I saw this movie many years ago, and just tonight on DVD. Wow. This film has been remastered by the UCLA Archives, and the sound is very clear. Clear enough, that you can hear some rather explicit language coming from Monte during the dogfight sequence. And if you understand German, there is even more. Definitely before the Code. This is a Great film, and for those who would criticize the acting, editing, etc, compare it to other films made during the first years of the "talkie era." It stands up very well. Pay special attention to the wounded pilots as they are dying in their planes. Very gritty. The realism of the aerial battles has never been equaled. This film is a true classic. How many other classic films circa 1930 come to mind? Not many.
84 Reviews
Jean Harlow in Technicolor!
didi-522 May 2005
Warning: Spoilers
'Hell's Angels', now available on DVD in a beautifully restored version, can now be enjoyed by all of us with tinted and full colour sequences intact.
Directed by Howard Hughes (with dialogue scenes staged by James Whale), this war movie is famous for two reasons - one, it has some of the most exciting air-borne battle sequences to appear on film; and two, it marks the feature film debut of Jean Harlow. She appears in colour for the only time in the 8 minute Lady Randolph's Party sequence about halfway into the film.
The story starts with three friends at Oxford - two brothers, the good-natured Roy (James Hall), and the fly-by-night Monte (Ben Lyon); and a German student, Karl (John Darrow). An early sequence features one of the brothers taking the other's place in a duel - important to remember for later in the saga; while the turning point of the first part is of course the start of the Great War (forcing Karl to join the enemy, and Roy and Monte to enlist as pilots). Roy has a well-to girlfriend, Helen (Harlow), who isn't quite the angel he takes her to be.
The aerial battles are by far the highlight of the film, although Harlow is good in her role, vamping all who come into her path. Evelyn Hall is agreeably twittery as Lady Randolph, while Lucien Prival overacts as Baron von Kranz. Roy Wilson provides some comic relief as 'Baldy' Maloney.
Originally planned and started as a silent movie, 'Hell's Angels' still has some problems with pacing and comes across as rather stilted in places. Ben Lyon is a bit of a problem as Monte - fine as a relaxed civilian, he doesn't convince in the later sequences.
All this aside, 'Hell's Angels' is a good film and looks fantastic after its clean-up. A very interesting viewing experience.
Directed by Howard Hughes (with dialogue scenes staged by James Whale), this war movie is famous for two reasons - one, it has some of the most exciting air-borne battle sequences to appear on film; and two, it marks the feature film debut of Jean Harlow. She appears in colour for the only time in the 8 minute Lady Randolph's Party sequence about halfway into the film.
The story starts with three friends at Oxford - two brothers, the good-natured Roy (James Hall), and the fly-by-night Monte (Ben Lyon); and a German student, Karl (John Darrow). An early sequence features one of the brothers taking the other's place in a duel - important to remember for later in the saga; while the turning point of the first part is of course the start of the Great War (forcing Karl to join the enemy, and Roy and Monte to enlist as pilots). Roy has a well-to girlfriend, Helen (Harlow), who isn't quite the angel he takes her to be.
The aerial battles are by far the highlight of the film, although Harlow is good in her role, vamping all who come into her path. Evelyn Hall is agreeably twittery as Lady Randolph, while Lucien Prival overacts as Baron von Kranz. Roy Wilson provides some comic relief as 'Baldy' Maloney.
Originally planned and started as a silent movie, 'Hell's Angels' still has some problems with pacing and comes across as rather stilted in places. Ben Lyon is a bit of a problem as Monte - fine as a relaxed civilian, he doesn't convince in the later sequences.
All this aside, 'Hell's Angels' is a good film and looks fantastic after its clean-up. A very interesting viewing experience.
Dated, but still interesting and exciting.
train46413 August 2004
This film, produced only three years after sound entered the movies, is entertaining and thoughtful. It makes good use of sound effects and has great visual effects as well. The flight scenes are impressive. Hughes flew a plane in this film (but crashed it) and three other pilots were killed during filming. The scenes of dozens of tiny aircraft swarming in the sky are still breathtaking. The plot is standard good-guys/bad-guys but adds some sensitivity to all parties. We have groups fighting a war in the air, and not too happy to be doing it. But they do their jobs, and give their lives for victory. The scene of Germans abandoning their airship is particularly wrenching and affective. Some token love interests and the usual inept comedy characters round out the cast, which all stood up to the task as well as anyone in 1930.
Jean Harlow gets her first billing in this film (she's one of my all time favorites), so it is her breakthrough movie.
Not a keeper, but see it if you can.
Jean Harlow gets her first billing in this film (she's one of my all time favorites), so it is her breakthrough movie.
Not a keeper, but see it if you can.
An early epic film,that enthralled the audiences of the day.
lenliqbar2 April 2001
I saw this film (movie) in about 1933 and still remember every scene. Without the use of bad language it conveyed the fear,excitement,and gallantry of the time. The German evil was perhaps overplayed,but it was made just a very few years after the War. The flying scenes were dramatic and at least as effective as any made in recent years.
Is it possible to obtain a copy?if so where.
Is it possible to obtain a copy?if so where.
Hughes' compulsive behavior produces an early talkie gem,
AlsExGal23 February 2013
Warning: Spoilers
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.
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.
Possibly the best aerial battles yet!
eliasen18 November 2001
My roommates and I saw a few minutes of this many years ago, and we spent weeks poring over TV listings and video rentals to find more of this movie. We were not disappointed. The aerial combat scenes are, quite simply, the most astounding ever. Some scenes show DOZENS of REAL airplanes roiling in a frighteningly tight ball like a cloud of gnats, and barely missing each other. 3 pilots died filming this movie. I'm forever spoiled for the safe choreography, heavy editing, and airplane-free skies of Top Gun... Hell's Angels has real pilots doing really scary stuff. Real planes crashing into real hillsides, not "drifting behind a sand dune and then setting off a gasoline pot."
