Such a frustrating disappointment

Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

After he gets flying drunk, daredevil aviator Richard Dix (as Phil Mercedes) gets his plane smashed. The once popular stunt-man loses his license and livelihood. Fortunately, his pretty sister Wendy Barrie (as Kay) knows the well-oiled Dix is a fine engineer. His designs could save the aircraft manufacturing company owned by Edmund Lowe (as Dan McLean). Chief engineer Kent Taylor (as Martin "Marty" Ames) works there, and he is Ms. Barrie's love interest. Some of the aviation footage is exciting, especially the opening crash, but "Men against the Sky" is otherwise quite dull. The leading man disappears for long stretches, gets no romantic interest, and participates in an odd stunt. The ending leaves Dix and the film up in the air.**** Men against the Sky (1940-09-06) Leslie Goodwins ~ Richard Dix, Kent Taylor, Wendy Barrie, Edmund Lowe

The film has two main themes. A world-famous aviator (Dix) has slowly destroyed his once amazing career and he has his pilot's license revoked for being drunk in the cockpit. The film is about his rebuilding his life, though through very long stretches of the film he is absent or practically absent as the second plot took precedence during most of the film. A small aircraft manufacturer is trying to design a fighter plane in order to win a lucrative government contract. So much of the film concerns the struggles they go through as well as a budding relationship that never seems to get off the ground between the project manager and a female draftsman.As far as the plane goes, I know most who see the film won't notice some of the problems with how they executed the flying sequences and the plane itself. While the plane is supposed to be "the latest thing" and capable of flying over 400 m.p.h., the design is actually similar to experimental craft being produced from 1932-1936 (looking a lot like the airplane used in the old Universal Studios intros), so in so many ways the craft was totally obsolete. This isn't a real issue for the average person, but hey, for us aviation buffs it is noticeable. But what IS noticeable even for the casual viewer are the silly physics of the plane as it flies. It's very obviously a model and it executes turns that no plane EVER could make--making the tiniest loop-to-loops and spins in history! A little more money and effort could have made for much more realistic and less silly flying sequences. However, even despite these problems, the movie is about a seldom discussed topic and I found it very interesting from a historical standpoint.As for me, personally, I would score this movie a 6 or 7, since I am a huge fan of the history of aviation and am a school teacher. However, I also understand that for the average viewer, this film will no doubt be pretty dull stuff and provide little entertainment. Also, as far as a the romance goes, it never really made much sense and never seemed to get past minor infatuation. Plus, for fans of Richard Dix (and there must be a few out there), his role in the film is pretty small and not especially heroic--despite him receiving top billing.

I just saw Men Against the Sky on TCM. Has anyone ever commented on the use of the Hughes H-1 racer as the experimental plane in that picture? Hughes broke the land speed record with it in 1935, reaching the amazing, for that time, speed of 350+ mph. The movie was made in 1940. I assume the shots in the film were taken during the testing of the H-1 five years earlier. That plane is now in the Smithsonian. I was surprised that no mention of this use ever came out during the publicity for the Hughes Biopic, The Aviator. Men Against the Sky was an RKO picture, and I think Howard Hughes was connected the that studio. There was no mention of Hughes in the closing credits of the film. Paul Mantz, noted movie pilot was the aviation consultant on the film.

From the early thirties to the early forties there seems to have been a plethora of films about the development of aviation.The modest aims of this film and the fact that it only lasts 76 minutes seems to indicate that by the time this film was made the interest in these type of films was waning,about to be overtaken by war films.It had to be said that the model work in this film is all too obvious and looks as if it was made in the producers garage rather than by a major studio.The plot itself is routine and for the umpteenth time we have a hero redeem himself in the final reel.Richard Dix is one of those square jawed hero figures who no longer exist in films.He is the only real reason to watch this film.