Amazon.com

As superfluous remakes go, Flight of the Phoenix could've been better, and could've been worse. It's a passable popcorn adventure, especially for those unfamiliar with the 1965 original, which starred James Stewart, made headlines for the crash-landing death of stunt-pilot Paul Mantz, and now stands as a minor classic of its era. This flashy remake stars Dennis Quaid in Stewart's role, adds a woman to the list of plane-crash survivors, and showcases Giovanni Ribisi, who gives a cleverly eccentric performance as the model-airplane designer who proposes to rebuild a crashed cargo plane into a single-engine escape from certain death in the remote Gobi desert. Both films are essentially identical, but this remake is somehow less believable (due to shortcuts in a haphazardly written screenplay) and much more spectacular, owing to the advantage of impressive special effects. Otherwise it's a routine dose of survivalist entertainment from the director of Behind Enemy Lines, never convincing enough to be genuinely compelling, but certainly never boring. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (81)

Okay, Okay, Okay. Okay. We'll build it.
Disappointment is just one of the emotions felt after viewing this cinematic failure.Frustration, aggravation, and anger could also be used, but mainly it was disappointment.One of the most important rules of making a film is to incorporate believable characters into an unbelievable situation.Flight of the Phoenix proves that you can place unbelievable characters in an unbelievable situation, and the end result will be ... well ... unbelievable (not in a good way).From the very blurry beginning, until the incredibly cheesy ending, this film gives us a taste of Hollywood proving that sometimes creativity, originality, and strong storytelling falls to the wayside to allow for more of Hollywood's leading men the ability to prance around shirtless.From the non-existent acting, to the scattered story, and finally followed by a very predictable and unrealistic ending, The Flight of the Phoenix never really took off to begin with.This was one of those films that tried to stuff as much in as possible without any thought to the five basic questions (who, what, where, when, and why) and thinking of the female drive in replace of a decent story.

To tell a good story, you must have a strong leader to guide you through the rough spots.Since Flight of the Phoenix was nothing but rough spots, I was looking forward to having the best leader who would draw my attention away from these distractions.Sadly, there was no leader, thus it forced me to focus on the gaping plot holes and meaningless dribble that happened throughout this film.Dennis Quaid was not the best choice for this picture.To make this film work, you needed to have someone strong, brainy, and a bit egotistical.You needed a leader, not one that would just sit around waiting for a rescue team to arrive.His nonchalant acting (bordering apathetic) never quite meshed well with the other actors.This didn't make him the central focus of the film, but instead turned our focus on Giovanni Ribisi's character.Sadly, nothing was given to us about Ribisi's character throughout the film, so we were forced to see an unknown character acting a bit eccentric.To me it didn't make much sense and lead to the very uneventful climax.With Quaid doing his least and Ribisi going a bit overboard, I would normally look towards the other characters to provide at least one line of enjoyment ... again ... normally ... but not in this case.Instead, what you found was the most diverse cast that I have ever seen, all of which are vying for more screen time.So, each push forward, nothing gets accomplish, the audience looses faith in the characters.Then, you have Miranda Otto.I only section her out because I had no honest clue what her role was in this film other than to provide a female interpretation on what was happening.You can't have all these men in the desert without some woman ... someone is going to be angry, and it will be up to Hollywood to show the diversity.It was pathetic and it felt forced to me.

I will give some credit that there was some creativity involved, but it was the overall development and final direction which lost all of the creativity that Flight of the Phoenix may have had going for it.Plane goes down in the desert and a group of people must rebuild before they die of dehydration.Interesting concept, but just not done well.There was too much sitting around and waiting for the first half of the film, where there could have been some decent character development or studies, instead we have these huge long-shots of the desert which is to show the vast nature of their surroundings.This was a great technique to use, but sadly director John Moore created the opposite effect than what he was going for.I understand that he was trying to show the vast landscape and how there was really no way for our ... is heroes to easy of a word? ... to escape the desert.He wanted the feel of the film to be this huge desert, but instead I felt trapped.I felt trapped in a characterless world where the scenery seemed like it should all have "Made in Hollywood" stamped on the back.I just could not grasp the horror that this team was feeling, and while some of that may be the actor's fault, I do feel that Moore had something to do with it as well.His ethics behind the camera, I do believe, hurt the final product of this film.

