I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

True to its essence, the characters remain on the same line and manage to entertain the viewer, each highlighting their own distinctive qualities or touches.

It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

A pleasant enough Air Force propaganda piece, with appropriate thanks to this branch of our country's military service in the closing credits; it also includes all the requisite elements for a CinemaScope production – impressive widescreen shots of the titled aircraft taking off, landing and an in-flight refueling, and even some impressive aerial shots of North Africa (including the Pyramids). Its story and the dramatic elements that hold it together are fairly rote and not particularly compelling.It begins with a 19 year-old Natalie Wood, playing the daughter of Karl Malden and Marsha Hunt, and being courted by 40 year-old Efrem Zimbalist Jr.. Of course, Malden's character isn't too keen about it while, surprisingly, Hunt's doesn't seem to care. The fact that Malden plays a career master sergeant mechanic that doesn't trust nor respect flyboy Zimbalist Jr. (per their history during the Korean War six years earlier), who's now his commanding officer, is a regularly recycled plot point as well.Then again, the film's message is meant to convey the value of the B-52 to our nation's security to the audience of its time (during the Cold War) whereas other superior dramas (Strategic Air Command (1955) and, later, A Gathering of Eagles (1963)) were focused on the U.S.A.F.'s leadership challenges.Directed by Gordon Douglas, its screenplay was written by Irving Wallace from the novel by Sam Rolfe. Movie fans will recognize Dick Elliott, Juanita Moore (don't blink or you'll miss her), and Stuart Whitman among the uncredited actors in the cast.

Gives great Airplane, and great Natalie Wood. Plot? Historical accuracy (in the "how the USAF worked" sense)? Naaaa. But: So what? Is it less accurate than Alfie, Goldfinger, Hamlet, Spider Man, Fahrenheit 9/11? Certainly not. Fact is, you can watch it with the sound off and lose very little. A lot of it looks like my childhood on USAF AFBs here and there. But just for the record, it takes a professional screenwriter to create and amplify the significance of the hypothetical "enlisted vs. officer" conflict. Only a Martinet(who rarely makes it past 1Lt)or a damn fool idiot (~academy puke...many of whom learn better) fails to understand that all airplanes fly not on Bernoulli's equation or jet fuel, but on sweat. Guess who's? Ask any combat pilot.Eagerly awaiting a DVD release...my off-HBO VHS is about worn-out (same for Strategic Air Command...just bought two copies of The Hunters DVD just to emphasize flyover country interest).

This movie was made at the same period as Strategic Air Command, Bridges at Toko-Ri, The Hunters and other wave the flag Cold War error. Yes as stated it does have some overstated patriotic, my job is the most important job in the world sentiment to it. That being said, I am a former USAF maintenance technician who did work on B-52's amongst other airframes in my 20 year career. I enjoyed the movie for several reasons, one the airplane shots with the B-47, F-86, and B-52B's. There are a number of at best questionable plots in the movie but all in all not bad if you like early Air Force movies. And in opposition to a previous input, the maintenance tech on these airframes is all important to the scheme of thing. The "O's" get to fly them but could not do a thing with out the maintainers keeping them ready to fly.

Fantastic wide screen, technicolor close-up images of one of the world's greatest long range nuclear bombers, the B-52. Fantastic wide screen, technicolor close-up images of one of the world's greatest actresses, Natalie Wood. ...and Efrem Zimbalist, Jr. gets to ride both of 'em. Is this a great movie, or what?