At the beginning when the four Spitfires land after a sortie ,the only person there to greet them is one man in blue overalls ,who pokes around in a cockpit . In reality the planes would need refueling and re arming so they would be ready to take off again within 5mins. This would involve many men swarming around the planes as they stop! With a fuel bowser present and a least an Ambulance .We see no vehicles .We see one man ! Two men are later seen fiddling around with a tail rudder in the background! But NO refueling or re-arming! A short while later a Spitfire lands with a female pilot (with presumably a replacement aircraft) But it has exactly the same flight identification markings as the Spitfire the Skipper landed in a short time earlier ! Then they take off in a few minutes later without being re-armed or re-fueled ! And so it goes on !
15 Reviews
Waste of time
ataofaichi8 March 2024
One Spitfire (all pilots are flying and sharing the same aeroplane :) ), one garden shed and one patch of grass as airfield doesn't make a war film (or any film at all), especialy with long fruitless conversations, no story at all and mediocre CGI. If possible, watch it only for your amusement how bad this movie really is with all obvious mistakes. One can not move aeroplane with wheel blocks in front, but still does. Oh, did I mention, that all aeroplanes have the same markings, even in CGI form? :) Chasing lonely He-111 bomber wihtout any gunners defence? What is this, arcade game BoB with novice level on? We had thousands of better aeroplane and war movies. So skipping this one no one will get hurt.
Hilarious and lazy version of history
TonyPepperoni547 March 2024
I am assuming their research department for this movie was hit by severe funding cutbacks because this movie is riddled with inaccuracies and outright hyperbole. I especially enjoyed the part where they just hop in their Spits and fly away, not a ground crew to be found other than one guy pulling the wheel blocks away. And whats with the not shaving? It may be be chic to walk around with a 5 oclock shadow, but in the military you would get crucified. Uniforms are sporting insignia that are placed wrong or did not even exist during the BoB, terrible plane inaccuracies, and British pilots who would ALL have been shot down on the first day. The movie is good for a laugh, or if you fancy a drinking game where everyone does a shot when they notice something farcical.
Good lord how is this getting more then 5 stars.
ultrafox697 March 2024
I have seen parts of this movie and it is just as bad as the Masters of the Skies series.
Guys sitting in there Spifires in perfectly starched suits flying straight lines while in combat.
Really is this the new norm of Hollywood movie making.
Flying straight line in active combat airspace is a deathwish to be fullfilled.
Every enemy gun will have zero trouble of shooting you down.
And the ammount of CGI is again everywhere.
And then I'm not even talking about the highschool level acting of the actors.
My advice would be to find, Battle over Brittian from 1969 and get a much better feeling how it was over the skies of Southern England during WWII and how close England got to be defeated by the Luftwaffe.
I have already deleted this movie from my collection because I will not insult the brave airmen that gave their lives during this horrible conflict by owning a copy of this abomination.
Guys sitting in there Spifires in perfectly starched suits flying straight lines while in combat.
Really is this the new norm of Hollywood movie making.
Flying straight line in active combat airspace is a deathwish to be fullfilled.
Every enemy gun will have zero trouble of shooting you down.
And the ammount of CGI is again everywhere.
And then I'm not even talking about the highschool level acting of the actors.
My advice would be to find, Battle over Brittian from 1969 and get a much better feeling how it was over the skies of Southern England during WWII and how close England got to be defeated by the Luftwaffe.
I have already deleted this movie from my collection because I will not insult the brave airmen that gave their lives during this horrible conflict by owning a copy of this abomination.
Utterly disgraceful
g76370326012 March 2024
Filmed and produced on a budget of 10 shillings and 6 pence, this utter load of rubbish is a disgrace and a slap in the face of real WWII veterans who fought and died in the conflict. Actors who have no idea of period acting, aircraft straight out of an X-box game, the combat sequences are ridiculous and the use of a garden shed for a flight dispersal defies belief. Background extras walking about wearing odd bits of uniforms, the whole film is complete farce. How anyone can take this level of amateur filmmaking seriously is beyond belief, whoever rated this higher than 2 stars must have been watching something completely different.
