Sky Fighters (2005) User Reviews

No big story but big shots

[sebastian_goofy · 7/10 · 13 October 2006]

The movie is somewhat disappointing at first sight: The story is kinda lame, the actors are quite OK, and it's boring from time to time. Some intermission shots seem clearly constructed, like they needed some human acting in there.

But then you see the shots taken in flight, the planes, the sky- it's simply amazing. I've never seen a movie that features flight to that degree. Well, I've seen quite some movies featuring airplanes (flying, that is- not Airforce One or such), but that movie is different. Forget the story, forget the actors- there is only one thing important in here, it's the beauty of flying. It's not even the planes itself, it could be almost any other aircraft. Some shots are simply beautiful, some are amazing, some are interesting, and some make you lean back in your chair, stunned, willing to make your PPL next week.

Flying is beautiful. This movie shows it. However, if you can't stand flying or understand the fun in it it's not worth viewing. But if you like movies like this, watch it.

By the way, it's from time to time almost the same as watching those Mountainbike vids that you can run as a background on your PC. Nice shots with nice action to look at and you can watch it all day long.

I gave it 8 points, 2 for the flying, 4 for the camera and the idea, another 2 for the not too bad acting. No, seriously- it's 8 points mostly to the camera and the idea behind the flight shots. It could be 10 without any acting in between, but then it wouldn't have been a movie for the regular cinema anymore.

Surprisingly Good Action French Movie

[claudio_carvalho · 7/10 · 19 February 2007]

While in an international fair of exhibition of airplanes, a French Mirage 2000 of the last generation vanishes and pilots Antoine "Walk'n" Marchelli (Benoît Magimel) and Sebastian "Fahrenheit" Vallois (Clovis Cornillac) are assigned to locate the plane that is flying in a hiding position below a commercial airplane. The pilots order the Mirage to return to the base, but the Mirage attacks Fahrenheit instead, and Walk'n immediately shots the Mirage saving his partner. However, the evidences are forged by the leader of a force called "Special Missions" and Walk'n is falsely accused of not following the orders and discharged from the air force. Blacklisted in the commercial flight companies, Walk'n and Fahrenheit are pressed to join the Special Missions team, where they disclose betrayals in a net of espionage.

"Sky Fighters" is a surprisingly good action French movie, a sort of "Top Guns" of the Twentieth-First Century. The cinematography is spectacular, with impressive air flight sequences and the story is full of action, betrayal and espionage with many twists. In the end, this movie is a great entertainment. My vote is seven.

Title (Brazil): "Os Cavaleiros do Ar" ("The Air Knights")

Breathtaking and spectacular dogfighting by a crack fighter pilots

[ma-cortes · 6/10 · 15 January 2008]

The film deals about a pair braves pilots, a young studs, on the ground and in the air, the captain Antoine Walk Marchelli(Benoit Maginel) and captain Fahrenheit(Clovis Cornillac), both commanding a Mirage fighter jets. They're assigned to locate an aircraft flying behind a commercial plane. The rare aircraft shots and the Marchelli's jet spontaneously shot, saving his pal. Meanwhile the French High Command orders recruiting pilots team with his American counterparts, a women pilots, on a flight missions. However captain Antoine is accused and dismissed from the Air Force, being forced to work in commercial aviation. But they return to Air Force on a secret mission. They fly to Middle East in order to vanquish American F-14 Fighter, but they are been taken prisoners.

This is a overwhelming comic-book with suspense, dogfighting with spectacular flight scenes and some commercial elements, like the catching music . Full of French jingoist ideals, dubious ethics and crack fighter pilots . The film moves like a supersonic bullet for most of its running time and the last generation Jets steal the show. Contrived beyond belief with spectacular dogfights that play like video games, but slickly calculated to please 2000s audiences. The movie follows the wake of ¨Top Gun, Iron Eagle I and sequels¨. Agreeable casting, though unknown, exception to Benoit Maginel with various success(Crimson Rivers 2, Flower of evil, Nest and Piano player) and Phippe Torreton(Captain Conan, Cursed monarchy, All starts today) as Bertrand. The motion picture is professionally directed by Gerad Pires, a director and writer with wide and long career since the 70s(Agression), until today(Riders, Taxi). Rating : Acceptable and passable, no boring , but is quite entertaining.

