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.

First of all,my dad was stationed in Italy in 1944-45 a bombardier in the15th Airforce 483rd bomb group(H) flying in B-17G Flying Forts. He and his crew were shot down and crashed in occupied Yugoslavia. He was MIA on his 44th mission and evaded capture and returned to Italy after 72 days missing. He is alive and well at 95!! Together we watched this movie. Here is my Dad's take. First, the special effects were pretty good, but the movement of the B-17's especially on take off's were completely inaccurate. They seemed to take off like fighter planes. B-17's were comparatively very slow on take off with full bomb loads. Also, the actors portrayal of the young flyers seemed out of touch with the reality of the 1940's. My father said most of the air crews of that era would not over use the "F" word like these actors did. He says the "F" was used on occasion as in SNAFU,but wasn't part everyday conversations the way curse words like God Damn and "son of a bitch" were.As for life on base. Drinking large amounts of moonshine would not happen. As drunk as this crew was,they would have been grounded for sure. We might have a few beers ,but we all wanted to stay sharp. "We did our drinking mostly at the officers club after a mission and only really got drunk when we knew we were't flying the next day" My dad says"one Sgt. once tried to make a still, but got caught and was court martialed. That boy who had his still blow up would have been sent to the brig and busted to private!In a nut shell, this movie did not seem realistic to the combat missions we flew in WW2. Yes, the violent deaths were realistic, but an injured navigator would never disobey his pilot's orders. So,as me,OK...not a great film. My advice is that if you are going to make a film about WW2 bomber crews and missions, do what Spielberg did for Saving Private Ryan....or don't make one at all.

I have to agree with one of the previous comments. While this movie doesn't have the budget and panache of larger films it kept to the spirit of bomber groups operating out of North Africa. And, I easily preferred this to well know titles such as Red Tails or Memphis Belle. The computer artists need to be congratulated because for not having real planes through most of it I thought all completely was believable. The key to a movie is not so much how much money you throw at it, but how good the story is. I found myself becoming one with the crew of the Lucky Lass. It is definitely worth a watch and I won't hesitate to watch it again. Well written, well acted and enjoyable. Mission accomplished!

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