Flight from Ashiya (1964)

Very well executed

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

I concur with the most of the previous comments. The film is silly, the acting is wooden, the story is contrived and mawkish, and the 1941 and 1942 flash back scenes give no real sense of the periods depicted.Most of the scenes filmed using models are ludicrous, especially the water landings and the take off after the rescue, but there are some good shots of real aircraft (Sikorsky UH-19 helicopter, Douglas DC-3, and Grumman HU-16 Albatross amphibian) and a few flying scenes that will appeal to aviation buffs.One previous comment is in error: the air rescue aircraft is a Grumman HU-16 Albatross, not a Martin PBM.

The film is about 3 men flying rescue in the Pacific, just after WWII. A Japanese ship has gone down in a storm, with the survivors clinging to rafts in storm tossed seas.Airplane aficionado's will like the Martin PBM Mariner footage of flying through the storm to attempt to find the survivors. Yes there is a lot of flashbacks for Richard Widmark's character, as he wrestles with the decision as whether to attempt a landing in the storm tossed seas or not. However, in fairness he was a civilian pilot married to a beautiful photographer, when both were captured by the Japanese and place in an internment (read "work until you die") camp.Japanese soldiers are usually depicted as introspective souls that carry out their duties only after tortuous reflections on their lives as in "Bridge Over the River Kwai". This movie didn't follow that formula, but didn't get into the real details of camp life either.Yule Bryner doesn't appear to be Japanese, but then he didn't like the King of Siam either. His character was in French occupied North Africa (Algeria?), and who knows how to accurately depict that torturous time period and mess.All, in all not a bad picture, and one I remember enjoying staying up late to watch in my childhood in the late 60's, early 70's.

If you want to see this film it helps being not too attentive. This film has a nice surface which promises an entertaining, adventurous film but unfortunately "Flight from Ashiya" instead is full of clichés, stereotypical characters and of often unintentionally funny story lines. "Highlight" is the story of Yul Brynner which takes part in Africa and which involves a super-exotic woman and a doll's house's Africa. The end of this part of the film is ridiculous and at the same time disgusting and a perfect example of the exploitation of a character for a very cheap effect. The most funny is the pathetic narrative voice-over commentary which claims that everything in this film really happened - which indeed would surprise me... All in all "Flight from Ashiya" unfortunately is a perfect argument for all the people who despises classic Hollywood films for being stereotypical and false, which this film surely is.

This is, despite a fairly epic attempt at storytelling and a heavyweight cast, a snoozefest. The pacing is very dry and ultimately predictable and the storyline is trite, contrived and pat. Widmark, Chakiris and Brynner are on a rescue mission and as their plane approaches it's destination, each of them has a flashback to another dramatic time for them. Chakiris' is the most believable as he recalls a tragic rescue attempt of some villagers caught in an icy mountain range. Widmark recalls meeting a photojournalist (Knight) and falling in love against a war-torn backdrop. Brynner remembers meeting a foreign girl (Gaubert) who he can only communicate with visually since they don't speak each others' language. Parker gets the film's most pointless & thankless role as a woman who pines for Brynner back at the base. The film ranges from stodgy to overwrought with many unintentionally amusing moments and some really ripe dialogue. Made at a time when studios were still getting used to a little more freedom with immorality, it wants desperately to be cutting edge and racy, yet is hopelessly old-fashioned and silly. There is NO attempt at period flavor. Knight's story is set in 1941, yet her hair and clothing are early sixties (she even wears a skirt almost identical to Parker's, whose story takes place in 1964!) Her awesome mane of hair could easily have been styled into a neato '40's 'do, but alas, no one did. Widmark and Knight's story tries to cram a two-hour-movie's worth of clichés and dramatics into about 20 minutes. They literally fall hopelessly in love after one plane ride! The same can be said of Brynner's affair. He gives his seat to a girl on a bus and then can't live without her. This whole section of the film is ludicrous, but Gaubert is quite lovely. The ending of this sequence is surreal and jaw-dropping! It must be seen to be believed and is almost worth sitting through the film for. There are worse ways to spend two hours, but this is hardly rewarding entertainment. There is also a hilarious before and after narration by a man who sounds like he did voice-over for army recruitment shorts.