This is not a film for watching, it's a film for bypassing and avoiding...
This is not a film for watching, it's a film for bypassing and avoiding...
Rebuilt Spitfire Exploitation
larryliontrading10 March 2024
I try to watch every war movie out there, and most of them are ok - even the low budget ones make an attempt at plot, CGI, and action: this one does none of the above.
-Week to no plot; -Minimal if any use of CGI; -"Battle over Britain"? I never saw any battles;
The cockpit death scenes are unconvincing: where's the blood? How did the pilots get shot? In one scene we simply see a splash of crimson, done.
The movie blatantly uses the same tired aircraft over and over - check out the registration of the "new delivery" Spitfire if you don't believe me. Plus the movie has the same arial clips over and over.
Don't waste your time on this garbage. Spitfire exploitation I call it. The producers are taking advantage of the plethora of rebuilt war planes out there, which is great - but this movie ain't.
-Week to no plot; -Minimal if any use of CGI; -"Battle over Britain"? I never saw any battles;
The cockpit death scenes are unconvincing: where's the blood? How did the pilots get shot? In one scene we simply see a splash of crimson, done.
The movie blatantly uses the same tired aircraft over and over - check out the registration of the "new delivery" Spitfire if you don't believe me. Plus the movie has the same arial clips over and over.
Don't waste your time on this garbage. Spitfire exploitation I call it. The producers are taking advantage of the plethora of rebuilt war planes out there, which is great - but this movie ain't.
Budget film, but old Skool sentiment and classic style
ian-jackson4 December 2023
I'm sat watching now.
As a film, as a concept of bringing back the Classic British War Film, it's a great attempt. Not a blockbuster, not a study in of human endeavour in any real depth, just a story and a scenario of RAF Pilots 'doing their jobs'.
There is some plotline of sorts revolving around a competition of kills for a prize pot, the main driver of the competition being a bluff Yorkshireman (accent like Sean Bean) who has a cold exterior of a personality, not particularly likeable.
In short, it's ok, 1hr 20 min, and actually worth the time. Makes a change to see a film in slow burn mode and not to be bashed around the head with multi plot line set-ups to be able to play the last 20 mins punchline.
Give it a go.
As a film, as a concept of bringing back the Classic British War Film, it's a great attempt. Not a blockbuster, not a study in of human endeavour in any real depth, just a story and a scenario of RAF Pilots 'doing their jobs'.
There is some plotline of sorts revolving around a competition of kills for a prize pot, the main driver of the competition being a bluff Yorkshireman (accent like Sean Bean) who has a cold exterior of a personality, not particularly likeable.
In short, it's ok, 1hr 20 min, and actually worth the time. Makes a change to see a film in slow burn mode and not to be bashed around the head with multi plot line set-ups to be able to play the last 20 mins punchline.
Give it a go.
Pathetic
mozmugo18 March 2024
Warning: Spoilers
There was possibly 0 actual research done about planes during WW2 by anyone on the production staff before they shot this movie... Which can be forgiven to some extent, because focus on the plot, right?
But then, before I even reached a quarter of the way through, in THE MIDDLE OF AN AIR BATTLE, the leader of this squadron says, "That's enough, boys." and leads them home because one of their squad mates was shot down.
Hello? This isn't a kickball game, it's war. You can't quit halfway through a mission, leaving your other allies to fight alone and letting the enemy escape because your mate was offed. Did a 4 year-old write this script?
But then, before I even reached a quarter of the way through, in THE MIDDLE OF AN AIR BATTLE, the leader of this squadron says, "That's enough, boys." and leads them home because one of their squad mates was shot down.
Hello? This isn't a kickball game, it's war. You can't quit halfway through a mission, leaving your other allies to fight alone and letting the enemy escape because your mate was offed. Did a 4 year-old write this script?
(Tin) Hats off to everyone who made this film happen.