Finally, I cannot complain about this enough, but for me to fall in step with characters, I need to know their names, their weaknesses, and something about their lives.My biggest issue with the film Black Hawk Down and Tears of the Sun was that I didn't know any of the soldiers really well, so when they started dying I didn't know who they were, nor did I care.This is similar to what I felt when I watched this film.I knew only two-three of the characters really well, while the others were extremely expendable.When this happens, and something tragic happens to them, it will not evoke any emotion from you.Most of the time you shrug it off and wait for the next nameless victim.It is sad, but I can add Flight of the Phoenix to the ever-growing list of films that decided to use this technique.

Working around films so much I have seen so many patrons rent this film and come back with such glowing remarks.While most loved this film, I cannot agree with them because without decent characters, a stronger story, and a defined reason as to why Miranda Otto was involved with this project, then I cannot say this was a valued film in my book.

Grade: * out of *****

Barely worth a rental
After 30 minutes into Flight of the Phoenix, I asked myself, "Self, when does the action start?" Upon falling asleep and waking up later into the movie, I asked myself that again...and again.The trailer is incredibly misleading in that it makes this movie look somewhat...well...exciting.It's incredibly sleep-inducing and terribly written.One question: Why is Dennis Quaid trudging through the scorching desert with a winter bomber jacket and full flight regalia? Another question: why remake the original and make it worse? Don't waste your time.

Not Bad
The acting in this film was pretty good, and so were the special effects. I also thought the story was very good, and the ending was sweet.
That said, this good film is somewhat dirtied by a bad screenwriter. The lines were completely dumb, and the characters had to say them seriously.
You probably will like this movie anyway, but it could have been great with a better screenplay.

Good Plot , Exaggerated ,Uninspiring Performances
This movie is an absolute disaster. I haven't seen the original but let me tell you no director could possibly put together any worse set of actors for a film. In a land where they're doomed to be roasted to death, they show optimism. They build a plane ,dance aroud to radios that appear from nowhere. There are many loopholes to this plot. It didnt seem that the moderate sized plane that crashed in the desert could carry as much as load as they somehow bought out of it.

If you're an intense movie watcher like most are or if you're looking for a good lost nowhere movie please don't buy this. It's good that I borroweda friend's copy of the dvd. Somehow my friend hasn't seen it.I suggest he put it up for auction somewhere. In any case,this movie's a complete disappointment with very incompetent acting and action.

Poor casting, slow, and predictable
Given its premise, it sounds like this should have been a really good movie.Unfortunately, that's not the way it plays out.

First, the casting is poor.As the pilot and main character, Dennis Quaid's all-American, average guy persona just doesn't work.Giovanni Ribisi comes close to over-the-top acting, and the other characters - especially those played by Hugh Laurie and Tyrese - are completely one-dimensional stock characters whose actions can be easily predicted.

There's very little in the way of action, with most of the time spent on trite dialogue or needless shots of the desert and the plane.When events start to unfold, their outcome can be guessed well in advance.And while I don't have a problem with being able to guess the movie's ultimate outcome, a little bit of suspense would have helped.

Finally, the "updates" on the characters that are shown during the credits may be the corniest thing I've seen in a movie this year.We really could have done without that touch.

I'd recommend avoiding this one, even if you're looking for a light and mindless film.It just doesn't work on any level, and it was a real disappointment. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Disney couldn't resist the temptation to remake 1961's popular comedy The Absent Minded Professor, so they cast Robin Williams as Professor Philip Brainard (a role vaguely related to the character originated by Fred MacMurray), and the result is a comedy that, frankly, doesn't fully deserve its modest success. It's admittedly clever to a point, and certainly the digitally "flubberized" special effects provide the kind of movie magic that's entertaining for kids and parents alike. The professor can't even remember his own wedding day (much to the chagrin of his fiancée, played by Marcia Gay Harden), and now his academic rival (Christopher McDonald) is trying to steal his latest and purely accidental invention--flying rubber, or ... flubber. The green goo magnifies energy and can be used as an amazing source of power, but in the hands of screenwriter John Hughes it becomes just another excuse to recycle a lot of Home Alone-style slapstick humor involving a pair of bumbling would-be flubber thieves. There's also a floating robot named Weebo and some catchy music by Danny Elfman to accompany dancing globs of flubber, but the story's too thin to add up to anything special. Lightweight fun, but, given the title, it lacks a certain bounce. Of course, that didn't stop Disney's marketing wizards from turning it into a home-video hit. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (27)

Cute But Absentmindedly Twisted
Recently I went to a theater showing the Disney remake, Flubber, starring Robin Williams. Although I still prefer the original The Absent Minded Professor, Flubber was a whole lot of fun.