I now scoff at the computer-generated zeppelin scenes in "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade." Howard Hughes kicked their butts over 70 years earlier.
Some of the movie is melodramatic and dated, but some human scenes are brutally harsh, powerful, and would never get filmed today because they're TOO chilling.
A really stunning movie, which not only holds up, but betters today's air movies.
I now scoff at the computer-generated zeppelin scenes in "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade." Howard Hughes kicked their butts over 70 years earlier.
Some of the movie is melodramatic and dated, but some human scenes are brutally harsh, powerful, and would never get filmed today because they're TOO chilling.
A really stunning movie, which not only holds up, but betters today's air movies.
Memorable aerial footage encumbered by creaky 'human drama'
jamesrupert201416 July 2021
Brothers Roy (James Hall) and Monte Rutledge (Ben Lyon) enlist in the Royal Flying Corp and end up flying dangerous missions over England and France in the early days of aerial combat. Howard Hugh's film is best remembered for its extensive aerial footage, involving dozens of aircraft including period-correct Royal Aircraft Factory S. E.5s, Fokker D. VIIs, and a 1920s Sikorsky S-29-A mocked up to look like a German Gotha bomber. The flying scenes (real and in miniature) are outstanding with the attack on the Zeppelin over London and the crash of a large bomber standouts. The epic production, during which several planes were destroyed and three pilots/crew lost their lives, was said to be the most expensive ever (although this may have been marketing hyperbole), partly because it was caught in the silent-to-talkie transition period and needed to be extensively reshot before release. The simplistic 'human story-line' about the brothers, one heroic, one cowardly, is much less memorable with a lot of stilted dialogue, artificial-sounding bonhomie, and trite romantic melodrama (involving up-right Roy's pining after Helen (Jean Harlow), a peroxide blond vamp of dubious morals who seems more interested in variety than sobriety). The pre-code film contains some expletives (shocking then, tame now), Harlow wears some clingy and revealing dresses at times, and the scene in which a character is shot in the back is extremely real looking ( for an era when most 'shot people' simply put a hand on their chest and fell over wearing a shocked expression). A must see for fans of both vintage films and of vintage aircraft.
The First Great Action Epic of the Talking Era
FEAvera19 February 2005
With the release of "The Aviator" there will be renewed, and well deserved, interest in this classic. Hell's Angels holds together surprisingly well for a 75 year old film. Sure there is the over-emoting one would expect from a film that bridges the era between silents and talkies, but the character development is good, the flight scenes are amazing and the story holds the attention from beginning to end. And we haven't even talked about Jean Harlow!! There can be no doubt that Howard Hughes was a genius, a perfectionist, and that he set out to, and did, produce of of the greatest movies of all time. The most expensive film of it's day, and worth every penny.
Star making role for Harlow and a film that still holds it's own
rosscinema23 December 2004
Warning: Spoilers
With everything that went on during the making of this film you can make a good point that it's more interesting than the film itself but don't let that keep you from viewing this because some of the footage that was shot is still amazing to look at. Story surrounds two brothers who end up in World War I together as pilots but also the relationship they share with the same woman. Roy Rutledge (James Hall) is brave and polite but also dull and he keeps telling everyone around him about his girlfriend Helen (Jean Harlow) but what he doesn't know is that she's a promiscuous tramp. Roy introduces her to his brother Monte (Ben Lyon) who's a selfish cad and a playboy and Helen doesn't waste any time getting him to go home with her where she seduces him.
*****SPOILER ALERT***** Both brothers are pilots for the British Royal Flying Corps and Helen volunteers to work in a Canteen which Roy visits often but one night he catches her with another man and it ends with her telling him that she never loved him in the first place. Later a dangerous mission comes up and both brothers volunteer to fly a German plane into enemy territory and bomb a munitions dump which they succeed in doing but they are also caught and told that if they don't cooperate they will both be shot.
This was the first film that Howard Hughes directed and it cost almost 4 million dollars for him to produce which resulted in him never earning a profit in it's initial release. So many things to mention about this film and I guess I'll start with the fact that it was supposed to be a silent film but sound took off during filming and Hughes re-filmed several scenes with the actors and one of the interesting things to watch is the newer footage edited in with sound effects. Three pilots working on the film would crash and die during filming and Hughes himself flew some of the planes and crashed twice nearly killing him. There are two scenes that are tinted and hand colored and this film possesses the only color footage in existence of Jean Harlow. I'm one of those who never thought that Harlow was this jaw dropping beauty but I do think she's incredibly sexy in this film. The dresses look like they are ready to fall off of her and considering that this was her first big role it's easy to see why it made her a big star. Some have said that the story is dated but I still see a uniqueness in it especially with the characters and some of the dialog that was written by Hughes. In one scene Monte screams about how senseless the war is and how it was started by politicians and the film doesn't attempt to hide the fact that he would give up information to the enemy to save his own hide. Thank God the Hays Office Production Code that was formed in 1934 wasn't in effect otherwise audiences wouldn't have been titillated by Harlow's deliciously trampy performance. But the highlight of the film is still the aerial dogfight footage and the scene of the German Zeppelin going down while on fire. These scenes still hold up and add to the mystique of Hughes legacy as a maverick in everything that he wanted to do.
*****SPOILER ALERT***** Both brothers are pilots for the British Royal Flying Corps and Helen volunteers to work in a Canteen which Roy visits often but one night he catches her with another man and it ends with her telling him that she never loved him in the first place. Later a dangerous mission comes up and both brothers volunteer to fly a German plane into enemy territory and bomb a munitions dump which they succeed in doing but they are also caught and told that if they don't cooperate they will both be shot.