TheOneHirst1 December 2023
Having just come out of the premier of Battle Over Britain, I would like to say a massive well done and thank you to everyone who worked on this film. It is truly amazing, what has been achieved with only a small team and a tiny budget.
The story is a beautifully drawn-out tale of a small crew of pilots, thrown together to help fight off relentless invading aerial forces from Germany, not knowing what is going to happen to them every time the call comes in to take flight. The steady pace is refreshing, allowing you time to invest in each individual character, and whilst Nathan Walker certainly has a strong personality, he never over-shadows the other crew members. The subtle orchestral score perfectly complements each scene, and it feels throughout like you are watching a style of filming and story-telling which has been lost in modern big budget productions.
Without passion and belief, movies like this simply would not exist, and it shows in abundance as you watch Battle Over Britain, and as the credits end, you are left thinking, "Wow, I wonder what they will make next" and I for one simply cannot wait.
The story is a beautifully drawn-out tale of a small crew of pilots, thrown together to help fight off relentless invading aerial forces from Germany, not knowing what is going to happen to them every time the call comes in to take flight. The steady pace is refreshing, allowing you time to invest in each individual character, and whilst Nathan Walker certainly has a strong personality, he never over-shadows the other crew members. The subtle orchestral score perfectly complements each scene, and it feels throughout like you are watching a style of filming and story-telling which has been lost in modern big budget productions.
Without passion and belief, movies like this simply would not exist, and it shows in abundance as you watch Battle Over Britain, and as the credits end, you are left thinking, "Wow, I wonder what they will make next" and I for one simply cannot wait.
Good story
darrensharrocks9 March 2024
The film has basic CGI, and its low cost B movie, but it does has its charm and its if you invest in the lives of the people in it you get an emotional story of the men who fought in the battle of Britain. I found the movie basic and good at the same time. The acting was great and so was the setting. The film is not really about the wider war even though that plays a part, its about how the men in the B section of the squadron interact with each other and how they deal with each loss. The battle scenes are ok except there is not much climbing and diving you would expect in aerial combat. Good movie overall despite its short comings, acting is good.
How not to make a movie of any kind
joachimokeefe14 May 2024
TL:DR - Boredom under budget
EXT. FIELD, DAY.
It doesn't matter if your supposedly historical drama gets all the facts wrong. All of them.
It doesn't matter if you've only got one Spitfire.
It doesn't matter if your airbase consists of garden centre shed in a field.
It doesn't matter if your combat sequences were filmed with Microsoft Flight Simulator, or your soundtrack is off a CD called 'Generic Drama Themes vol XXIII'.
What you absolutely must have is relatable characters in deep conflict. That doen't mean 'tropes during WWII', which is all you get from BOB.
You also get a lot of nationalistic nonsense, which is disturbing if they mean it. Everyone ought to know by now that Nazi Germany called off operation Sea Lion (the invasion) partly because their invasion of Russia was due the next summer, and partly because they thought England was ready to negotiate peace. The narrative that Churchill 'won the war' was concocted by Churchill and the tory party to cover the loss of the British Empire. This film has a superannuated propaganda narrative, which makes its lack of plot even more annoying.
EXT. FIELD, DAY.
It doesn't matter if your supposedly historical drama gets all the facts wrong. All of them.
It doesn't matter if you've only got one Spitfire.
It doesn't matter if your airbase consists of garden centre shed in a field.
It doesn't matter if your combat sequences were filmed with Microsoft Flight Simulator, or your soundtrack is off a CD called 'Generic Drama Themes vol XXIII'.
What you absolutely must have is relatable characters in deep conflict. That doen't mean 'tropes during WWII', which is all you get from BOB.
You also get a lot of nationalistic nonsense, which is disturbing if they mean it. Everyone ought to know by now that Nazi Germany called off operation Sea Lion (the invasion) partly because their invasion of Russia was due the next summer, and partly because they thought England was ready to negotiate peace. The narrative that Churchill 'won the war' was concocted by Churchill and the tory party to cover the loss of the British Empire. This film has a superannuated propaganda narrative, which makes its lack of plot even more annoying.