Full Speed ...

[stuart-mcalister · 22 May 2006]

A French aerial-action flick packed with fast jets, quick tempered pilots and the usual array of love-interests. Many have compared 'Les Chevaliers du ciel' to the 1986 US box office blockbuster, Top Gun. Film fans bang on about 'this lax French copy' - but it's not a copy, it's a completely different film altogether. Different plot and different characters. It just happens to feature the French Air Force, whereas Top Gun was based on the US Navy.

In my honest opinion, 'Les Chevs' (it's international title being Sky Fighters), is a very plausible film. If you ignore the weak female characters and their individual inter-woven story-lines, then the 97 minute film motors along quite happily. Then you discover that the director is one Gérard Pirès, the man responsible for delivering 'Riders' and 'Double Zero'. For anyone who saw either of these stable-mates may recall British actor Bruce Payne's fingernail scraping American accent in 'Riders' and then there was the farcical 'Double Zero' - a French spy comedy film. It was obvious that a large slice of the combined budgets went towards lunch.

'Les Chevaliers du ciel' has a fairly reasonable story: a new French fighter jet, the Mirage 2000 is hijacked on the tarmac at the Farnborough Airshow in the UK. Two French fighter jets are sent to intercept the stolen aircraft as it flies towards the French coast. Our two heros are flying the interceptors, Benoît Magimel as Capt Antoine "Walk'n" Marchelli and his sidekick, Capt Sébastien "Fahrenheit" Vallois played by Clovis Cornillac. They end up in a multitude of trouble but go on to save the day when a naughty little inter-governmental plot is revealed.

Such is the advancement in filming technology and special effects in the 19 years since Top Gun was made, this particular flick contains some very impressive aerial sequences. What many fail to realise is that the flying sequences in Top Gun were mainly filmed from the ground, whereas in 'Les Chevs', it was mostly airborne. With 21st Century kit like the Spacecam and the Vectorvision Jet Camera, what you see is what actually happened. By strapping this new technology to the underbelly of another fighter jet, the aerial sequences have you in the Martin Baker seat of ejection happiness. A pod containing 4 cameras captured the forward, rear and side-to-side action, making for a fascinating insight into the sheer joy of punching your way through a cloud bank.

The film, naturally, has to have a love interest - or 3 - as in this case. Géraldine Pailhas plays Maelle Coste, the French Prime Minister's defence adviser, Alice Taglioni plays fellow pilot Lt Estelle 'Pitbull' Kass and Rey Reyes as "Stardust", an American Air Force pilot on an exchange programme. I must say that Ms Reyes took a leaf out of 'Riders' by delivering a shockingly bad US accent and also managed to corner the market in pouting and posing. A character somewhat far fetched and unbelievable.

The inter-weaving sub plots keep you thinking and Fiona Curzon, a Paris-based English actress, makes an appearance as a certain Mrs Redgrave, a British arms dealer from Gibraltar. Sadly, she too seems to have been struck down with a case of the 'awful accents'.

Overall, 'Les Chevs' seems to have lifted Gérard Pirès out of his funk and is well worth a viewing. So brush up on your French, return the seatback to the upright position and prepare for the rush of the afterburners.

Decent flying movie

[mn1993 · 6/10 · 13 September 2006]

I give this one a 6 because I expect the ending to be better. It's too anti-climatic and not long/intense enough. Other than that the special effect and camera angles is pretty decent. Another thing I notice, a goof, was that they use a Matra heat seeking AAM and fire from air to hit a ground target after taking off from a terrorist camp, a little unrealistic. The mirage in the movie at that time didn't have any air to ground weapons loadout.

