The Aeronauts

A thrilling, action-packed, wide-vista yarn from the sharp quills of Jack Thorne and co-writer and director Tom Harper, this Amazon-backed project is deceptively simple yet surprisingly deft.

The dialogue is dull as dried glue, but the acting is fine, although the boundless range and skill of Redmayne is wasted, which might account for the reason he doesn’t appear to enjoy the ride as much as he could. Unfortunately, we’ve seen it all before with motorcycles, submarines, airplanes and ships at sea in peril instead of hot-air balloons.

The duo [of Redmayne and Jones] hand-in-hand elevates [The Aeronauts] ... from a flimsy action-adventure to something worth watching on the biggest possible screen, even if it operates on a handful of clichés with little character-based substance to speak of.

Although it’s stuffed with many cliches, The Aeronauts can feel like a rather enjoyable bit of historical fantasy.

On the whole, The Aeronauts is a pretty good small-scale adventure movie. It’s also a pretty dull everything-else, the unceasing flashbacks providing multiple instances where telling might have been preferable to showing.

The Aeronauts is a film flawed from its first concept. By blending fact and fiction so freely, Thorne and Harper turned a story of scientific discovery into a muddling romantic adventure that crashes and burns.

The Aeronauts is the second film this year by Harper to get a U.S. release, after “Wild Rose.” That film was excellent, with strong music and an effervescent star turn from newcomer Jessie Buckley. This one is, at moments, exhilarating — but not much else.

Gripping film with stunning visuals. Captivating from its first minute to end with believable characters

My compliments go mainly to the art and set design of this film. Well done, visually. I’m reluctant to believe that any human would be able to sustain adequate brain function at an altitude of 37,000 feet for more than 5 minutes (maximum)?? without oxygen supply. Then again, I wasn’t there so I am not at liberty to say. But we DO know that aircraft have crashed after the depressurization of the cabin at an altitude of 33,000 feet, at which point humans are unlikely to stay COMPLETELY conscious for more than 6 minutes before hypoxia sets in and clouds your basic judgment and bodily functions. Anyway, this was still a Hollywood movie and what do I know?!

This is quite sentimental but I enjoyed it overall. It's perhaps a little dull at times but the story and the characters intrigued me even if their only very loosely based on fact. There's some lovely cinematography and the period costumes (where they feature - not all the time) are nice. Understandably, there's a fair bit of shaky camerawork, which may frustrate you and Eddie's acting is a little cheesy at times but I liked the themes and the sentiment. Amelia Wren seemed a pretty admirable character, as a scientist or women explorer of her time. I like that she's rightfully mentioned and complimented towards the end of the film, although I'd have liked it if more info. about the true story were shown on screen just before the credits. Suffice to say, it's by no means perfect but its certainly alright.

Not historically accurate and credit was taken away from a real person who deserved it...

I really hate what the feminists are doing to movies to push their agenda. Why do they have to steal adventurous men real lives and replace them with fictional female characters? This is not fair, this is pretty disturbing and it does no good at all to gender equality. Other than that, the movie is pretty mediocre and boring.