The film starts with an impressive look at the universe, which itself is interestingly voiced over. This scene is probably one of the films most impressive when you consider the era in which it was made. Soon though we join the lead on board his rapidly plummeting Aircraft. It is quickly established that he has no way of surviVing this situation, the plane is too badly damaged, his parachute is shot through and his friend is dead. We hear Peter discussing all of this with a young American female who is at the other end of the radio and instantly we can tell that these characters, given the chance would be a perfect match However too soon Peter has to jump into the fog and to his death...
As I watched this film I had a nagging sense of annoyance building inside me, I wasn't quite sure what caused it, other than perhaps the unsatisfying nature of the film after the initially promising opening scenes. The film itself is based around quite a unique concept, a man being missed by Heaven, he then subsequently falls in love and is given the right to appeal the decision of his death. What bugs me though is that the realisation of this idea was not everything it could of been and the film instead focuses to much on the relationship between Britain and America as opposed to, in my opinion, the far more interesting one of life and death.
It makes perfect sense that the film was designed as a propaganda piece to boost Anglo-American relations. After all it did come at a time when there were a few difficulties between the nations. What doesn't make sense though is the way the film is so obvious in its attempts to improve and cement that relationship. This, inevitably, brings me on to the trial. Where do I start with the Trial? I give it that it was entertaining, amusing and good fun. What I don't give it though is much credit for anything else. I thought that the trial, perhaps naively, would be more about Peter and his life and why he should be allowed to continue to live. Alas though it wasn't, instead we are given a debate about which country is better, Britain or America. There is not much more to the trial than this and sadly, despite the amusement I got out of place from the scene, it kind of ruins the film. The scene is so out of place with the rest of the film that it jars horribly and feels somehow shoehorned in.
I want to briefly mention Frank, he is perhaps the best character in the film but I think that he is unnecessarily killed. We are told by the French operator that anyone who has ever lived could be Peters defence in the trial, which of course indicates that Frank could perform the role even whilst alive. Alas no though, the character is killed in perhaps the most contrived motorcycle crash of all time and is then taken up to Heaven were he is given the role of Peters defence Despite this though Frank is an interesting character, he is not over the top like the Operator, nor is he a caricature like Peter himself, he is just a normal person
So in all it is an interesting film but it is one which makes things difficult for itself. It offers a lot of interest, but not on the subjects you would of thought. By no means a masterpiece but neither is it junk
6/10
As I watched this film I had a nagging sense of annoyance building inside me, I wasn't quite sure what caused it, other than perhaps the unsatisfying nature of the film after the initially promising opening scenes. The film itself is based around quite a unique concept, a man being missed by Heaven, he then subsequently falls in love and is given the right to appeal the decision of his death. What bugs me though is that the realisation of this idea was not everything it could of been and the film instead focuses to much on the relationship between Britain and America as opposed to, in my opinion, the far more interesting one of life and death.
It makes perfect sense that the film was designed as a propaganda piece to boost Anglo-American relations. After all it did come at a time when there were a few difficulties between the nations. What doesn't make sense though is the way the film is so obvious in its attempts to improve and cement that relationship. This, inevitably, brings me on to the trial. Where do I start with the Trial? I give it that it was entertaining, amusing and good fun. What I don't give it though is much credit for anything else. I thought that the trial, perhaps naively, would be more about Peter and his life and why he should be allowed to continue to live. Alas though it wasn't, instead we are given a debate about which country is better, Britain or America. There is not much more to the trial than this and sadly, despite the amusement I got out of place from the scene, it kind of ruins the film. The scene is so out of place with the rest of the film that it jars horribly and feels somehow shoehorned in.
I want to briefly mention Frank, he is perhaps the best character in the film but I think that he is unnecessarily killed. We are told by the French operator that anyone who has ever lived could be Peters defence in the trial, which of course indicates that Frank could perform the role even whilst alive. Alas no though, the character is killed in perhaps the most contrived motorcycle crash of all time and is then taken up to Heaven were he is given the role of Peters defence Despite this though Frank is an interesting character, he is not over the top like the Operator, nor is he a caricature like Peter himself, he is just a normal person
So in all it is an interesting film but it is one which makes things difficult for itself. It offers a lot of interest, but not on the subjects you would of thought. By no means a masterpiece but neither is it junk
6/10