ThedevilChoose When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

SeeQuant Blending excellent reporting and strong storytelling, this is a disturbing film truly stranger than fiction

Hayleigh Joseph This is ultimately a movie about the very bad things that can happen when we don't address our unease, when we just try to brush it off, whether that's to fit in or to preserve our self-image.

Fleur Actress is magnificent and exudes a hypnotic screen presence in this affecting drama.

gavin6942 During the air war over Vietnam, a US Navy A-6 Intruder tactical bomber pilot schemes with a hardened veteran to make an unauthorized air strike on Hanoi.Director John Milius later recalled, "That was Paramount with the Paramount control, and they tried to control every aspect of it. I'd spent more money than I'd ever spent before, because they told me how much I was going to spend on it. They didn't let me control it. I would have made that movie for at least $5 million less." One can only imagine what Milius would have done with complete control! Roger Ebert called the film a "mess", noting that "some scenes say one thing, some say another." Others have complained about the special effects. I thought it was alright. Not a great film, but in retrospect somewhat interesting due to the cast. I mean, wow, a pre-"Friends" David Schwimmer and a pre-"Pulp Fiction" Ving Rhames?

lost-in-limbo Two pilots aboard an US aircraft carrier during the Vietnam war take the war into their own hands when they commandeer an A6 bomber, known as the "Intruder" and head over protective airspace to bomb Hanoi. Something promising couldn't eventuated, but I found "Flight of the Intruder" to be rather mundane despite being well-made and capturing the atmosphere aboard the carrier. Story arches are there, but they feel quite moody, superficial (like the rushed romance angle with Rosanne Arquette's character) and cliché. Its slow-build up is planned in a calculative manner, but when it came to the action scenes, it just didn't ignite much in the way of thrills despite some stellar visuals and aerial photography. Although it's more than just a basic action joint, as comradeship between the pilots is probably its strong point along with its anti-war sentiment putting this war into perspective with some strong script writing. Especially when Johnson's rogue character becomes frustrated by questioning his orders and the stirring speech about knowing the difference of dieing for something than dieing for nothing. Brad Johnson and William Dafoe (quite a laid-back, charismatic performance) lead the way as the two pilots then in support is credible turns from Danny Glover (barking out the orders), Tom Sizemore, J. Kenneth Campbell and Ving Rhames.

David da Vinci Stephen Coonts is a rare breed of author. Some say similar to Tom Clancy but Stephen Coonts really "knows". You can tell he was there and back. The movie didn't bend his book and so it turns out as a very very accurate representation of Vietnam as well. Being an aviation buff, I like the aerial scenes a lot more than Top Gun. The triple-A fire and SAM explosions looks a little fake(poor effects), but the entire atmosphere, the camaraderie, the missions, are all faithful to the real thing. I find the story to be better developed than Top Gun as well. If you liked Top Gun, watch this, if you hated Top Gun, try this, if you like war movies, watch this. But if you only go for the sleazy Hollywood productions, re-watch TopGun instead.

Stanton McCandlish It was interesting in a number of ways to see the Vietnam War from the perspective of bomber pilots (as opposed to fighter pilots and ground troops, stories we've all seen/heard/ read many times by now). But somehow this movie just falls flat. It is not engaging. Suspension of disbelief is very difficult to achieve. Even the court martial scene comes across as wooden and preachy, despite trying to make very valid points. The lead actor, the relatively unknown Brad Johnson, who looks remarkably like a young Tom Berenger, is quite *believable* as a navy pilot - as the adoptive son of a USAF F-111 pilot I grew up around men just like this - but the performance simply isn't compelling. In the end we really don't *care* about these characters or their actions. Tom Sizemore (long before he was a known Hollywood "face"), Ving Rhames (with a full head of hair), and Willem Dafoe are basically just wasted in this movie; their roles have very little room for growth or expression. Danny Glover's frequently humorous turn as the CO is faintly rewarding, and a very young David Schwimmer makes a kind of cute appearance. But when all is said and done this movie comes across as having very little in the way of a real point. The feel-good, triumphant music that floods us toward the end, as the planes are launching off the carrier, comes across as just downright silly and, worse yet, patriotically manipulative. There is also a marked lack of complexity when it comes to the Vietnamese. Except for one very brief moment when a drunken Johnson looks up, after falling in the mud, at a family of locals, whose faces seem to show a mixture of fear, disapproval and indifference, the indigenous population don't have any roles or presence, other than as either whores or largely faceless enemies. On a positive note, the visual effects are actually quite impressive for the early '90s, especially in the bombing raid on Hanoi. Many CGI attempts at realistically depicting missiles and aircraft have done worse than the apparently model-based effects in this film.