Robin Williams plays a science professor looking for a new form of energy. As the film opens, Williams is already in danger of missing his own wedding for the third time. But while guests wait patiently Williams discovers the semi-intelligent Flubber. Much of the rest of the film is spent trying to win back the heart of his fiance and subsequently save the collage from bankruptcy and closure. Williams is aided in his endeavors by two robots. The first is an exceptionally capable housekeeping robot. The second is a levitating, self-aware intelligence with full emotions. While fun companions movie-wise, the technical aspects of these robots would be more than enough for Williams to save the college. In the End Williams wins back his fiancé, defeats the bad guys trying to close the college and finds a future for Flubber.

While Flubber is very enjoyable it seems like the writers added details for the sake of cuteness without thinking about the implications. Williams is looking for a new energy source yet he has a robot that can defy gravity and powered by simple electricity. He needs a discovery worth money yet he has two very successful and useful robots, one of them alive. Flubber itself has been made into some kind of life form. This may be good for merchandising but one can only wonder about the source of powdered Flubber or the implications of flight resulting from intentionally causing the organism's decay. Selling the rights to flying cars to Ford made for a funny scene but now there can potentially be millions of semi-responsible drivers flying through the country's airlanes while carrying radioactive materials. Additionally, a few scenes were changed from the original and are now less plausible. For instance, in the original, the fiancé calls the professor when he is late for the wedding again.

So if you are looking for fun then this is your movie. However, if you tend to rebel at inconsistencies and like your plots to make sense, then you might want to avoid this one. It's up to you.

Suitable for kids aged 0-100!
Oh, I loved this movie, I was so surprised. Robin Williams is a brilliant actor, and he's in his comedic element here! He plays a mad scientist who keeps on postponing his wedding to create his ultimate invention - FLUBBER - a rubbery substance that has a life of its own and can make you fly. Yes, I'm 30 years old and an action fan, and a guy that doesn't appreciate chick flicks. but kids flicks I can tolerate. My five-year old niece had this for her birthday, I sat and watched it with her and laughed out loud all the way through. The special effects are superb as well!

Typical unimaginative Disney claptrap.
Have you ever been invited to some friends' house for an evening and thought that you were going to be doing something interesting or fun, only to find out that they rented a video for all of you to watch? It's always something you never would have rented for yourself in a million years.
For all of it's former ingenuity and creativity, today's Disney films certainly have a habit of showing a lack of imagination and originality. If you think about it, most of today's Disney animated films are based on old stories that have been around forever, and most of the studio's live action films are remakes of early Disney-era classics. This is not to say that the occasional enjoyable Disney film doesn't make an appearance at your local theater now and then. Some of them are hard not to enjoy.
When the overpaid, brain-dead executives at Disney decided to remake the 1961 hit film, "The Absent-Minded Professor", they indicated the type of audience the film would be catering to by dumbing down the title of the film to "Flubber".
"The Absent-Minded Professor" is not necessarily one of my very favorite of Disney's classic era 50s and 60s films, but it was a well-written, creative story that could be enjoyed by kids and adults alike, and it has held up pretty well through the decades. This remake is nothing more than an attempt to show what can be done with today's overblown computer animation technology. In the story, an absent-minded professor, who's always forgetting his wedding date (this is where the mandatory love interest comes into play), accidentally invents a form of bouncing, flying synthetic rubber, and as luck would have it, is able to use it to help the local high school basketball team finally win a game. The fate of the free world seems to hinge on this small town team winning this game. That simple story was enough to make the 1961 film a winner with audiences but today's kids (and some adults) would find that boring because they've had technology shoved down their throats since birth. So in this new film, we have incredibly stupid scenes such as the little blobs of Flubber changing into the shape of little fat men and dancing to rhythmic quasi-Latin music. The Flubber men also change their shapes to become different Latin percussion instruments during the song. Oh, that Disney magic! What would we do without it to make our lives worth living???
This is a fairly repulsive film for a non-thinking audience.

Flubber
A Great Movie!!!! I laughed alot! I like the way the flubber entered the Villian's mouth and went thru his system and came out of his Butt was extremely funny. The crooks getting hit in the head with the golf ball and bowling ball was funny and the crooks saying it sure gives you a headache. The only bad thing about the movie is some cussing that should have been left out.