This was the first film that Howard Hughes directed and it cost almost 4 million dollars for him to produce which resulted in him never earning a profit in it's initial release. So many things to mention about this film and I guess I'll start with the fact that it was supposed to be a silent film but sound took off during filming and Hughes re-filmed several scenes with the actors and one of the interesting things to watch is the newer footage edited in with sound effects. Three pilots working on the film would crash and die during filming and Hughes himself flew some of the planes and crashed twice nearly killing him. There are two scenes that are tinted and hand colored and this film possesses the only color footage in existence of Jean Harlow. I'm one of those who never thought that Harlow was this jaw dropping beauty but I do think she's incredibly sexy in this film. The dresses look like they are ready to fall off of her and considering that this was her first big role it's easy to see why it made her a big star. Some have said that the story is dated but I still see a uniqueness in it especially with the characters and some of the dialog that was written by Hughes. In one scene Monte screams about how senseless the war is and how it was started by politicians and the film doesn't attempt to hide the fact that he would give up information to the enemy to save his own hide. Thank God the Hays Office Production Code that was formed in 1934 wasn't in effect otherwise audiences wouldn't have been titillated by Harlow's deliciously trampy performance. But the highlight of the film is still the aerial dogfight footage and the scene of the German Zeppelin going down while on fire. These scenes still hold up and add to the mystique of Hughes legacy as a maverick in everything that he wanted to do.
Its time ahead!
grillrobert7 March 2005
This is a fabulous film, far ahead of its time. The screenplay is outstanding, and all the actors did a marvelous job, and the ones who played Germans as well. There was only one German in a minor role and one Finnish actor, who played a German, all the others were Americans, to my big surprise! I am an Austrian and German is my mother tongue and I would have bet that there were at least half a dozen Germans in this movie! I was also mesmerized by the details of the air battles, which were mostly shot in the air. Jean Harlow was beautiful and gave a persuading performance, not to mention her great looks! I rented this movie, because I heard about it the first time, when I watched "The Aviator" and I have to say that this picture is one of the most entertaining and exciting movies I have seen in a long time and it should be an example how movies should be made as a guideline for modern day Hollywood! It is a perfect example that a great story, action and special effects can live together in a beautiful piece of art without sacrificing anything!
The Year For World War I
bkoganbing17 September 2009
World War I was the source of two great war films, All Quiet On The Western Front and Hell's Angels in 1930. The first was the Best Picture for that year according to the Motion Picture Academy, the second is known for its special effects and had the Special Effects Oscar been a category that year, Hell's Angels would have won no doubt.
The other thing that Hell's Angels is noted for is the screen debut of Jean Harlow in a major part. She had done several bit roles prior to Hell's Angels when Howard Hughes who produced and directed this gave her the big break. Harlow is perfect as the flighty upper class woman who flirts between brothers Ben Lyon and James Hall. Hughes photographed her to best advantage the way he would do for Jane Russell later on in The Outlaw. Harlow was not the accomplished comedienne she later became, but all she has to do in Hell's Angels is be alluring and sexy and that she did without practice.
When it came to the special aerial effects and filming of same, no film could touch Hell's Angels. The film received it's one Academy Award nomination for cinematography. It lost to the documentary film, With Byrd At The South Pole. If there had been a documentary category that year, the Admiral Byrd film would have been in that category and probably an easy winner. As it was the real life heroics of Richard E. Byrd trumped any make believe that Howard Hughes put on the screen.
But Howard Hughes was not a man of thespian profession and was no director of actors. He was also no judge of scripts. The plot is an overwrought melodramatic one involving two brothers, one a heroic if somewhat dull figure, the other one both a ladies man and a weakling as well. Maybe with a real director the acting would have been of a better caliber.
The most famous sequence is the aerial battle between the German Zeppelin and the Royal Flying Corps squadron sent up to bring the big dirigible down. Even there with the well done battle sequences there's a bit of ridiculousness where the German crew after everything else has been tossed overboard to lighten the load and gain altitude is asked to sacrifice themselves. And you see them jumping out the plane for the Kaiser and the Reich as they put it WITHOUT PARACHUTES. I mean PLEASE give me a break.
The German commander who had a run in with the brothers before the war when they were touring Germany as Oxford students is played by Lucien Prival. He must have been the guy that the producers called for when they couldn't get Erich Von Stroheim. He had all of Von Stroheim's bullnecked Teutonic personality down to the last sneer. He did fine with the part, but it must have been something with this guy to be cast in these parts and only when the producers couldn't get Von Stroheim.
Aviation fans will love this film, but for all its technical wizardry it's not close to being as good as All Quiet On The Western Front.
The other thing that Hell's Angels is noted for is the screen debut of Jean Harlow in a major part. She had done several bit roles prior to Hell's Angels when Howard Hughes who produced and directed this gave her the big break. Harlow is perfect as the flighty upper class woman who flirts between brothers Ben Lyon and James Hall. Hughes photographed her to best advantage the way he would do for Jane Russell later on in The Outlaw. Harlow was not the accomplished comedienne she later became, but all she has to do in Hell's Angels is be alluring and sexy and that she did without practice.
When it came to the special aerial effects and filming of same, no film could touch Hell's Angels. The film received it's one Academy Award nomination for cinematography. It lost to the documentary film, With Byrd At The South Pole. If there had been a documentary category that year, the Admiral Byrd film would have been in that category and probably an easy winner. As it was the real life heroics of Richard E. Byrd trumped any make believe that Howard Hughes put on the screen.
But Howard Hughes was not a man of thespian profession and was no director of actors. He was also no judge of scripts. The plot is an overwrought melodramatic one involving two brothers, one a heroic if somewhat dull figure, the other one both a ladies man and a weakling as well. Maybe with a real director the acting would have been of a better caliber.
