What makes it different from others?

Boring

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

This movie has some value to introduce viewers to who Amelia Earhart and GP Putman were and how they marketed Amelia like laundry soap to a public hungry for a hero during the depression. It also accurately portrayed Amelia as a less then stellar pilot - absolutely brave but not technically proficient, and lackadaisical about radio communications (without which she will not find the speck of land in the Pacific where she needs to land). Where it falls apart is the myths portrayed as facts in the movie. The spying on the Japanese islands theme has been discredited for years - not only is there a lack of evidence, the simple fact is that the only time Amelia Earhart was flying over Japanese controlled islands would have been during the flight from New Guinea to Howland Island when it would have been dark, she would have been too high to really see anything, and she was quite busy flying the plane under a very tight fuel management protocol and not looking out the window.Her navigator Fred Noonan could have sued the makers of this movie for slander if he was still around. Noonan pioneered long distance aerial navigation over the Pacific Ocean working for Pan Am on the famous China Clippers, and was widely recognized as the best in the business. His drinking is a widely known story, that only has one written reference - a comment by a journalist in a private letter to a friend. Noonan learned his skills as a merchant seaman and as most sailors probably went on a bender during some shore leaves, but was known to be a consummate professional when working.The movie shows Earhart and Noonan as constantly bickering during the flight - by all accounts (including Earhart's own press releases filed during the flight and newsreels shot during the flight) they got along very well. Add to all of this are the little details like their constantly grimy appearance during the flight (they were basically flying an airliner and the actual newsreel shows them emerging from the plane clean and dapper at Lae) a completely made up engine failure during the round the world flight, and images of them camping by the plane in remote airstrips (they stayed in the best hotels available on each of their stops) and you have a tragic story made far more tragic by all of the inaccuracies.

It would be impossible to make a biographical film of Ms. Earhart then or now without some included elements of myth. Noting them would be not so much a criticism as an observation.Re: comments about her pilot skill shortcomings, I think the issue was well served by the takeoff accident depiction. I agree that her busy schedule seemed to have precluded enough up to date stick time.The cinematography was above the made for TV standard throughout. The aerial shot of the lonely taxi and lineup to the last takeoff was one of the most visually evocative scenes in the history of film.It will be interesting to compare this modest effort to the impending release. Diane Keaton vs Hilary Swank, no comment from me. Rutger Hauer Vs Christopher Eccleston. Bruce Dern vs Richard Gere will be interesting. I like them both but would lean towards Dern, all else being equal. But it won't be. The tale will be told in the battle of the writers. Given the tone and level of the work today, I will bet on this film. The trailer makes the new version seem a bit florid, but it is just a trailer.

This movie was decent for a TV Movie, it was well directed and fairly well casted (Although the casting of Dern as Putnam could have been better), and handled the era quite nicely.I liked how it explored the angle of Amelia gathering information about Japanese movements - if you consider the condition the country was in at the time of the real Earhart flight, you'd understand that it very well could not be a myth. It included Noonans alcohol problem (A little known, yet on the record fact) as well as Amelias stubbornness to carry extra equipment.One thing I did not like about this movie is the "afterwards" angle. It ended with them raising their altitude in some final acceptance scene into the sunset - Amelia was stubborn, she wouldn't have accepted the fact that she may very well be DEAD in an hour that easily.Also, I think it would have been prudent to tell the viewers that not only would a Lockeed C-35 Electra (The plane she was flying) float with empty fuel tanks, but also that there were several islands in the vicinity of Amelias last transmissions... the (real) main theory is that she crashed on one of these islands and was later executed by pacific Japanese troops... the plane was then burned (Almost confirmed by pieces of a C-35 found on one of the islands) Overall it was an amusing movie. I thought it was overacted in some parts, and the drama was stereotypical and drawn out, but it was worth the two hours to watch it.

This movie is a real insult to a brave woman. It is just lies and slander all the way through. I cannot believe it was even made it is so base and false. Amelia was a true heroine and a pioneer who paved the way for other woman pilots. I cannot believe that ridiculous story that she was spying for the government! Amelia and Fred were involved in an aircraft accident, it is that simple. There is a man named Elgin Long who has spent years researching the case and I think he found the answer. Due to a combination of empty fuel tanks, faulty navigation and exhaustion, Amelia's plane went down in the sea about a hundred miles from tiny Howland Island. The impact alone probably killed them both, even if it hadn't the plane would have sunk like a rock within minutes.