Dancing Globs make me wozzy
Wow this was disappointing. The stupid parts outweight the good stuff. What a waste. With all the potential to make a real interesting story, and with all the high tech capabilities now vs when the original was made this should have been a real fun movie to watch. It is not. Most of my kids had left the room before the end. definitely rent before you buy. ... Read more

Description

As Chicago radio station WBN celebrates its first night on the air, someone is murdering the company employees one by one, and the station's secretary and her estranged writer-husband must join forces to find the killer. From the mind of George Lucas, creator of "Star Wars" and "Indiana Jones," comes this mystery-comedy-adventure set in the heyday of live radio. It's an enegetic, fast-paced romp, sparkling with a brilliant cast, dozens of guest stars, hilarious complications, and a toe-tapping melange of musical standards. ... Read more

Reviews (19)

Don't listen to critics...
This is a manic, crazy and fun film, largely due to the Keaton-like performance of Brian Benben. Mary Stuart Masterson is known for great dramatic talent, but this is the first comedy I've seen her in, and she's a natural. This was directed by Mel Smith; is it the same Mel Smith that had a small but hysterical part in "The Princess Bride"? I wonder if this film was given a bad rap because it came out the same year as Woody Allen's brilliant "Bullets Over Broadway" (1994). There are comparisons to be made, if only for period and music. Otherwise, this film takes on its very own character. A wonderful ensemble cast , including Ned Beatty, Michael Lerner, Jeffrey Tambor & Christopher Lloyd, must be commended. Cameo appearances from George Burns and Rosemary Clooney are wonderful. Whatever this film lacks in plot, is made up for with energetic performances, quick editing, and loads of great one-liners. There's also a lot of great period music to entertain. I DO enjoy this film a lot, and at the reasonable price and a great 2.35:1 Widescreen, the DVD is a bargain. If you like "silly", you'll love this. And Brian Benben is marvelous. Too bad the stuck-up critics didn't like it. We, the audience, know better.

Remember?
I'm conducting a wake for Rosemary Clooney (Born May 23, 1928 . Died June 30, 2002.) I read "Girl Singer:an autobiography" and got the conveniently packaged "Songs from the Girl Singer: a musical autobiography "CD set. Like Girranimals, the similarly titled pieces have the same picture on the front so that the purchaser will know that they go together. I heartily recommend both.

I also recommend this madcap musical murder mystery movie that manages to pay homage to Radio Days Gone By while keeping audiences of all eras entertained. It's the 1939 opening night live extravagnaze broadcast of the fictional WBN in Chicago, a 4th national network. Who's killing the participants? What played in Peoria? Meanwhile, "the Show must go on" and the viewer is treated to a mature Rosemary Clooney, (maybe as a metaphor to her own life, Rosemary sings a heart-rendingly beautiful "That Old Feeling" while pandemonium rages off-stage,) George Burns (Gracie had long since left the building by the time this movie was filmed) and others. Christopher Lloyd as the Sound Effects guy and his noise are a real hoot, as are the "Bubbly" live and drop dead commercials and Corbin Bernsen as the smarmy (think his later role as LA Law-yer Arnie Becker) announcer.

Radioland Murders works on many levels. Like the box says: "It's a side-splitting, edge-of-your-seat adventure, part farce, part mystery, and all fun!"

A Misunderstood Masterpiece
Since George Lucas had enough money from his "Star Wars" empire not to care what critics would say, he wrote the story and produced this affectionate nod to old time radio and the imagination. It is a whacky slapstick farce with charm, moving faster than a speeding bullet. It is dopey and dumb, sweet and innocent, cornball and old fashioned, and it was suppose to be. The jarring breakneck speed of it had critics thinking it should have been a riot, and it was received by and large like a slap in the face. It never had a chance.

If you can get past the machine gun speed and accept it on the level that George Lucas intended, there is a sweet wonderful film here, a film that suprisingly has a lot to say, though it may not be clearly evident when you watch it. It all takes place during radio's heyday on the night WBN attempts to go 'National' and become the fourth major radio network.

Lucas gave this film a beautiful 1930's retro look that is magnificent. It almost gets lost in the crazy and corny atmosphere of this film but the radio station itself is teriffic, as are the period details as Lucas pays affectionate homage to everything that was great about radio.

The main crux of the story is the relationship of Roger (Brian Benben) and Penny (a red headed Mary Stuart Masterson) Henderson. She practically runs the station and he's one of the writers. She thinks he was messing around with their sexy star Claudette (Anita Morris) and wants a divorce, but of course he wasn't and has to talk her out of it since he loves her. Meanwhile as she is sending WBN's page Billy (Michael Scott Campbell) back and forth to the writer's room to get her stories page by page, a phantom voice keeps interrupting the broadcast with riddles which are shortly followed by murders behind the curtains and when the police arrive Lt. Cross (Michael Lerner) likes Roger for the murders, which keep piling up.

We get to see the makings of radio as Roger tries to clear himself and find the culprit. Christopher Lloyd of TV's "Taxi" fame is on hand as the frantic sound effects man and Corbin Bernsen of TV's "LA Law" is the announcer. Robert Klein, Peter MacNicol, and Harvey Korman are part of the writing team, but of course it is Leighann Lord as the cleaning lady Morgan who comes up with all the last second ideas.

