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

I love this movie so much

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Roger Corman is usually immediately associated with exploitive movies made for B studios, but there were a few times when he worked for major Hollywood studios, "Von Richthofen and Brown" being one example. Additional interest is that this movie is one of the few times Corman made a serious movie - there's no exploitive tone to be found here. So how are the end results? Well, with a major studio bankrolling the production, the look of the movie is pretty well done. There's no signs of cost-cutting or missing details. Also, the aerial sequences are excellent, exciting and breath-taking. However, Corman was working with an inadequate script. Though the various actors in the cast do a professional job, the screenplay simply doesn't get into the heads of Von Richthofen or Brown (or anyone else for that matter.) We don't really learn what's driving them or what they are really thinking. While I wouldn't say that this is a terrible movie despite that fatal flaw, I would only recommend the movie to Roger Corman fans who are intrigued about the idea of him making a serious movie on an A-level budget.

I rented this film in furtherance of my duty as something of a Roger Corman completist, and was very pleasantly surprised to find what I consider one of his very best films. Perhaps due to its lack of rubber monsters and scream queens (not to mention acid trips and biker chicks), this one has kind of slipped through the cracks of the director's massive output. It deserves rediscovery, as it is an excellent film featuring quality performances that I think rivals "The Intruder", his other attempt at serious film-making.Some will complain I'm sure about this film's lack of historical accuracy. Hermann Goering (Barry Primus), for example, is shown fighting in the same air squadron as Baron Von Richthofen (John Phillip Law). I'm not very concerned with history myself because I think that history is better conveyed through books than film, and I would prefer for a film to have more focus and intent than a strictly accurate representation would allow. This film follows in the same line as great films like "Lawrence of Arabia" in choosing to throw aside historical accuracy in favor of what its writers considered historical resonance and perspective. It is not concerned with where Goering and Von Richthofen fought their battles, or even with who exactly shot Von Richthofen down in the end, but rather with the essential transformation that was taking place in the nature of combat in the early 20th Century. Goering and Von Richthofen were transposed because it provides a fascinating context as far as the kind of schism that was developing among warriors between the old and new ways. Von Richthofen is a man who prides himself deeply upon his aristocratic heritage and who insists at all points on fighting an honorable war -- for example when ordered to paint his airplanes in order to camouflage them from the enemy, he instead paints them all in bright colors and gives birth to the legendary "Flying Circus." He says to his superiors, "You can order us to die, but you cannot order us to hide from our enemy." He says that he is a knight who has traded in his horse for an airplane.The contrast between Goering and Von Richthofen is interesting, and serves largely to make Von Richthofen more sympathetic than some of the other Germans, but it's the juxtaposition of Von Richthofen and the Canadian Roy Brown (Don Stroud) that is really at the heart of this film. Brown has a cynical view towards warfare, seemingly resigned towards the most brutal and callous aspects of war and deliberately eschewing all talk of "glory" and even "victory." "How can it be over? There's still some of us alive," he tells a reporter from Toronto in one of the film's most striking scenes. Von Richthofen and Brown each have an interview, which we hear on the soundtrack as we see them fly their planes in the sky. I was really struck by the writing in these scenes and the way that the contrast between their attitudes towards war was brought out by them.I shouldn't end this comment without making mention of the excellent aerial photography that was used in this film. Today's audiences would demand some kind of over-the-top display of showmanship aided by CGI. Although I'm not completely against the use of CGI, in the case of a film like this I greatly prefer the way it was done back at the time this film was made, with what seem to be authentic airplanes of the period and some really exciting stunt flying. Von Richthofen's flying circus is truly a sight to see piercing its way through clear blue skies, and we don't need any digital manipulation to enhance the majesty of that vision.I loved John Phillip Law in this performance. I've always enjoyed him in all the sci-fi films I've seen him in, as well as his sincere performance in "The Russians Are Coming! The Russians are Coming!". I think he showed his real leading man strength in this role, and his style was not patronizing towards the Germans in any way (in fact Law often worked as an actor in Germany in the 1980s and 90s). Don Stroud really amazed me because I've never particularly cared for him in all the biker movies I've seen him in, but he had the perfect amount of gravity for this role.Kudos to Roger Corman -- other than a one-off return to directing in the early 90s, this was his swan song. He decided that if he couldn't make it as a top notch director that he would rather produce other director's films rather than go back to making schlock. And even though he was one of the greatest schlock-meisters, you have to respect that decision. And you have to wonder how different things might have been if this film had received the kind of attention that I think it deserved at the time it was made. Probably he did not make enough concessions to what he surely knew to be the popular taste -- there is only the smallest romantic element in this film, and it is a film more of ideas than of emotions.

Talk about your films you wish you had seen on the big screen! I honestly thought Nikolai Mullerschon's upcoming 'Der Rote Baron' was the first movie about Manfred von Richtofen. Then I happened upon 'Von Richtofen and Brown,' thinking it was a documentary when I ordered it.To my surprise, it was a full-fledged movie and quite a good one. I just wish I had seen it on the big screen instead of a small box on my 17-inch computer screen (because this DVD wouldn't play on my TV/DVD player)! Filmed in 1971, 'Von Richtofen and Brown' has some of the best World War I combat sequences I've seen. (OK, MAYBE Howard Hughes' scenes from 'Hell's Angels' would have been more breathtaking, had they been in color!) To see the fabled Flying Circus taking off in living color is worth the price of the DVD itself. This film is exquisitely done! The bulk of the flying sequences were done with vintage WWI planes and the crashes convincingly done with models.Overall, it seems historically accurate, too. Only the ending is a bit disappointing (though not surprising) in this regard. It came out in 1971, two years after P.J. Carisella and James W. Ryan's book, 'Who Killed the Red Baron?' had blown the lid off the myth of Capt. Arthur 'Roy' Brown shooting down the baron. As Carisell and Ryan surmised, and as Dale Titler confirmed in his 'The Day the Red Baron Died' in 1971, Australian anti-aircraft gunners almost without question fired the fatal slug that killed von Richtofen as he chased Lt. Wilfred May and was chased by Brown.Other than this and Herman Goering's erroneous presence during the bulk of the film, I found it accurate and quite entertaining – even on a 14 x 7 inch screen! B-horror/gangster director Roger Corman turned in nice work. My only complaint is that, since they were letting myth ease into the picture, why didn't they go ahead and include the baron's 'wife of six weeks?' This myth of him secretly marrying the nurse that nursed him back to health after the first of his two crashes could have made an interesting subplot. Maybe Mullerschon will tackle this myth – or maybe he'll stick 100 percent to the facts! In either case, the baron makes for a fascinating film subject. This one is definitely worth watching.

Given the very negative comments by others on IMDB about this film, I wasn't really expecting much, especially given that it was directed by Roger Corman, who, whilst he certainly has his talents, would not really be expected to helm a period piece with high production values. Actually I found this film not at all bad. Certainly its narrative plays fast and loose with historical details. But it is quite authentic in many respects - the planes themselves, and the nature of air combat depicted, are reasonably accurate (better, for example, than the planes in The Blue Max, which often look like very thinly disguised Tiger Moths). And fair chunks of the dialogue seem to be taken almost directly from the writings of actual WW1 flyers. Even the rather melodramatic plot does have roots in historical truths, and functions well enough to engage the viewer's attention throughout. I'd say it's definitely worth a look, and compares surprisingly well with the generally much better regarded The Blue Max.