The most famous sequence is the aerial battle between the German Zeppelin and the Royal Flying Corps squadron sent up to bring the big dirigible down. Even there with the well done battle sequences there's a bit of ridiculousness where the German crew after everything else has been tossed overboard to lighten the load and gain altitude is asked to sacrifice themselves. And you see them jumping out the plane for the Kaiser and the Reich as they put it WITHOUT PARACHUTES. I mean PLEASE give me a break.
The German commander who had a run in with the brothers before the war when they were touring Germany as Oxford students is played by Lucien Prival. He must have been the guy that the producers called for when they couldn't get Erich Von Stroheim. He had all of Von Stroheim's bullnecked Teutonic personality down to the last sneer. He did fine with the part, but it must have been something with this guy to be cast in these parts and only when the producers couldn't get Von Stroheim.
Aviation fans will love this film, but for all its technical wizardry it's not close to being as good as All Quiet On The Western Front.
Head In the Clouds
telegonus3 January 2003
Howard Hughes produced and directed (with a little help from Edmund Goulding and Howard Hawks) this 1930 aerial extravaganza, whose plot is both hackneyed and largely irrelevant, since one is merely waiting for the heavy melodrama to end so as to feast one's eyes on Jean Harlow and aerial combat scenes. The photography is magnificent, and one gets a kind of God's eye view of reenactments of World War I dogfights. The leading actors, Ben Lyon and James Hall, playing brothers, give such intense performances as to suggest at times that they are not merely emotionally but romantically attached to one another. Those old-fangled airplanes are something to see, as is a gigantic zeppelin, and the combat scenes, full of billowing clouds, the sky full of airplanes that resemble orange crates with wings, buzzing and whistling through the air like flies, are the stuff of dreams, and make this otherwise turgid movie come alive and live in one's mind long after it's over.
What marvelous plane and zeppelin direction! The rest is eh
Quinoa198417 December 2020
About what you may have heard: the aerial sequences, both the midpoint first half climax with the Zeppelin attack and all of the moments showing the bravery and idiocy of war (all those men falling off the zeppelin to their deaths is pretty shocking and I'm glad it's there as part of the futility of WW1), and that final half hour with that massive, appropriately and approximately chaotic dogfight, featuring some wildly violent deaths and airplane stunts, crashes and cinematography that should have received a special Medal of Freedom award, are the reason to see the movie. Of course most of us know George Lucas told his crew and editors before. Star Wars to study closely WW2 documentary footage of dogfights, but it wouldn't surprise me if he showed Marcia some of the scenes from this movie as well. It's innovative and stimulating action that keeps going past where it has to.
And the rest of the story is.... What it is. I don't care much for the brother-love-triangle line, Ben Lyon has a few good moments (that "Yellow" rant in the mess hall), and Jean Harlow has a lot of natural screen presence and attitude but isn't as strong of an actor as she would be just a year or two later (it was her first movie so cut her some slack and all). Maybe the ending has a bit more pathos than the rest of rhs film, but only because of the stakes of that scene. Hell's Angels in a nutshell is like a much, much superior version of what Michael Bay would do with Pearl Harbor: it's basic at best and at worst trite and inept as drama, and as action it should be seen on IMAX screens still today (not to say that is so for PH, the action in that is risible and offensive, but maybe you get my point).
And the rest of the story is.... What it is. I don't care much for the brother-love-triangle line, Ben Lyon has a few good moments (that "Yellow" rant in the mess hall), and Jean Harlow has a lot of natural screen presence and attitude but isn't as strong of an actor as she would be just a year or two later (it was her first movie so cut her some slack and all). Maybe the ending has a bit more pathos than the rest of rhs film, but only because of the stakes of that scene. Hell's Angels in a nutshell is like a much, much superior version of what Michael Bay would do with Pearl Harbor: it's basic at best and at worst trite and inept as drama, and as action it should be seen on IMAX screens still today (not to say that is so for PH, the action in that is risible and offensive, but maybe you get my point).
The Good & Bad Of 'Hell's Angels"
ccthemovieman-12 October 2006
I found the Howard Hughes cinema biography, "The Aviator," to be more interesting when it came to describing the trials and tribulations of making "Hells Angels" than the actual movie itself.
There are some very good aspects of this film, which took a long, long time to make and a ton of money. The aerial scenes, including blimps - which a lot of people forget about - were excellent. The color tints, such as a mysterious blue, on some of those action scenes were cool, too. Jean Harlow looked as good as I've ever seen her in her first major role and the ending of this film was excellent with brother against brother.
While the photography, airplanes, and a few actors were all fun to watch, the dialog was not fun to hear. It was very dated. Sometimes dated dialog is a lot of fun to hear, but most of this was just plain stupid. Also, if I want a bunch of swearing/Lord's name in vain I'll watch a post-1967 film, which I often do. If I don't want to hear that stuff, I'll put in a "classic" film in my DVD player or VCR. So, imagine my shock to watch this and hear at least three abuses of the Lord's name in vain, along with SOBs and other assorted profanity.
In all, worth seeing once since it is so famous, but I wouldn't sit through it again.
There are some very good aspects of this film, which took a long, long time to make and a ton of money. The aerial scenes, including blimps - which a lot of people forget about - were excellent. The color tints, such as a mysterious blue, on some of those action scenes were cool, too. Jean Harlow looked as good as I've ever seen her in her first major role and the ending of this film was excellent with brother against brother.
While the photography, airplanes, and a few actors were all fun to watch, the dialog was not fun to hear. It was very dated. Sometimes dated dialog is a lot of fun to hear, but most of this was just plain stupid. Also, if I want a bunch of swearing/Lord's name in vain I'll watch a post-1967 film, which I often do. If I don't want to hear that stuff, I'll put in a "classic" film in my DVD player or VCR. So, imagine my shock to watch this and hear at least three abuses of the Lord's name in vain, along with SOBs and other assorted profanity.