The murders occur in ways often used in old time radio and that is part of it's charm. Lucas had this filmed in a fast and furious fashion, as if the movie itself WAS an old radio show. None of it is to be taken seriously as it is only entertainment, there to make us smile. It was a time in entertainment when even murder had a sort of a screwy "innocence" about it. So does this film.

One of Lucas's messages here is that it was a better time, as we had an innocence as well. The other message is about the advent of television, and a lament on how it has stopped us from using our imaginations. Pretty thoughtful for a dopey film that has Benben running around dressed like Carmen Miranda in one scene as he tries to catch the killer and get back with Masterson, who loves him as well.

Considered a huge failure at it's time of release (critics still hate it) this film has slowly garnered a following in recent years and may be on the verge of "cult" status soon.We get to see snippets of the shows they are trying to go live with. George Burns is on hand with some stand-up comedy. Rosemary Clooney sings "That Old Feeling". There are great band numbers of the period and "The Miller Sisters" sing at interludes between shows. Just about every staple of old time radio is here.

If you can get past the pace and the dopey slapstick antics, you'll find a lot of charm here, and an innocence in entertainment we'll never see again....

Radioland Murders
I thought this movie was not main stream, and was well written. If you hate those movies that crittics and main stream Hollywood try to slam down your throats and call it a brillant cinamatic masterpeice, then this a refreshing change of pace for you. Yes it was campy, and, no it wasn't Forrest Gump or Titanic (which I thought they weren't even worth the paper they were written on), but a movie that you can curl up with some popcorn and escape for a few hours. I loved the characters, I loved the idea, and it was an alround good story that was never given a chance.

It's by George freaking Lucas
A great comedy. Well, it's not for the faint of brain. It's funny if you can see the underlying message. At the end of the film you can look back and say, "Eh? That's boody good cinema!" ... Read more

Reviews (112)

"Hart's War"
Hart's War (R) ****/5
Bruce Willis, Colin Farrell, Terence Howard, Cole Hauser, Linus Roache.
Directed by: Gregory Hoblit.
Synopsis: A trial is held in a P.O.W. camp, and the defendant's lawyer is desperate to prove him innocent.
Special Features: Commentaries, Deleted Scenes with Commentary, Photo Gallery, Trailer.
Review: Well MGM is on the ropes with good movie failing after good movie failing. Perhaps they need a new marketing department. "Hart's War" tells the tale of a young Lieutenant who is appointed to an obviously innocent black man who is accused of murdering a white man in a German P.O.W. camp. The German's agree to allow the court martial, and the trail begins. Everything seems to go against Lieutenant Hart from the beginning, and he is forced to unravel the lies to find who the murderer is and why he is being protected. In a stand for courage and against racism "Hart's War" is rousing stuff. This military drama is a refreshing break from the explosions and guts war films we are used to. Some minor battling/blood is present, but it is brief, critical to the plot, and not fight scenes (A fighter strafing run and bullet to the head). Bruce Willis gives a credible performance as the Colonel in charge of the U.S. prisoners, Terence Howard plays the accused very well, Cole Hauser is excellent as the bad guy, but Colin Farrell steals the show as the title character. Not the pick for bloody war film fans, but definitely for those who like history, or a good drama. Gregory Hoblit ("Frequency") is on top of his game again what a fantastic director. As for the DVD? MGM still uses flip discs! I hate flip discs! Sure it is an easy way to pack wide/full screen on one disc, but invariably fingerprints get on one side. Columbia/Tri Star can fit both and 2 times the special features on their single sided discs! Get a clue MGM! MGM DVD's usually are weak on special features and while this has more than some its mostly just commentaries. The disc is well worth picking up for the film, but I wish MGM's DVD designers would get a clue already.

Average WWII POW movie
Hart's War is based on the recent bestselling book by John Katzenbach. I didn't read the book, but was looking forward to the movie because of the cast - Bruce Willis and Colin Farell. The movie starts off terrific, with several tense scenes showing how Colin Farell's character (who is the son of a US Senator) gets captured, interrogated, and sent to a POW camp. However, the film begins to lose focus and tackles too many themes, including racism, identification with the enemy, and heroism. At times, it's derivative of the "Great Escape" and other POW movies. It has a pretty good plot, with Colin Farrel's character forced to defend a POW who is suspected of murdering another POW. This plot, though, gets lost beneath all of the posturing. Bruce Willis was just ok, and at times his voice is so strained that its irritating to listen to him. Colin Farell lives up to the promise he showed in Tigerland, although his part was underdeveloped. Overall, an average movie that could have been much better.