One of the best parts of the movie is part of the Mirage went from subsonic to supersonic and made a sonic boom. You can see the detail of the atmospheric changes around the jet. I don't think any movie has show a detailed close up of that happening...

Another good shot is the mirage under the Airbus 340 at the beginning of the movie.

Best flight scenes ever

[shawn-scottie · 7/10 · 17 November 2009]

Granted this is not the best movie ever and the scenario is not always credible but Les chevaliers du ciel was meant to be entertaining and for a French movie, the result is better than one could initially expect.

The main interest of the movie is of course the fighter jets. I found the photography in the flight scenes better than that of any other movie I had see before, including Top Gun. This is why I gave this movie 7/10. Furthermore, this is not CGI but actual film shot from a pod located under a real plane, something worth mentioning when most other movies nowadays would rely on computers to show aircraft in the air.

So if you like war planes in action, Les chevaliers du ciel is for you. The flight sequences alone are worth it. And the rest of the story is still quite pleasant.

If you like planes, watch it. If you like movies, don't

[alcosta-197-774442 · 5/10 · 7 September 2017]

This is the kind of movie that focuses so much on the aviation side of things that it ends up forgetting it is a movie and such it is meant to entertain.

So, if you like airplanes you will have plenty of cool stuff to see, but if you like movies then you'll be disappointed. Poor acting, cheesy story, and very bad CGI and special effects

Better than Top Gun

[jpsupersonico · 7/10 · 31 January 2007]

A good film to aviation's lovers, it has excellent shots from the air,

that are at least 10 times better than Top Gun's.

It also presents the soul of fighter's pilots, how they feel about their jobs, again better than Top Gun.

It's not an advertising film such as Top Gun.

Stop comparing both.

The acting is good, the footage, good, sound, good, the story has holes, indeed, but it is a nice film.

And for the record: the Mirages shown in the movie would beat recent versions of F-14s. Lol.

boring

[tireli · 3/10 · 24 July 2006]

i saw this movie in DVD. I didn't expect anything good from the director Gérard Pirès and I was, not surprisingly, disappointed. Kind of Besson production (if not), full of wind (wow, fasten your seat-belt, dudes !) like taxi or Michel Vaillant. Sure some nice views but a plot unbelievable, uninteresting, without suspense from the beginning to the end. Moreover, probably those guys are very skilled but they are first useless army men accepting a stupid mission to prove mirage 2000 could be a best seller than F16. Lord of war which treats the same subject - weapons business - with less humor, which is probably the only way to deal with a so serious subject. Watch it for the landscapes and if you need to be proud that France also can still save the world.

A "Top Gun" simile with a French twist

[christian_fournier · 7/10 · 21 January 2022]

This movie originates from a comic strip "Tanguy et Laverdure" where the former is the 'all-American' (sorry, 'all-French') character and the latter is the happy-go-lucky clodhopper with a heart of gold!

No wonder the plot is at times implausible, occasionally verging on the slapstick (e.g. The Go-Go girl episode, or the Stearman tracting a giant condom...); Less jingoistic than "Top Gun" (the French characters do not always appear to be the best & brightest...) and with as many sex-interest scenes but treated more lightly.

The gist of this movie is in the airplane sequences (all in RR - real reality) which will delight AvGeeks and even those who simply like to watch sleek airplanes in flight. Of course, just as in "Top Gun", the fighters move implausibly close in dogfights for reasons of camera shooting angles.

Overall a surprisingly entertaining flick! ___ .

Why? Eh... Pourqouoi?

[lossowitz · 4/10 · 29 March 2009]

The ministry of Defense in France needed more applications for the military, especially the air force, so they decided to commission a film. "Here's a few million euro's and make something decent an believable."

The filmmakers took the money and had a brain storm session: -we need two friends in the military! -for one of them it's his life! -the other one is funny! -girls! Not one, two but three! -table dancing in a uniform! -terrorists! -terrorist plotting! -some corruption up high! -international conflict! -traitors! -an air race! -big finale above Paris!