Brings the viewer into thier world
buttersian7 March 2024
I really enjoyed this movie. It gave me an idea just what these young men went through and the life expectancy of spit fighter pilot was during WW2. This war movie is very different to the action packed Hollywood productions, less blood and violence with very good acting and what I love, the characters grow on you and you actually care if they die. The action was pretty good considering the budget. I would have liked to see more aerial views of the dog fights instead of the face and window views but i guess this just made it more personal for the viewer, being in that cramp seat being shot at.
A different take
danielstowell-3488712 March 2024
This film was made on a budget but to be fair that isn't a criticism. I found it interesting that they did a different more human take on the Battle of Britain. I liked the cgi air battle scenes especially the view using the rear view mirror with the flashes of gunfire zipping past them. There were a few little errors but that's me being too critical. Personally I liked the stories of the pilots and it showed how they were coping or dealing with the pressures that they were under. This "ordinary" men did extraordinary things often at the cost of their lives. In its way this film pays tribute to them and gives a nod to the ATA and their role.
Not your usual Battle of Britain tale
Ajjam196710 March 2024
From the point of view of the remains of a squadron, with a new replacement after losing two pilots, this story is more about what it was like for the fighter pilots both during and in-between battle.
The acting is good and the story and characters are interesting enough to keep you engaged to the end.
The evidently low-budget does however impact scenes, flying scenes in particular, with some moments more convincing than others. I swear I saw one Spitfire fly through a Heinkel wing (remember a ship doing something similar in Star Wars?) and the scenes showing battle through the gun sights were poor, whereas, oddly, the shots of German fighters in the rear view mirror were better, if still not that great. In short, the effects were low budget.
There aren't many real "Spits" around anymore and at times it seemed like they only had the use of the same one on the ground.
If you are looking for a non-stop, action-filled Battle of Britain story filled with great air scenes and dog fights, you'll probably be very disappointed by what you see here - but if you are interested in a tale about the psychological strain of war and how different pilots dealt with it, this is worth a watch.
The acting is good and the story and characters are interesting enough to keep you engaged to the end.
The evidently low-budget does however impact scenes, flying scenes in particular, with some moments more convincing than others. I swear I saw one Spitfire fly through a Heinkel wing (remember a ship doing something similar in Star Wars?) and the scenes showing battle through the gun sights were poor, whereas, oddly, the shots of German fighters in the rear view mirror were better, if still not that great. In short, the effects were low budget.
There aren't many real "Spits" around anymore and at times it seemed like they only had the use of the same one on the ground.
If you are looking for a non-stop, action-filled Battle of Britain story filled with great air scenes and dog fights, you'll probably be very disappointed by what you see here - but if you are interested in a tale about the psychological strain of war and how different pilots dealt with it, this is worth a watch.
Don't reuse NFY for every aircraft new or old!
paul-slootweg14 May 2024
Sure, the plot was not on fire, but I was happy to follow along until I saw the same airframe belonging to the SL being handed to the newbie before being re-delivered by the ATA!
Did you really only have 1 Spitfire to film? If so, was it really too much trouble to make them look different?!
Many of the aerial battles lacked realism - did they really have HUD back then? (To be fair the actual sighting system was maybe hard to show.)
I also thought the squadron was tiny - I mean, my garden shed is bigger than their squadron HQ. Not sure it was actually big enough for a game a darts.
Anyway - there you go - over 600 chars of review.
Did you really only have 1 Spitfire to film? If so, was it really too much trouble to make them look different?!
Many of the aerial battles lacked realism - did they really have HUD back then? (To be fair the actual sighting system was maybe hard to show.)
I also thought the squadron was tiny - I mean, my garden shed is bigger than their squadron HQ. Not sure it was actually big enough for a game a darts.
Anyway - there you go - over 600 chars of review.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