The Plot Successfully Escaped
HART'S WAR had potential. The last months of World War Two as a backdrop with demoralized GI's crammed into an overcrowded POW compound. If this picture was soley about the hardships endured by surrendered soldiers during the Battle of the Bulge, then it could have had a chance. Instead the film makers took on too many plots and subplots. Unintentionally the movie borrows from SLAUGHTERHOUSE FIVE, A SOLDIER'S STORY, THE GREAT ESCAPE and STALAG 17. A cardinal rule in war films is that the premise has to be simple. In HART'S WAR we find some good elements lost in a virtual Mulligan stew. In the story Colin Farrell's character, a rear echelon lawyer, accompanies another officer on what he thinks is a joyride. Unfortunately for Farrell, the Germans have launched their attack in the Ardennes. The young lawyer is captured, harshly interrogated, and finally shipped out to a German stalag. There he meets the senior POW officer, played by Bruce Willis, and tries to settle down in the dirty and uncomfortable life of a POW. A soldier is killed and a recently downed Tuskegee airman is accused of murder. Yes, you guessed it. Farrell takes on the aviator's defense during the subsequent courts martial. If director Gregory Hoblit left the storyline to develop around the trial a decent film could have emerged. Instead we have additions of Colonel Hart's unexplained behavior, an mass tunnel escape plot, sabotage and the German Commandant's attempt to befriend the American lawyer as superfluous baggage.

HART'S WAR was filmed in the Czech Republic, no doubt to cut costs. A little more effort and a lot less story and this film would have had a better showing at the box office. Still, if you enjoy war movies you should probably add this DVD to your collection.

Where's the history?
A movie based on WW2 backdrop should at least remain somewhat historical in it's context. The implausible storyline, added with a hyped up propaganda laced motif makes for one sorry flick.

Stalag 13 - up close & personal
Well, not really Stalag 13, but the situations reminded me of the TV series. But the racism got to this redneck cowboy who stopped looking at color years ago. I guess that is one of the things about movies -- they show history.

All in all it was a very good flick. ... Read more

Amazon.com

As superfluous remakes go, Flight of the Phoenix could've been better, and could've been worse. It's a passable popcorn adventure, especially for those unfamiliar with the 1965 original, which starred James Stewart, made headlines for the crash-landing death of stunt-pilot Paul Mantz, and now stands as a minor classic of its era. This flashy remake stars Dennis Quaid in Stewart's role, adds a woman to the list of plane-crash survivors, and showcases Giovanni Ribisi, who gives a cleverly eccentric performance as the model-airplane designer who proposes to rebuild a crashed cargo plane into a single-engine escape from certain death in the remote Gobi desert. Both films are essentially identical, but this remake is somehow less believable (due to shortcuts in a haphazardly written screenplay) and much more spectacular, owing to the advantage of impressive special effects. Otherwise it's a routine dose of survivalist entertainment from the director of Behind Enemy Lines, never convincing enough to be genuinely compelling, but certainly never boring. --Jeff Shannon ... Read more

Reviews (81)

Okay, Okay, Okay. Okay. We'll build it.
Disappointment is just one of the emotions felt after viewing this cinematic failure.Frustration, aggravation, and anger could also be used, but mainly it was disappointment.One of the most important rules of making a film is to incorporate believable characters into an unbelievable situation.Flight of the Phoenix proves that you can place unbelievable characters in an unbelievable situation, and the end result will be ... well ... unbelievable (not in a good way).From the very blurry beginning, until the incredibly cheesy ending, this film gives us a taste of Hollywood proving that sometimes creativity, originality, and strong storytelling falls to the wayside to allow for more of Hollywood's leading men the ability to prance around shirtless.From the non-existent acting, to the scattered story, and finally followed by a very predictable and unrealistic ending, The Flight of the Phoenix never really took off to begin with.This was one of those films that tried to stuff as much in as possible without any thought to the five basic questions (who, what, where, when, and why) and thinking of the female drive in replace of a decent story.