In all, worth seeing once since it is so famous, but I wouldn't sit through it again.
Great combat special effects, but so-so "special mission" story.
fisherforrest10 October 2003
Hughes as director had his limitations, but he was at his best in making possible the great combat and special effects scenes. The Zeppelin scenes are so realistic it is difficult to believe it was all model and special set work. In 1927-1930 there just wasn't available a "junk" Zeppelin for Hughes to buy and shoot down. It would not surprise me to learn that he offered the U.S.Navy or the Zeppelin Co. a good round sum to buy "Los Angeles" (LZ-126) or "Graf Zeppelin" (LZ-127) for that purpose! Hughes' inexperience as a director shows up at its worst in his handling of the cast. Even allowing for the difficulties of "Dawn of Sound" filming, and that HELL'S ANGELS started as a silent, Hughes tolerated some of the worst acting ever seen in a major film. There is some good work, though. Jean Harlow is very smooth and natural, and the actors playing the German officers are satisfactorily sly and evil.
The story? Oh, two brothers are in love with the same girl, who doesn't really give a hoot for either of them. They volunteer for a suicide mission in a captured German bomber, and .... But, see the ending for yourself. Meanwhile, the Germans are trying to bomb London with their Zeppelin, but the Royal Flying Corps in on the job. That's about it.
For true airship buffs, I'll add a word about the designation "L-32" visible in one scene when the "Zeppelin" is over London. In the minds of folks not too knowledgeable about Zeppelin history, there is apt to be confusion about the "L" and "LZ" designations of German airships used in The Great War (WW1) and after. The German Naval Air Service gave their ships an "L" number. The Zeppelin Co. gave its products an "LZ" number, and the two did not correspond. There was a real "L-32" (LZ-74), and a real "L-7" (LZ-32). Both were destroyed during raids over London in 1916. Perhaps Hughes may have had either of these airships in mind for his fictional one. Incidentally, there is no record of the "observation gondola", which figures in the film story, ever having been used over England. It was used to some extent in raids over European cities.
The story? Oh, two brothers are in love with the same girl, who doesn't really give a hoot for either of them. They volunteer for a suicide mission in a captured German bomber, and .... But, see the ending for yourself. Meanwhile, the Germans are trying to bomb London with their Zeppelin, but the Royal Flying Corps in on the job. That's about it.
For true airship buffs, I'll add a word about the designation "L-32" visible in one scene when the "Zeppelin" is over London. In the minds of folks not too knowledgeable about Zeppelin history, there is apt to be confusion about the "L" and "LZ" designations of German airships used in The Great War (WW1) and after. The German Naval Air Service gave their ships an "L" number. The Zeppelin Co. gave its products an "LZ" number, and the two did not correspond. There was a real "L-32" (LZ-74), and a real "L-7" (LZ-32). Both were destroyed during raids over London in 1916. Perhaps Hughes may have had either of these airships in mind for his fictional one. Incidentally, there is no record of the "observation gondola", which figures in the film story, ever having been used over England. It was used to some extent in raids over European cities.
Among the Best Aerial Combat Scenes Ever Filmed
jdrusk5 February 2005
Incredible aerial combat scenes redeem a poorly written and acted story. The Zeppelin sequence illustrates the intensity and ultimate futility of that form of warfare. The dirigibles, shown as capable of doing a great deal of damage, are also shown to be death-traps incapable of protecting themselves from determined attacks. The dogfights seem as realistic as anything you are likely to see this side of actual combat, probably because they were filmed using stunt pilots, many of whom participated in the real thing a decade or so earlier.
The story is so weak, however, even more so when one realizes that such strong plays as "What Price, Glory" and novels such as "All Quiet on the Western Front" and "A Farewell to Arms" were available as models to Howard Hughes and his writing stable.
Also jarring to my modern (but not necessarily superior) sensibility is the switches to blue monochrome scenes that occur more or less at random throughout the movie. Perhaps audiences in the the 1930s appreciated the addition of tints, I surely did not.
One final comment, it was helpful to realize that the imperious, officious Prussian officer stereotype preceded World War II films by many years
The story is so weak, however, even more so when one realizes that such strong plays as "What Price, Glory" and novels such as "All Quiet on the Western Front" and "A Farewell to Arms" were available as models to Howard Hughes and his writing stable.
Also jarring to my modern (but not necessarily superior) sensibility is the switches to blue monochrome scenes that occur more or less at random throughout the movie. Perhaps audiences in the the 1930s appreciated the addition of tints, I surely did not.
One final comment, it was helpful to realize that the imperious, officious Prussian officer stereotype preceded World War II films by many years
Skip "Flyboys" and see this one instead!
NavyOrion13 February 2007
Three-quarters of a century before "Flyboys" hit the big screen, Howard Hughes had already made the definitive World War I flying movie, "Hell's Angels". While the plot and acting may occasionally leave a bit to be desired (the same being also true for "Fyboys") the flying sequences are the among the finest ever filmed for any motion picture.
Because the art of special effect was in its infancy at the time, the marvelous aerobatics were were actually performed by scores of pilots, most of them actual WWI combat veterans. (As in combat, some of these maneuvers were quite hazardous, and several of the pilots were killed during filming.) Look also for the bombing footage; this is the only movie I've ever seen where the bomb can actually be seen falling away, punching through the roof of the building, and blowing debris back up toward the plane.
Even in the few scenes where models were used (notably in the dirigible sequence) Hughes' meticulous attention to detail is apparent, as it is difficult to see that it is not a real Zeppelin (Hughes wanted to shoot down a real airship, but the Navy refused to sell him one of theirs!) With the restored version of the movie running a bit over 2 hours in length, things can drag a bit between battle scenes (that's what fast-forward is for!) but if you enjoy combat flight footage that looks real because it is, you owe it to yourself to see this classic movie.