And they ended up putting all of that in the movie, gluing it together with the worst dialogue imaginable and a story that they made up along the way. Result: not a movie but a pile of scenes, scenery and credits accompanied by some random chosen music. Even Benoit Magimel could not lift that up to a decent standard. I wonder if the ministry of defense got its money back.

It is not the story-line, but rather the well integrated flying sequences that make this film special

[i-love-lamborghinis77 · 8/10 · 15 September 2006]

Admitedly this film is somewhat lacking in film techniques and complexity, but the reason for this is not that it is a bad film but rather a film with a different aim. With so many films coming out every year it is unavoidable that they be judged and compared, but this constant rating of films has created a certain stereotype of qualities which a film should have to be good. This kind of stereotyped rating, although often setting a good standard for comparison, works against films such as Sky Fighters. This is because in my opinion Sky Fighters has a different goal to most movies, rather than using the common methods to deliver a complex story line, Sky Fighters is a tribute to fighter pilots. It does an excellent job of portraying the complexity and importance of the role of a fighter pilot, as well as demonstrating the qualities a pilot must posses. Sky Fighters uses all real flying and aerobatics footage to achieve a very real demonstration, from the technical aspect, of what it means to be a fighter pilot. This film is very appropriate for anyone interested in fighters, aerobatics and the people behind them. I do not recommend it for audiences looking for a sophisticated or complex storyline.

Air force pilots caught up in national security problems

[yoeyho · 6/10 · 4 June 2006]

This film has good flying sequences and lots of noisy aircraft , so make sure you have good volume on your TV. Another reason for higher than normal volume is to catch the dialog as the French is very fast and often mumbled. Not a good movie to try to learn some french , even my two sons born and raised in France had trouble understanding some of the more heated exchanges. Some of the actors speak like machines guns in short unintelligible bursts. It is a shame the film has no language choice or subtitles. On the whole, the plot starts well and holds promise, and there is plenty of action. Some of it totally unbelievable, but what the heck, it is only a story, which means I can forgive the totally unprofessional representation of a military organization. I cannot believe that French air force fighter pilots can just jump in their jets and zoom around whenever they feel like it!!! And as for some of the after hours behavior...well I bet there is a rush to sign up in the Arme De l'air, all over France as I type this!! Maybe that is what the film is all about, a fun recruitment drive. This would have been a great film for younger kids except for a couple of scenes not suitable for them, a shame when you see the long lines of kids wanting to sit in a mirage or whatever at air shows.

Desperate attempt to copy Top Gun

[forceflow · 4/10 · 5 January 2006]

At the time Top Gun was made, it was a great and fun movie. These days I think it needs some serious work, and I hoped the french would be up to the task. Usually the french do know how to make a good action movie, but sadly they have failed at 'Sky Fighters'. Yes, everything in the air is great and better than Top Gun. (Well, okay, the F-14 looks a lot cooler than the Mirages but well, the flying was still awesome) But everything besides that was simply bad. Story had plenty of holes, I didn't like the actors, and at least the German translation of the movie was horrible. (I really, really hope the original dialog is better, because this version was just stupid from beginning to end) Also the ending seemed really rushed and not well thought out. Again, if you liked Top Gun for the pictures in the sky, 'Sky Fighters' might be good for you, but do not expect anything besides that!

Top Gun, Adieu

[Mxzplk · 7 October 2006]

For the share of the audience that thinks - with all the reason - that airplanes are the most majestical machines ever made, Les Chevaliers du Ciel (France, 2005) is practically a guarantee of satisfaction. Sort of a french version of Top Gun, the movie has, off course, pilots so photogenic as their jets. One of them, inclusive - is actor worthy of his name - the Benoít Magimel from The Bridesmaid and The Piano Teacher. There are female pilots too (even so this attempt of sexual equality breaks down when one of them makes a striptease standing on a Mirage). The title is kind of fake, since in the subject of marketing it is common knowledge that the europeans don't compete very well with the Americans. As is of custom of french cinema, has dialogues even more wordy then expected in the genre and tries to stage a believable scenery for the action. But for certain it isn't for the intrigue or the inevitable romance that Les Chevaliers du Ciel distinguishes itself: it is because of the spectacular aerial scenes, that kicks down badly with their hands tied its American predecessor.