To tell a good story, you must have a strong leader to guide you through the rough spots.Since Flight of the Phoenix was nothing but rough spots, I was looking forward to having the best leader who would draw my attention away from these distractions.Sadly, there was no leader, thus it forced me to focus on the gaping plot holes and meaningless dribble that happened throughout this film.Dennis Quaid was not the best choice for this picture.To make this film work, you needed to have someone strong, brainy, and a bit egotistical.You needed a leader, not one that would just sit around waiting for a rescue team to arrive.His nonchalant acting (bordering apathetic) never quite meshed well with the other actors.This didn't make him the central focus of the film, but instead turned our focus on Giovanni Ribisi's character.Sadly, nothing was given to us about Ribisi's character throughout the film, so we were forced to see an unknown character acting a bit eccentric.To me it didn't make much sense and lead to the very uneventful climax.With Quaid doing his least and Ribisi going a bit overboard, I would normally look towards the other characters to provide at least one line of enjoyment ... again ... normally ... but not in this case.Instead, what you found was the most diverse cast that I have ever seen, all of which are vying for more screen time.So, each push forward, nothing gets accomplish, the audience looses faith in the characters.Then, you have Miranda Otto.I only section her out because I had no honest clue what her role was in this film other than to provide a female interpretation on what was happening.You can't have all these men in the desert without some woman ... someone is going to be angry, and it will be up to Hollywood to show the diversity.It was pathetic and it felt forced to me.

I will give some credit that there was some creativity involved, but it was the overall development and final direction which lost all of the creativity that Flight of the Phoenix may have had going for it.Plane goes down in the desert and a group of people must rebuild before they die of dehydration.Interesting concept, but just not done well.There was too much sitting around and waiting for the first half of the film, where there could have been some decent character development or studies, instead we have these huge long-shots of the desert which is to show the vast nature of their surroundings.This was a great technique to use, but sadly director John Moore created the opposite effect than what he was going for.I understand that he was trying to show the vast landscape and how there was really no way for our ... is heroes to easy of a word? ... to escape the desert.He wanted the feel of the film to be this huge desert, but instead I felt trapped.I felt trapped in a characterless world where the scenery seemed like it should all have "Made in Hollywood" stamped on the back.I just could not grasp the horror that this team was feeling, and while some of that may be the actor's fault, I do feel that Moore had something to do with it as well.His ethics behind the camera, I do believe, hurt the final product of this film.

Finally, I cannot complain about this enough, but for me to fall in step with characters, I need to know their names, their weaknesses, and something about their lives.My biggest issue with the film Black Hawk Down and Tears of the Sun was that I didn't know any of the soldiers really well, so when they started dying I didn't know who they were, nor did I care.This is similar to what I felt when I watched this film.I knew only two-three of the characters really well, while the others were extremely expendable.When this happens, and something tragic happens to them, it will not evoke any emotion from you.Most of the time you shrug it off and wait for the next nameless victim.It is sad, but I can add Flight of the Phoenix to the ever-growing list of films that decided to use this technique.

Working around films so much I have seen so many patrons rent this film and come back with such glowing remarks.While most loved this film, I cannot agree with them because without decent characters, a stronger story, and a defined reason as to why Miranda Otto was involved with this project, then I cannot say this was a valued film in my book.

Grade: * out of *****

Barely worth a rental
After 30 minutes into Flight of the Phoenix, I asked myself, "Self, when does the action start?" Upon falling asleep and waking up later into the movie, I asked myself that again...and again.The trailer is incredibly misleading in that it makes this movie look somewhat...well...exciting.It's incredibly sleep-inducing and terribly written.One question: Why is Dennis Quaid trudging through the scorching desert with a winter bomber jacket and full flight regalia? Another question: why remake the original and make it worse? Don't waste your time.

Not Bad
The acting in this film was pretty good, and so were the special effects. I also thought the story was very good, and the ending was sweet.
That said, this good film is somewhat dirtied by a bad screenwriter. The lines were completely dumb, and the characters had to say them seriously.
You probably will like this movie anyway, but it could have been great with a better screenplay.

Good Plot , Exaggerated ,Uninspiring Performances
This movie is an absolute disaster. I haven't seen the original but let me tell you no director could possibly put together any worse set of actors for a film. In a land where they're doomed to be roasted to death, they show optimism. They build a plane ,dance aroud to radios that appear from nowhere. There are many loopholes to this plot. It didnt seem that the moderate sized plane that crashed in the desert could carry as much as load as they somehow bought out of it.

If you're an intense movie watcher like most are or if you're looking for a good lost nowhere movie please don't buy this. It's good that I borroweda friend's copy of the dvd. Somehow my friend hasn't seen it.I suggest he put it up for auction somewhere. In any case,this movie's a complete disappointment with very incompetent acting and action.

Poor casting, slow, and predictable
Given its premise, it sounds like this should have been a really good movie.Unfortunately, that's not the way it plays out.