Because the art of special effect was in its infancy at the time, the marvelous aerobatics were were actually performed by scores of pilots, most of them actual WWI combat veterans. (As in combat, some of these maneuvers were quite hazardous, and several of the pilots were killed during filming.) Look also for the bombing footage; this is the only movie I've ever seen where the bomb can actually be seen falling away, punching through the roof of the building, and blowing debris back up toward the plane.
Even in the few scenes where models were used (notably in the dirigible sequence) Hughes' meticulous attention to detail is apparent, as it is difficult to see that it is not a real Zeppelin (Hughes wanted to shoot down a real airship, but the Navy refused to sell him one of theirs!) With the restored version of the movie running a bit over 2 hours in length, things can drag a bit between battle scenes (that's what fast-forward is for!) but if you enjoy combat flight footage that looks real because it is, you owe it to yourself to see this classic movie.
Hughes breaks sound barrier with mixed results.
st-shot16 December 2019
Notorious tinkerer Howard Hughes went from the silent to the sound era as he fussed over clouds and Jean Harlow's negligee in this big budget WW l epic that just doesn't get to the altitude that it aspires to. Re-tooling for sound and recasting Harlow as the seductress it looks like it may been dated even at its opening with some glaringly poor voice over and sound effects work.
Monte Rutledge (Ben Lyon) is bit of a scalawag, his brother Roy (John Hall) a stand-up guy in every respect. He's crazy about Helen (Harlow), a flirtatious flapper, floozy that Monte has no problem seducing. Both end up in the RAF while a fellow Oxford pal (John Darrow) is drafted into the German Military. In spite of the Helen issue straining their relationship, noble Roy, who has already taken his cowardly brother place in a duel does everything he can to keep his bro together during aerial combat.
Once airborne, Hell's Angels soars with exciting dogfights and the stunning emergence of a dirigible in a night battle. Harlow's vamp tramp is convincing in looks and action while at the same time making a cogent declaration about being an independent women. Lyon and Hall both annoy after awhile with one brother to smug, the other to gullible. Hughes meanwhile paints with a broad brush the German military and its robotic response to duty with a mass suicide while the former Oxford student, presumably with and English education under his belt averts a civilian massacre against orders.
Begun a year after the release of Wings, Hell's Angels sound or silent remains slightly inferior in nearly every respect except for the hype given to its release and the attempt to give it epic status by among other things injecting an intermission into a two hour film. Given its runaway budget, the film grossed well but did not make a profit. It did however announce and turn Hughes into a major Hollywood player with a splash.
Monte Rutledge (Ben Lyon) is bit of a scalawag, his brother Roy (John Hall) a stand-up guy in every respect. He's crazy about Helen (Harlow), a flirtatious flapper, floozy that Monte has no problem seducing. Both end up in the RAF while a fellow Oxford pal (John Darrow) is drafted into the German Military. In spite of the Helen issue straining their relationship, noble Roy, who has already taken his cowardly brother place in a duel does everything he can to keep his bro together during aerial combat.
Once airborne, Hell's Angels soars with exciting dogfights and the stunning emergence of a dirigible in a night battle. Harlow's vamp tramp is convincing in looks and action while at the same time making a cogent declaration about being an independent women. Lyon and Hall both annoy after awhile with one brother to smug, the other to gullible. Hughes meanwhile paints with a broad brush the German military and its robotic response to duty with a mass suicide while the former Oxford student, presumably with and English education under his belt averts a civilian massacre against orders.
Begun a year after the release of Wings, Hell's Angels sound or silent remains slightly inferior in nearly every respect except for the hype given to its release and the attempt to give it epic status by among other things injecting an intermission into a two hour film. Given its runaway budget, the film grossed well but did not make a profit. It did however announce and turn Hughes into a major Hollywood player with a splash.
Still exciting and entertaining
Venarde24 February 1999
OK, so the story is corny, and some of the performances (dialogue coached by James Whale!) are early sound acting at its worst. This is nonetheless a very watchable movie, even its hoariest plot devices (all about friends and enemies and duty and how betrayal is sometimes the greatest expression of devotion, creeeeeeeeeak) excused by breathtaking aerial footage and a truly memorable sequence in the middle involving a German dirigible over London. Some German dialogue adds realism, although that sign in occupied France that reads "Munitions Depot" is not too authentic. The portrayal of women, including a very young Jean Harlow, makes the late 20th-century viewer squirm; it's also unfortunate that that German general looks so much like Pee Wee Herman. Watch it anyway for the flying and the extremely effective two-color and three-color sequences. "Top Gun" doesn't look nearly as good and will not age this beautifully.
Great Zeppelin sequence
AAdaSC4 December 2010
Two brothers, James Hall (Roy) and Ben Lyon (Monte), join the Flying Corps at the outbreak of WW1. They have different personalities - Hall is honourable and longs for the love of 1 woman, Jean Harlow (Helen), while Lyon only lives for his own pleasure and likes to womanize (good lad). Harlow is a bit of a bitch/slag so most women should be able to relate. The brothers volunteer for a dangerous mission to bomb a German ammunition hold.....
While the acting is generally wooden with people over-emoting, Jean Harlow is good in her role as a slag - she is funny, cruel and unrepentant. Ben Lyon isn't particularly likable and James Hall would make a good Dracula, but they manage to keep the film ticking along as the 2 brothers. It was interesting to see the tactics that were used to recruit soldiers at the time. The one moment that dooms Lyon is when he succumbs to the recruitment ploy of "kiss the pretty girl and sign up". He kisses her and walks on by but is grabbed back into the recruitment office. Dirty tricks campaigns have been running for a very long time indeed!
