Perfect cast and a good story

Just intense enough to provide a much-needed diversion, just lightweight enough to make you forget about it soon after it’s over. It’s not exactly “good,” per se, but it does what it sets out to do in terms of putting us on edge, which makes it … successful?

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Interesting War drama taken from British point of view . Spectacular and colorful WWI airplane movie with an enjoyable casting and breathtaking aerial battles . Splendid aerial scenes stunningly staged , being wonderfully photographed by Gerry Fisher and adequate musical score by Richard Hartley are the chief assets of this enjoyable film . In WW1 the high casualty rate among the rookie pilots of the Royal Flying Corps puts an enormous strain on the survivors . Pilots shooting down enemy planes but also suffering a lot of war losses . They carry out attacks on balloons that were extremely dangerous because machine guns and antiaircraft guns formed a protective circle beneath the balloons . Therefore pilots dived at a steep angle when they attacked , they did not attack horizontally . High above the trenches 14 days is a long life...This is the 15th day! Spectacular dogfighting , interesting dramatics , overwhelming scenarios , top-drawer cast , agreeable interpretations bring to life attractive roles though tend toward cliché . Nice aerial sequences directed by Derek Cracknell but drama on the ground does a little boring . R.C. Sheriff's classic play about life in the trenches was reworked as a drama of fliers in the Royal Flying Corps by screen-writer Howard Barker . As the setting is transplanted from the trenches to an airfield , but most of the characters and some incidents are almost unchanged . Big-budget extended feats produced by Benjamin Fisz about unfortunate pilots undergoing risked feats on air . The main excitement results to be the grandiose spectacle of the planes , as on the ground roar rather less . Pretty good aerial flick full of thought-provoking issues , drama , fantastic cloudy scenes and spectacular dogfighting . The scene with the balloon observer jumping out with a parachute is reused footage from Blue Max (1966) by John Guillermin . Peter Firth shows professionalism as a crack fighter pilot , he plays a naive youth assigned to dangerous missions . Malcolm McDowell gives a restrained and intelligent acting as a veteran pilot . Top-notch support cast gives excellent performances as Christopher Plummer , Richard Johnson , Ray Milland , John Gielgud , Simon Ward , Trevor Howard and first cinema feature of Tim Pigott-Smith . Adequate photography by Gerry Fisher , though a perfect remastering being necessary . It was filmed at North Weald airfield, in Essex , a hangar that was built for the film was later used for sets of television .The motion picture was professionally directed by Jack Gold . He was born in London and is a prestigious director and producer , known for Bofors guns (1968) , The Reckoning (1970) , Man Friday (1975) , The Medusa touch (1978) , The Chain (1984) , Escape from Sobibor (1987), and Goodnight, Mister Tom (1998) . ¨Aces high¨ is a rehash of the former airplane movie clichés in which the splendid casting stands out . Rating : nice and entertaining , it's a fairly watchable and breathtaking film and results to be a good treatment of WWI flying aces .

I caught this film on a Sunday afternoon when nothing else was on.I'm interested in the history of the period, but I can't say that I am a total plane nut or could tell you that the wrong flap or control stick was used on a certain plane etc.I thought the piece had real emotion running through it - this is far from a propaganda piece, a glory-romp detailing the beginnings of the RAF. I found it a very convincing and personal take on the futility of air war during WW1.The film is quite depressing, but then the war itself was no walk in the park, was it? We get to see first hand how the constant pressure affected these young men, we see how many of them were killed, how many could barely fly the planes. I thought that the flight scenes, and the scenery/sets generally, added to the overall ambiance and feel of the film. The 'barrack' or 'mess' they live in is just a shack with a piano in, and the only solace they have is getting drunk every night and singing songs. I genuinely felt their terror, and for me it pervades the entire film. It shows how various men cope with this massive pressure - some better than others - and it highlights a time very different from ours, a time when most of these young airmen had no idea what was in store for them. I believe that WW1 changed the world in many ways - artistically, musically, politically - and more. This is a little vignette into a lost world. It shows (but doesn't rub in or over-egg) the class system at the time - as others have mentioned, the RAF was really the preserve of the upper classes at that time, and this is a beautiful counterpart to the working class ground crew. This isn't an obvious film, I don't think, it doesn't spell things out for you, you are just awashed with small and loving details, character traits, believable props/scenery etc. It just feels right, and is quite moving.For those who bemoan the fact that it's not like Journey's End - although it's a 'revised' version of the play, it is going to be totally different - I don't understand how you can compare the claustrophobia of the trenches with the much more 'open' warfare and living conditions of the RAF. Rather than let myself get hung up about this, I treated Aces High as its own piece. I've seen Journey's End at the theatre, and enjoyed it, but to compare the two and berate Aces High for not being an exact port or copy of the origin I feel is missing the point.I was really surprised and happy at this little gem I found on a Sunday afternoon. I think it helps to have some knowledge of the period to really appreciate the film, but I'd recommend this film to anyone.

Its an anti war film. That's it. No great epic, no great direction, no good production values and certainly not even original. I mean how many war films over the past 30/40 years do you know that are set in WWI that are not weighed down with a none too subtle anti war message? This is nothing different and nothing that hasn't been seen before, even in the mid 70s. Positive side. Both Christopher Plummer as the "best of a bad job" and Malcolm McDowell "I can not handle this, pass the whisky" are excellent and the planes do look the part. Class system shown (as it was/is in the British forces) but not stuffed in your face so it dominates the film.The aerial battles are good but not exactly "Battle of Britain" standard and the whole film seems to have been shot in a filed round the back of the studios and the ending is hardly a shock. Still all in all it an alright if not good film to watch on a Sunday afternoon.

First of all I feel I`ve got to point out the two flaws of ACES HIGH 1 ) The film starts with the commonly held erroneous view that young men of whatever nation joined the army because they`d been brainwashed by glorious tales of derring do and had no idea of the horror awaiting them in the trenches . Not so in Britain at least since The Times newspaper published the names of every British serviceman killed at this time . One edition in July 1916 published over 20,000 names of the men killed during the Somme offensive , so to insinuate that the boys at the school had somehow only had Gresham`s account of the war to fall back on is somewhat naive . This might have happened in 1915 but not so when this film was set towards the end of 1916 2 ) ACES HIGH is based on the play JOURNEYS END except it revolves around a plane squadron which means when the chaps are at the airfield everything feels a bit too stagey while when they`re up in the air there`s a distinct lack of drama since the cast are indistinguishble with their goggle clad faces and their lack of dialogue Having pointed out the flaws I can`t not mention the main strength and that`s the cast . Malcolm McDowell an actor I can`t usually stand at the best of times gives a superb performance as the bitter , cynical alcholic John Gresham . It`d be very easy for McDowell to give a very over the top performance ( Some might say that`s all he ever does ) but he`s both very convincing and disciplined here . Christopher Plummer is completely convincing as a paternal English officer ( Plummer was always good at this kind of role ) and Peter Firth - Despite being hampered with a character unsubtley written - is also good Considering the limited budget the technical aspects are impressive enough with the sometimes slightly obvious backscreen projection hardly bringing the film down . It`s an anti-war film so its heart is in the right place but like many an anti-war film it`s somewhat heavy handed ( As I imagine the source play was ) and the ariel scenes with their lack of dialogue means a somewhat over dramatic film in places and an undramatic film in other places Six out of ten