: X-plane enthusiasts will love the real & authentic action, but most others will conclude that it's appropriate for this flick to only show up infrequently on obscure cable & satellite channels.

One day someone will write a book comparing films of this sort to the artistic accomplishments of 1920s and 1930s Soviet socialist realism. There is minimal character development as the film focuses almost entirely on the technological triumphs of space age America. The fetishistic treatment of the space programme and all its minutiae is dull in the extreme, and the only relief is a stolid performance by the always reliable James Gregory.