During an aerial show, a Mirage 2000 runs away in the middle of the demonstration, hides from the radar flying above a passenger Airbus 340 and opens fire on the pilots that goes to investigate the occurrence. The film proposes that this is going to be the new plan of terror: graduate from civil to military aviation - and, if somebody thinks that it will be used bearded man wearing turbans for this kind of operation, better think again. All the action sequences of Le Chevalier du Ciel were made on the heat of the moment, with real jet fighters and no digital additives. They are, besides that, singularly well-planned, and make great use of the clouds, mountains and cities (including Paris) - reference points that accent to the limit the sensation of vertigo proportioned by the extreme high speed maneuvers. With a propaganda so efficient as the common European product, it is not admiring that the movie counted with all the good will of the military and french aerial trusts. What is weird is that the Americans were the only ones that didn't had any interest in acquiring the right to distribution of Chevaliers. Must be of shame.

If it's French it must be meaningful...but not with Walk'n Marchelli and Fahrenheit Valois around

[Terrell-4 · 7/10 · 2 December 2008]

"Man, that brunette can take my joystick anytime!" says French fighter pilot Fahrenheit Valois to his buddy, Walk'n Marchelli. There is no evidence that Jean-Luc Godard ever had the courage to write dialogue this heartfelt, much less direct a movie that...gasp...was as entertaining. Sky Fighters (Les Chevaliers du Ciel) is a fightin', flyin' French film that shows Top Gun a thing or two. Not only is the acting better (Benoit Magimel stars as Walk'n Marchelli), but the movie was made with the full cooperation of the French Air Force, down to assigning fighter pilots and their jets to take part. There's little or no CGC (Computer Generated Crud), just fast and dangerous flying where the laws of physics had better be respected.

It all starts at the Farnborough Airshow where arms dealers and manufacturers show off their high tech deadly toys and make deals with generals and, probably, terrorists. During one flyover a top-of-the-line Mirage 2000 suddenly breaks formation and departs for places unknown. Something rotten is going on because we saw the original pilot shot. Luckily, Walk'n and Fahrenheit (Clovis Corillac) are on air patrol off the North Sea. They spot the plane, carefully hiding itself just below an A380. Only the fifth contrail gives it away. Instead of landing as ordered, the pilot swings into action and nearly shoots down Fahrenheit. Only Walk'n's fast reflexes slam out his missile first. The rogue Mirage explodes and falls into the sea. Walk'n and Fahrenheit are heroes, right?

No, because now we're in the world of French Special Missions, which was testing how easily it would be for a terrorist to highjack a fighter at an air show. The cool, elegant Maelie Coste (Geraldine Paihas), who represents the French premier in Special Missions operations, doesn't know that a terrorist actually did it. Walk'n' and Fahrenheit are made scapegoats and are assigned to training duty. Then we learn there will be an intense one-on-one competition between a new French Mirage and a new American fighter for a big sales contract. In the middle of all this, Walk'n and Fahrenheit meet two hotshot American pilots who are in France for NATO training. Yes, they're women...Captain Estelle "Pitbull" Kass (Alice Taglione). and Captain Leslie "Stardust" Hedget (Rey Reyes). It's not long before the brunette Stardust and Fahrenheit are practicing barrel rolls together, but Pitbull and Walk'n, who had met before, are wary of each other.

Here's the deal. The American fighter and the French fighter, each with two fighters along side, will leave from separate bases to fly more than a 1,000 miles with no clearances, no advance notice, across the Mediterranean, over an unfriendly Libya, with mid-air refueling down to East Africa and over "enemy" territory. The first fighter to cross the target undetected will win the contract. And off we go. Walk'n is flying the new Mirage, accompanied by Fahrenheit and Pitbull. But along the way things go wrong...terribly wrong. At an isolated airstrip where they were forced to land with no fuel, they find vicious mercenaries. Pitbull is smacked around and taken away for evening entertainment. Walk'n and Fahrenheit are smacked around, chained, and stuck in a ramshackle hut.

