Thanks for the memories!

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

JET ATTACK is a wartime drama from AIP, the studio best known for their mildly entertaining monster and horror movies of the era. This one's talky and dull, lacking the kind of money necessary to shoot decent action scenes and thus going for hackneyed plotting overall. Three American pilots find themselves behind enemy lines in North Korea and must rely on a Russian nurse for aid. John Agar stars, but there's no suspense or tension of any kind, and the copious use of stock footage of planes and aerial combat doesn't really help any.

This film is regarded as one of the 50 worst films of all time. Its a quickly shot, cheaply made film with lots of stock footage and a dicey story which makes little sense. However you cannot doubt its sincerity or its workmanlike pretension.A scientist who has developed a special type of radar is testing it on a plane and the plane has been shot down. Despite the crash looks fatal it seems the scientist has survived and there is a rescue mission behind enemy lines in Korea.The reason is that the scientist did not leave detailed plans of his invention behind and therefore they need to retrieve him. Why would a scientist be allowed out on such tests near Korea when its all in his head, I have no idea.John Agar leads a crack team to rescue the pilot after they have had a wild night partying in Seoul or from the scenes of the stock footage, Tokyo.They must get help from a Russian double agent and Korean rebels and to escape they might have to fly some Russian MIGs.The film is not as bad as Plan 9 from Outer Space but despite its low budget, so-so acting, dismal action sequences and nonsensical plotting it will at least keep you entertained and has a weird charm of its own.

I had wanted to see this movie for years, after reading about it in the notorious book "The Fifty Worst Films Of All Time" - it sounded like it was hilariously inept. It recently played on AMC, so I finally got to see it. Is it as hilariously inept as I imagined it to be? It certainly has its share of unintended laughs. There's a LOT of obvious stock footage, the funniest being when we see the neon nightlife of Tokyo - when the scene is taking place in Seoul, Korea! There's also a plane that crashes into flames at high speed, and there's a survivor. The wilderness doesn't look anything like Korea. There's comic relief that fails so badly it becomes funny, and there are other script-written ineptness like jet pilots recruited for a commando performance and scientific talk that makes no sense.Clearly, the movie has its share of unintended laughs. But is it one of the worst movies of all time? Of course not. It's not inept enough. Much of the movie is mediocre tedium, not inspired enough for laughs or to be considered a movie that's so bad it's BAD. While I guess I'm glad I finally saw it (I'm trying to watch all 50 movies from that book), I don't think other viewers will find enough to entertain them, either intentionally or unintentionally.

Here's yet another AIP quickie from the fast working hands of Edward L. Cahn. Someday I hope someone makes a film about him, or at least writes a book, because his prodigious output in 1958 and 1959 has never been outdone. Perhaps I'm not giving William Beaudine the credit he deserves...at any rate, this grade Z Korean war 'thriller' stars Audrey Totter as a Russian nurse in love with handsome John Agar. Ms. Totter was fine in her element---film noir---but as a Soviet double agent she just doesn't make the grade. Add in the California locations (complete with a Woody with a Soviet star painted on its side), the world's least convincing set of South Korean partisans (including what appear to be Polynesian dancing girls), and a preposterous finale involving stolen MiGs, and you have a turkey of Ed Woodian proportions.