£10.29 + £1.26 UK delivery
Only 3 left in stock. Sold by Newtownvideo_EU

Have one to sell? Sell on Amazon

Angel of the Skies [Blu-ray] [2013] [US Import]

2.5 out of 5 stars 2 customer reviews

Price: £10.29
Only 3 left in stock.
Dispatched from and sold by Newtownvideo_EU.
3 new from £5.59 2 used from £27.62
£10.29 Only 3 left in stock. Dispatched from and sold by Newtownvideo_EU.

Special Offers and Product Promotions

  • Note: Blu-ray discs are in a high definition format and need to be played on a Blu-ray player.

  • Important Information on Firmware Updates: Having trouble with your Blu-ray disc player? Will certain discs just not play? You may need to update the firmware inside your player. Click here to learn more.

What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?

Customers Also Watched on Amazon Video

Product details

  • Language: English
  • Region: Region A/1 (Read more about DVD/Blu-ray formats.)
  • Number of discs: 1
  • Average Customer Review: 2.5 out of 5 stars  See all reviews (2 customer reviews)
  • ASIN: B00IS6WQ3W
  • Amazon Bestsellers Rank: 235,275 in DVD & Blu-ray (See Top 100 in DVD & Blu-ray)

Customer Reviews

2.5 out of 5 stars
5 star
4 star
3 star
2 star
1 star
See both customer reviews
Share your thoughts with other customers

Top Customer Reviews

By P. Waller VINE VOICE on 22 Mar. 2014
Format: DVD
Computerised aircraft is not a good start really and the crew are incorrectly dressed for a flying mission. To some degree amateurish acting by the main actors. Like a lot of war films these days the extras look like they are from these many reenactment groups and do not want to get their uniforms dirty as they are all pristine and look new until they fall into mud or the likes. The British patrol are a good example as are the Germans and this makes it so unrealistic. It is more a teenagers film than an adults. As an escape and evasion film it is sadly a joke.
Comment 3 people found this helpful. Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse
Format: DVD
Took him 5 years to finish this film. Made with $35000 and many hours rendering on his computer at home. No fancy studios or big crews. This is as indie as it gets. He envisioned this film as a short film, but he couldn't stop writing, and in the end, made a feature out of it. The film was released in USA on December 31st 2013. Shot on Canon 7d DSLR, on location in South Africa.

Went to Berlin film festival with the film, and signed an international distribution deal through Kaleidoscope Entertainment in United Kingdom. They acted as sales agents and got it released in over 25 countries, including USA, UK, Germany, Spain, Canada, France, most of Europe actually, Japan, Australia, Russia and some South American countries (more).

It was a massive learning experience for him not just as a filmmaker and storyteller, but as a producer and how the industry works.
Comment Was this review helpful to you? Yes No Sending feedback...
Thank you for your feedback.
Sorry, we failed to record your vote. Please try again
Report abuse

Most Helpful Customer Reviews on Amazon.com (beta)

Amazon.com: HASH(0x9c42a6d8) out of 5 stars 49 reviews
21 of 21 people found the following review helpful
HASH(0x9c44457c) out of 5 stars South African WW2 Effort 8 Dec. 2013
By Tommy Dooley - Published on Amazon.com
Format: DVD
This is a South African made film about some of the former colonies men who volunteered their services to fight for Britain at the hour of her greatest need in the dark days of World War 2. Meet Captain Kirk (yes he is really called that) played by Nicholas Van Der Bijl, in a performance of varying degrees. He leads a motley crew of his fellow countrymen who use such vocabulary as ‘cheerio’ and ‘filly’ in reference to ladies. Anyway they are fighting for RAF, Bomber Command and have to go and bomb the bejesus out of Germany etc.

Well whilst over Germany they get shot and have to make an emergency landing and then decide to battle their way back to France and the safety of the British lines, this is set late in the war and Operation Overlord has already taken place so we are well past D Day. What happens next is the story of their journey.

Right, for war film buffs there are a few things wrong with this film, first off the planes are al CGI, which is not a problem as they are all done really well even the Mescherschmitts, with props that look real and proper smoke etc so well done there. Problem is these guys are flying during the day. By this stage of the war the USAAF were doing the daylight runs and the RAF were doing the night runs. And they had fighter escort in the latter stages when this is set and there are none here. They are also flying Liberators which were never deployed to bomb Bremen by the RAF as depicted here. Now you are doing CGI so you could have got a Lancaster or a Wellington even, but still never mind.