What's going on? All I can say is that they'd better escape fast. Terrorism and treason are in the air...and there are going to be a lot of world leaders meeting in Paris in a few days. Part of the ceremonies will include high-performance Mirage fly-overs...just the place for a rogue Mirage to fit in. It's likely that only Walk'n's and Fahrenheit's bravery, initiative and flying skills can save the day. Plus Maelie Coste's realization, at last, of the shocking truth.

Is this movie anything but glossy, exciting entertainment? Nope. The story is smile-worthy but not, unfortunately, improbable. The acting is better than you'd expect. The flying scenes, whether getting from place to place or aerial combat, are first rate. I'm fairly sure Jean-Luc Godard refused to have anything to do with Walk'n Marchelli and Fahrenheit Valois. But then he also probably refused to have anything to do with Maverick Mitchell and Iceman Kazansky. Thank goodness that in the real world there is room for meaningful films and meaningless entertainment. If only we could always tell the difference.

Good action aviation movie

[alternatecheng · 7/10 · 15 May 2013]

This is was a refreshing look of French military films where they have taken the focus off the French Foreign Legionairs and WW2. While film has a weak story-line and characters however I feel that the film is not focused on those aspect of a movie rather on the cinematography and the thrill of flying. The cinematography of this movie reveals Top Gun. The characters as fighter pilots combining their efforts with stunt pilots (from the air force) with cameras mounted on a hired chasing Lear Jet and of course inside the Mirage and Alpha jet, brings a breath taking and stunning views of the action. Unlike Top Gun where most of the shots where on the ground, Sky fighters give the audience a chance to "fly" with the film rather than a spectator and a sense of thrill of flying from the comfort of their couch. The film indirectly showcases the French military and aeronautical industry through whatever has been seen in this film. From I hear from rumors and ranting in the aviation world about French aircrafts especially the capabilities of the Mirage 2000 in focus they were rumored to be "crappy" like goods made in China. This film however aviators get the chance to see performance of the Mirage 2000 as being a graceful and agile delta wing fighter handed by the films skilled characters Captains Antoine Walk'in Marchelli (Benoît Magimel) and Sébastien Fahrenheit. Vallois (Clovis Cornillac).

Bottom-line: This film I believe is not really meant for the general audience but aviators who would enjoy the cinematography which beats Top Gun over-roll but don't expect an excellent (and romantically cheesy) story like it.

Those Knights of the sky have no weapons! (DVDR)

[leplatypus · 1/10 · 6 June 2006]

The comics adaptation isn't a trademark of the US, because French cinema is also filming French comics. Originally, the idea of this movie comes from 60s-70s comics called "The adventures of Tanguy & Laverdure". Never read one paperback so I can't tell if it's better or worse, but knowing that the characters are not called Tanguy & Laverdure, the omen aren't encouraging.

Indeed, the movie is a disappointment.

The story isn't interesting, because too much linear & predictable. The knights are better than excellent, the bad guys are very bad, the woman (greatly played by Miss Pailhas: OK, I admit: I'm a fan!) tries to be assertive in a men's world but finally succumbs to the Knight charm; all this wrapped in a military, terrorist two Euros-cents drama....

If only the flying shots were great: Sure, they are: the first ones: after you have see 5 minutes, the following 90 are the same! Maybe I am rude, but the more depressing fact is that for a modern movie helped by the official French air force, the planes, the military bases, the outfits, well everything seems old, far-fetched: in fact, imported from the era of the original comics. Even "Top Gun" filmed 20 years ago is in advance.

In conclusion, if this movie reflects the actual situation of the French air force, well, being French, I feel a bit insecure....

Crummy storyline, acting not so great but AMAZING visuals

[RazziaBE · 6/10 · 26 November 2013]

The storyline was decent but it had some rather jarring plot holes near the end. Well, not really plot holes but just plain stupid things so that a certain character can do X. The acting was OK, although I've seen better.