This film is much better than I expected. It is made up of a series of sections, eg, the Zeppelin raid, the dance, the mission, etc, some of which are done in colour. There are exciting moments, tense moments, funny moments and it's ultimately a tragic story. It certainly doesn't seem like over 2 hours long and this must be a good sign. The acting is sometimes stagey but this film has memorable scenes that will stay with you, eg, the German sacrifices on the Zeppelin.
While the acting is generally wooden with people over-emoting, Jean Harlow is good in her role as a slag - she is funny, cruel and unrepentant. Ben Lyon isn't particularly likable and James Hall would make a good Dracula, but they manage to keep the film ticking along as the 2 brothers. It was interesting to see the tactics that were used to recruit soldiers at the time. The one moment that dooms Lyon is when he succumbs to the recruitment ploy of "kiss the pretty girl and sign up". He kisses her and walks on by but is grabbed back into the recruitment office. Dirty tricks campaigns have been running for a very long time indeed!
This film is much better than I expected. It is made up of a series of sections, eg, the Zeppelin raid, the dance, the mission, etc, some of which are done in colour. There are exciting moments, tense moments, funny moments and it's ultimately a tragic story. It certainly doesn't seem like over 2 hours long and this must be a good sign. The acting is sometimes stagey but this film has memorable scenes that will stay with you, eg, the German sacrifices on the Zeppelin.
Great film
gbill-748775 April 2021
A film that makes some pretty strong anti-war statements, yet revels in aerial battles, the footage for which is stunning. It's also a film that gives Jean Harlow's character independence and power, and yet judges her for it. It's a bit contradictory, and has some scenes at the beginning and end that aren't as strong, but it's also very entertaining. In some sense, this is Howard Hughes' answer to Wings (1927), and it's darker in probing the violence of war and sexual suggestion off the battlefield.
The film follows two brothers (Ben Lyon and James Hall) as they go from Oxford students to pilots in the Royal Flying Corps, while a friend (John Darrow) is drafted in to the German Air Force. The two brothers couldn't be more different - Hall's character is straight-laced and believes in honor, even fighting a duel for his licentious brother after the latter was caught with a married woman. (As an aside, that's a duel scene which may have been referenced by Kubrick in 'Barry Lyndon' in the way it was shot, since Kubrick cited this film as one of his influences). Anyway, the brother also gladly enlists when war breaks out, whereas his brother only does so after being duped by a booth that promises a kiss from a young woman to sign up.
Hall's character naively trusts his brother with his girlfriend (Jean Harlow), which turns out to be a mistake because neither are trustworthy. Harlow oozes sexuality, threatening to spill out of the plunging necklines of her various outfits at any moment. "Would you be shocked if I put on something more comfortable?" she asks, to which Lyon's character quips "I'll try to survive."
Harlow is definitely being shown as a "loose" woman here - she carries on with other men later in the film, and spurns her honorable suitor's love, which I'm sure was meant to appear as a huge mistake. On the other hand, she also represents a woman comfortable with her own sexuality who dares to defy society's expectations of her. "Roy's love means marriage, and children, and never anyone but Roy. I couldn't bear that. I want to be free. I want to be gay and have fun. Life's short, and I want to live while I'm alive," she says. These sentiments along with the implied sex, and several instances of open mouth and ear kissing from others were scandalous at the time. Most of the film is black and white but not all of it - and it includes the only color footage of Harlow, which was a bonus treat.
The battle footage is extraordinary, and includes the inner workings of a German dirigible, its fiery crash, and dogfights featuring scores of planes. It seems as dangerous as it was thrilling, and notable that Hughes himself fractured his skull in a crash after attempting one of the more difficult stunts.
Several aspects speak to the inhumanity of war, starting with the German dirigible commander ordering his men to jump to their deaths in order to reduce weight in the effort to escape, and it was eerie and stunning as they did so, silently dropping through the clouds. Later we see close-ups of pilots screaming as they're dying after they've been hit in the air. Then there's this impassioned speech, delivered very well by Lyon:
"That's a lie, I'm not yellow! I can see things as they are, that's all, and I'm sick of this rotten business! You fools, why do you let them kill you like this? What are you fighting for? Patriotism, duty, are you mad? Can't you see they're just words? Words coined by politicians and profiteers to trick you into fighting for them! What's a word compared with life, the only life you've got? I'll give 'em a word. Murder, that's what this dirty rotten politician's war is! Murder, you know it as well as I do. Yellow, am I? You're the ones that are yellow! I've got guts to say what I think! You're afraid to say it! So afraid of being called yellow, you'd rather be killed first! You fools, you poor, stupid fools!"
Now, this guy is dishonorable one in the film, and ultimately his desire to stay alive threatens acts which would risk the lives of others, so he's clearly not the "good guy" by any means. On the other hand, he has a point, and I'm sure resonated with filmgoers who had endured WWI, an especially idiotic war. Harlow and Lyon's characters are both tarnished, but I loved how they brought subversive aspects to a war film, and Hughes got several instances of profanity into it as well. Overall it's certainly not a perfect film, but it's pretty impressive for 1930, a transitional year where I've always felt average film quality to be a little lower. Regardless, there are so many elements of interest that I really enjoyed this one.
The film follows two brothers (Ben Lyon and James Hall) as they go from Oxford students to pilots in the Royal Flying Corps, while a friend (John Darrow) is drafted in to the German Air Force. The two brothers couldn't be more different - Hall's character is straight-laced and believes in honor, even fighting a duel for his licentious brother after the latter was caught with a married woman. (As an aside, that's a duel scene which may have been referenced by Kubrick in 'Barry Lyndon' in the way it was shot, since Kubrick cited this film as one of his influences). Anyway, the brother also gladly enlists when war breaks out, whereas his brother only does so after being duped by a booth that promises a kiss from a young woman to sign up.