The acting is all quite good and the love interest in the shape of Kirky’s beloved in good if underplayed Lillie Claire as the neglected and dutiful lover is actually really convincing. This does have its moments and is far from being a bad movie, but factual errors really annoy some people and it is not a real full on ‘action fest’ especially once the plane goes splat, but I still found a lot to actually like here, hence the rating. If factual errors annoy you then best to avoid, and it was released as ‘Battle for the skies’ in the UK for some strange reason, at least it retains its proper title in the US.
12 of 13 people found the following review helpful
HASH(0x9c43da50) out of 5 stars Historically Inaccurate 2 Jan. 2014
By Jeffersonbroady - Published on Amazon.com
Verified Purchase
This movie had the potential to be good, whomever did the plot for the movie forgot to take WW2 History Class. The plot is set in September 1944, after the crew is shot down in Germany they set to reach allied lines in at the Falaise pocket in France? The allies had already cleared the Falaise pocket in Mid-August 1944, the German uniforms were poor at best, a school child could have done better. Definitely a "C" movie.
12 of 14 people found the following review helpful
HASH(0x9c43d60c) out of 5 stars Atrocious 10 April 2014
By Amazon Customer - Published on Amazon.com
Verified Purchase
This film was, perhaps, the most amateurish piece of film making it has ever been my misfortune to watch. The acting was abysmal and there was little attempt to make it historically accurate. I sincerely believe that a group of high school kids could have done a better job.

The real crime,and what is utterly inexcusable, is that Amazon has the nerve to charge money for this garbage.

I have only given it a star because it is a minimum requirement.
8 of 10 people found the following review helpful
HASH(0x9c43b840) out of 5 stars Full of inaccuracies, mediocre storyline. 10 Jan. 2014
By R. Wise - Published on Amazon.com
Format: DVD
Judging by the low reviews that this film has/still is getting, one can easily determine that it's not a good movie. I can tolerate a historical movie with a so-so storyline, but I abhor shoddy realism in the same. The opening scene depicts an ME109 and a Spitfire in a dogfight over the English Channel in September of 1940. The Spitfire displays the Sky Grey I.D. band around the fuselage ahead of the tail. This band wasn't applied until well after the Battle of the Britain when the RAF began flying raids over the France Coast. Also, the wing and fuselage roundels are all wrong. The movie poster and DVD cover shows a B-17, but the movie characters are flying in a B-24. And about that B-24, no British Squadron flew a B-24 on bombing raids in 1944. The RAF regulated the B-24 to maritime Coastal Command duties. A gross oversight indeed. The climatic air battle that brought the "Angel" down had ME109's as the only combatant. That's okay, but these ME's were the "E" variant and they were painted in late 1939-1940 camouflage. "E's" were not in service by 1944. After the "Angel" crashed, an RAF officer was at the door of Kirk's house to tell his wife that his plane had not returned. Following the movies storyline, this was happening as the crew was trying to save the life of one of their own immediately after the crash. I doubt that any planes from the raid had yet return from the mission at that point. Well, that was enough for me. I shut-off the movie and felt cheated out what could have been a pretty good film.
3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
HASH(0x9c43b960) out of 5 stars Not a bad move, offers a new pesrspective 12 Aug. 2014
By J. Hancock - Published on Amazon.com
Verified Purchase
Even though there were quite a few negative reviews of this move, I watched it anyways and I am glad I did. Yes, it does start out slow but that is common of most non-American movies since the filmmakers feel the need to develop a connection between the characters and the audience. Yes, the use of B-24s by the RAF or, in this case, the RSAAF was a mistake. Since they were using CGI, how much more difficult would it have been to create Lancasters rather than B-24s? Still, for me, it did not take that much away from the movie. Having grown up on pre-CGI war movies, I am just happy to see military hardware from the same period as the war.

The negative comments by many of the viewers were from people who admittedly did not watch the full movie or were completely wrong about the storyline. For example, one commentator complained that the filmmakers should have opened a history book before making the movie because the downed aircrew were trying to make it back to the Falaise Pocket in September 1944, when the British forces were by that time far to the east. Yet, in the movie, you could hear the sounds of battle from the time they crashed in Germany and there are British patrols along the French-German border, far east of the Pocket; which fits the historical narrative. There were also negative critiques over the wife knitting in high heels and receiving news of her husband's plane not returning while, time wise, the base would have not known that his plane was not returning. The high-heel shows, I believe, was done to convey the sense that she only started knitting to occupy herself while she was waiting for her husband to return from the mission. Same thing with the timing of the notice that his plane was not returning. It was done to convey the emotional impact. This was also done in "We Were Soldiers" when the spouses received telegrams while the battle was still raging. Again, to show the emotional impact on the families.

Overall, it was a decent movie on par with "Flyboys" and "Redtails". The CGI is not up to the same standard but is not bad. I did enjoy seeing a movie that offers a different perspective than most of the other movies. By focusing on the participation of the forces of the British Empire, the movie offers most viewers something new. This makes the movie especially interesting for those who want to see the all aspects of the war and not just a World War fought only by Americans. More importantly, having watched every WWII movie ever made at least a dozen times, this movie gave me something new to watch and that made it worth the rental.
Were these reviews helpful? Let us know

Customer Discussions

Look for similar items by category