Besides that, this movie does have the best dogfights I've ever seen in a movie (yes even better than Top Gun). The way the flying scenes are filmed is just breathtaking, and you actually feel like you're sitting in the cockpit. Major props for this.

In short, if you're an airplane enthusiast be sure to check out this movie! Otherwise you're better off watching something else.

Poor top gun clone

[dabm · 3/10 · 5 December 2006]

Generally, the film does have a very similar feel to Top Gun. There are many noticeable similarities. However, the film overall is very much average, if not boring. I felt the flight scenes were very frustrating. The film starts with a very promising aerial combat scene. However, all the combat scenes are sped up for some reason. So, the action makes frustrating viewing, with all the combat scenes just essentially fast forwarded. The director may have felt this would emulate the pace of aerial combat, but it feels cheap. Top Gun had excellent aerial combat scenes, none of which is super sped up. Some of the flying scenes are nice, looks gorgeous, especially the start, and the shots over Paris. Just not the combat scenes.

top gun vs les chevaliers du ciel

[darth_juris · 5/10 · 18 November 2005]

I'd like to admit that it is wonderful to see a pure air combat movie after long time...Therefore whatever the quality of that movie was, it would still attract people to the theaters. Before evaluating the movie it is to be emphasized that les chevaliers du ciel shouldn't be compared to Top Gun for two principal reasons. Primo, Top Gun was reflecting the Cold War Era where dogfighting was still trendy and reasonable. Taking into account the fact that the modern air warfare excludes dog fighting and that even the definition and the rules of the war itself have been altered, an other top gun class movie shouldn't be anticipated within the foreseeable future. Secundo, there is not a "french" Tom Cruise in Europe..Although Tom Cruise may be criticized since he mostly exaggerates the characters he is playing; he was the only suitable guy for that role since an air warfare movie requires not only some fancy flying but also strip the wild personality and the psychology of the aviators. Therefore Tom Cruise's huge ego(when the original plot was completed Tom Cruise amended it totally in order to fit it to his demands which in that case brought a great success) would melt into an aviator's profile in a perfect way since flying a 30 million dollars airplane would require not only good piloting skills but also an exaggerated egocentricity. Actually the lack of richness of characters constitutes the main problem for les Chevaliers du Ciel..The movie is limited to its 3 main characters and when it comes to the secondary characters they are extremely amorphous. Although you are looking for support (great acting of Val Kilmer, Michael Ironside and Tom Skerrit), what you get is the "she" aviators and their elastic bodies. Here we may compare the two movies since actually that is the point where Top Gun was criticized mostly and approached of being a "gay" movie since there was not enough room for ladies except Kelly Mcgillis..But I may say that it has also been the most challenging point of Top Gun. A movie that would blow your level of testosterone and adrenaline without leaning against erotism and soap opera clichés. The locomotive must have been the spoiled aviator egos and their lives on edge melted into macho acts like dogfighting or men's lockers' room tensions. Actually that was a smart move from the producers of Top Gun. Since they were probably not looking for repeating bestselling clichés but making, creating a new pure cliché:Top Gun. Although les chevaliers du ciel may never be a new top gun (the irony lies behind the reason why both movies were strongly backed up by the army:to make the aviation desirable again and to recruit more aviators) that wouldn't be because it was a bad movie or that because it didn't deserve the money you paid to buy a ticket but because the lath for such a movie has been set too high..Finally I should admit that the aerial plans(approx. 600 plans which is a record high) were stimes far better than top gun thanks to the new filming tech. But there was still sth missing up there..which is not a technical deficiency but a fundamental absence: a soul!!! Those who remember the sundowns in top gun would understand me better..it was not a romantic cliché but was considered as a perfect opportunity to color the planes and the oceans to yellow and red..a technique developed by Victor Hugo in his famous novel:les misérables..is not it ironic that this time french men who were the father of such a literary language did miss it in their first time?.by the way have you seen any sundown in les chevaliers du ciel??