Hall's character naively trusts his brother with his girlfriend (Jean Harlow), which turns out to be a mistake because neither are trustworthy. Harlow oozes sexuality, threatening to spill out of the plunging necklines of her various outfits at any moment. "Would you be shocked if I put on something more comfortable?" she asks, to which Lyon's character quips "I'll try to survive."
Harlow is definitely being shown as a "loose" woman here - she carries on with other men later in the film, and spurns her honorable suitor's love, which I'm sure was meant to appear as a huge mistake. On the other hand, she also represents a woman comfortable with her own sexuality who dares to defy society's expectations of her. "Roy's love means marriage, and children, and never anyone but Roy. I couldn't bear that. I want to be free. I want to be gay and have fun. Life's short, and I want to live while I'm alive," she says. These sentiments along with the implied sex, and several instances of open mouth and ear kissing from others were scandalous at the time. Most of the film is black and white but not all of it - and it includes the only color footage of Harlow, which was a bonus treat.
The battle footage is extraordinary, and includes the inner workings of a German dirigible, its fiery crash, and dogfights featuring scores of planes. It seems as dangerous as it was thrilling, and notable that Hughes himself fractured his skull in a crash after attempting one of the more difficult stunts.
Several aspects speak to the inhumanity of war, starting with the German dirigible commander ordering his men to jump to their deaths in order to reduce weight in the effort to escape, and it was eerie and stunning as they did so, silently dropping through the clouds. Later we see close-ups of pilots screaming as they're dying after they've been hit in the air. Then there's this impassioned speech, delivered very well by Lyon:
"That's a lie, I'm not yellow! I can see things as they are, that's all, and I'm sick of this rotten business! You fools, why do you let them kill you like this? What are you fighting for? Patriotism, duty, are you mad? Can't you see they're just words? Words coined by politicians and profiteers to trick you into fighting for them! What's a word compared with life, the only life you've got? I'll give 'em a word. Murder, that's what this dirty rotten politician's war is! Murder, you know it as well as I do. Yellow, am I? You're the ones that are yellow! I've got guts to say what I think! You're afraid to say it! So afraid of being called yellow, you'd rather be killed first! You fools, you poor, stupid fools!"
Now, this guy is dishonorable one in the film, and ultimately his desire to stay alive threatens acts which would risk the lives of others, so he's clearly not the "good guy" by any means. On the other hand, he has a point, and I'm sure resonated with filmgoers who had endured WWI, an especially idiotic war. Harlow and Lyon's characters are both tarnished, but I loved how they brought subversive aspects to a war film, and Hughes got several instances of profanity into it as well. Overall it's certainly not a perfect film, but it's pretty impressive for 1930, a transitional year where I've always felt average film quality to be a little lower. Regardless, there are so many elements of interest that I really enjoyed this one.
Looked at from a historical perspective it's impressive
jjnxn-110 May 2013
Of interest more as a historical landmark than a great film. The aerial scenes are very impressive especially those in rudimentary color but the acting of the leads keeps the film from being remarkable. An 18 year old Jean Harlow is very green as a high society Jezebel but holds the screen with the magnetism of a star plus it is the only chance to see what she looked like in color which in a strange way makes her more real even if the color is garish. The same can not be said of her co-stars. Both Hall and Lyon have moments that register but by and large they are stiff and dull, you have to wonder how much better this would have been with Gable & Spencer Tracy or James Cagney in the leads. John Darrow is good as Karl but his part is small. It's easy to see why this was a big hit on release just as talkies were dawning but now it is more of an artifact of time and place that a compelling viewing experience.
Ignore hammy acting and you are in for a treat!
gedaph-19 January 2006
My husband and I were excited to see this after watching "The Aviator" with Leonardo DiCaprio as Howard Hughes. Hughes definitely had his problems but he was spot on with this film. The years it took to make, including remaking it in sound after initially filming it as a silent, were worth it. Even though some (not all) of the acting is dated, the aerial dogfight scenes, periodic tinting and coloring, score, and ending make this film worth seeing. UCLA refurbished it and it is a delight to watch. Even some of the landscape scenes were breathtaking. Give it a try--we don't think you'll be disappointed! We also enjoyed the 10 minute Intermission and Outro music--very civilized.
Plodding Story, But Great Aerial Combat Scenes
quarterwavevertical16 April 2018
"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.
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.
This 85-Year-Old Relic Was A High-Flying Bomb
strong-122-4788856 June 2015
Back in 1930, multi-millionaire, Howard Hughes (25 at the time) may have been the richest kid on the block, but, regardless of that, when it came to competently directing a Hollywood, adventure movie he was sure clueless, as was clearly evident here with Hell's Angels.
Even for a film from that particular era of early movie-making, Hell's Angels was still noticeably mediocre and below-par in so many ways.
With this film's budget being $4 million (making it the most expensive picture of its time), I have to tell you that I honestly couldn't see (by the final product) where all of this money was spent.
From my point of view - The one and only reason for watching Hell's Angels was for its fairly impressive aerial dogfight sequences (which, unfortunately, happened so few and far between throughout the story).
Without these action scenes, this film would've been a real forgettable, nothing picture. And, believe me, at 2 hours and 11 minutes, Hell's Angels was already running on empty, anyway, right from the very start.
Even for a film from that particular era of early movie-making, Hell's Angels was still noticeably mediocre and below-par in so many ways.
With this film's budget being $4 million (making it the most expensive picture of its time), I have to tell you that I honestly couldn't see (by the final product) where all of this money was spent.
From my point of view - The one and only reason for watching Hell's Angels was for its fairly impressive aerial dogfight sequences (which, unfortunately, happened so few and far between throughout the story).
Without these action scenes, this film would've been a real forgettable, nothing picture. And, believe me, at 2 hours and 11 minutes, Hell's Angels was already running on empty, anyway, right from the very start.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