A cinematographic rival to Top Gun

[quoc · 8/10 · 14 January 2006]

For fans of modern military aircraft, this movie is not to be missed. There are not too many movies showing Mirages in action, in this case the Mirage 2000C and 2000D. The plot is better than average, has some similarities with Top Gun and the end is a bit anti climatic. I rated Top Gun better for the plot, but Les Chevaliers du Ciel better for its flight scenes. And it is for the aircraft that you want to see this movie. The majority of the Top Gun scenes are shot from the ground, here the flight scenes are shot from a modified fuel tank mounted on the Mirage 2000 or the Alphajet. The flights look very unique and many images are sensational. In Top Gun, the adversary aircraft is either an A4 (as used by Top Gun then) or the Northrop F5 disguised as MIG29 (in real life they are very different beasts). Here, the adversary aircraft is a Mirage 2000 that was stolen by a terrorist organization. There are 2 scenes that are breathtaking and unique. One with a M2000 flying close and hiding under the belly of a Qatar Airways Airbus A340 in the opening section! And the other is a Mirage 2000D going supersonic (!) at very low level over the Djibouti desert. The Mirage are flown by French Air Force pilots, and you can see they make full advantage of the high roll rate of the delta wing design to change directions abruptly. Last, the movie has women pilots in the plot unlike Top Gun, although I disagree with choosing a woman in the role of a bad guy.

This show sucks in English

[WhatHappend · 1/10 · 3 March 2007]

This was one of the worst movies I have seen it a long time. The flight scenes are cool but the dialog and plot are terrible. The ending sucks as well. I can only hope it must have been better in french otherwise the other reviewers here are clueless. Top Gun was 1000x better then this cheesy movie. The DVD "Sky Fighters" even defaults to English DD2.0. It should default to the DD6.0 sound track. This is the first DVD I have seen that defaults to a stereo sound track when the multi-speaker sound track is available. You would have to be a big fan of military aircraft to forgive the films short comings. The sound effects of the film was good though.

Unintentionally hilarious!

[sheyossarian · 11 September 2013]

Man, I don't even know what to say. Okay, I'll say it. This is probably the worst movie that currently exists. It is the Rebecca Black of movies. In fact, I registered for IMDb just because I felt the need to say so. The plot is asinine, the dialogue is painfully trite... Which makes for what actually ends up being a hilarious viewing experience. For example, there's this...

(After a scene in a gym where the new girl, the badass American female pilot, is wearing shorts with her entire butt hanging out while doing her workout as the guys gawk.)

Bro-ey pilot dude: Where did you learn how to do stretches like that? American pilotess: Do you know how American girls pay for their education? Bro-ey pilot dude: There's this party coming up... Would you perform? American pilotess: I only do that for money.

So you think the badass she-pilot is messing with the dumb jock because she's smarter than him, right? WRONG. Cut to the next scene. She's straddled on a fake plane wearing her uniform and heels, as all the pilots at the party are hollering, and she she proceeds to strip for all her new French colleagues... Yup, great way to gain respect in an environment where you're new, from a different country, and repeatedly suffer serious gender-based discrimination. Hilarious!

The movie is the best bad movie I've ever seen.

One of the worst movies i have seen this year

[roal · 1/10 · 13 May 2007]

So far, i was thinking that the epitome of stupidity on movies about flying was the kind of movies trying to be''Top Gun'', but this one surpass everything i have seen so far about this. The flight sequences (even if it was real flight) goes nowhere, are done in short takes, without any respect for what they call the storyline. This storyline is so simplistic that it is of no value to listen to it, and can easily be ''listened'' with the sound of. The ''actors'' are acting as if they are not able to remember their lines even if the story is so simple that you know from the beginning where it will lead. Poor scenario, with superfluous scenes absolutely not necessary to the movie but permitting to pass time so it could go for a movie of 1.5 hour, which would not have been if these scenes where cut.

Overall, a plain disaster. I highly recommend that you don't see it