First, the casting is poor.As the pilot and main character, Dennis Quaid's all-American, average guy persona just doesn't work.Giovanni Ribisi comes close to over-the-top acting, and the other characters - especially those played by Hugh Laurie and Tyrese - are completely one-dimensional stock characters whose actions can be easily predicted.

There's very little in the way of action, with most of the time spent on trite dialogue or needless shots of the desert and the plane.When events start to unfold, their outcome can be guessed well in advance.And while I don't have a problem with being able to guess the movie's ultimate outcome, a little bit of suspense would have helped.

Finally, the "updates" on the characters that are shown during the credits may be the corniest thing I've seen in a movie this year.We really could have done without that touch.

I'd recommend avoiding this one, even if you're looking for a light and mindless film.It just doesn't work on any level, and it was a real disappointment. ... Read more

Description

This inspirational movie by first-time director and Academy Award® nominee Salma Hayek, tells the story of a spiritually and financially bankrupt town in need of hope until one day a young boy gives them something to believe in. The Maldonado Miracle is an uplifting family movie with extraordinary performances by Academy Award® nominees, Peter Fonda and Mare Winningham and Emmy® Award nominee Ruben Blades. ... Read more

Amazon.com essential video

Jay Bulworth is your typical senator going through a nervous breakdown. The empty speeches, lies, money, and pressure have led him to plan his own assassination on a weekend trip home to California just before the election. However, a cord snaps in him and like Jim Carrey's rambling lawyer in Liar, Liar, Bulworth can only tell the truth. This new freedom turns Bulworth on and he spews the ugly truth about politics: he tells mass media they are as corrupt as insurance companies; lambastes a black church for not having leaders; and riles the Jewish power elite of Hollywood. He enters South Central running away from advisors (including a bemused Oliver Platt) and mixing it up with a potential new girlfriend (Halle Berry) and a local boss (Don Cheadle). He offends acrossthe board, even developing an inherent knack to rap his speeches. And the public loves it. The weekend becomes a clarifying point for Bulworth: he finds a reason to live.

Beatty's rude and relevant comedy is a one-joke movie, but the joke is pretty good. It's a courageous film that is always sharp even though it loses narrative focus. Beatty's hilarious raps are so inspired they deserve repeated viewings. As usual, Beatty surrounds himself with a great crew, Ennio Morricone's music and Vittorio Storaro's cinematography being especially noteworthy. Beatty and Storaro even have the audacity to imitate two very famous photographs in the film's final seconds. The script by Beatty and Jeremy Pikser won the L.A. Film Critics award and was nominated for an Oscar. --Doug Thomas ... Read more

Reviews (131)

A sincere movie with no target demographic.
A politician has nothing left to lose -- so why not speak the truth? Warren Beatty's Senator Jay Bulworth lays down the smack: the reason the working man (in this movie, the working class is cleverly disguised as hip-hop mavens) doesn't have a voice, is he doesn't have the sway or monetary bullocks to *buy* a voice. Words aren't worth a penny unless you're worth billions. And of course, from the first instant, this divine fool's failure is certain and imminent: Big Business, what with its grimy fingers perpetually immersed in the U.S. Government's proverbial tub of crunchy Jif, would never allow a politician like Bulworth to succeed, at the risk of the working class' newfound capacity to leech the power from the insurance companies and tire manufacturers.

But here's the best part: this poor movie didn't stand a chance of finding a target demographic, just as we know from the first instant Bulworth doesn't stand a chance, either. The movie's occasionally bawdy humor is poised to captivate, paradoxically, *my* demographic (19-year olds who appreciate taboos about racial tension), while its sad, sad message is better suited to working class families who "get it," rather than to, say, people who rent movies all the time, or play the stock market, or capitalize on apathy. In that respect, Bulworth is a sad story, indeed.

Original, daring, and funny, one of the best movies ever.
Here is a movie that you will either love or hate but it certainly won't leave you indifferent.If you dislike Bulworth you most likely either can't stomach the film's left-wing political ideology or you find some aspect of the film offensive.But the willingness of the film to offend is the very thing that makes it so compelling to others.If you don't hate the movie for the above reasons you'll be able to appreciate the just how risky and original this movie is.As Bulworth campaigns,offending everyone and their mother while telling it like it is,you can't help but share in his giddy exhileration and you'll laugh your behind off at the same time.This is the essential theme of the movie and,just to keep things livly,Beatty introduces a variation as Bulworth begins to rap.On these scenes alone the film succeeds as a comedy though there are other very funny scenes(often involving Bulworth's campaign aids).Generaly I'm not a fan of rap but the film's music sets the tone nicely. The cast is universaly excellent,everyone seems to fit their part perfectly and Nina (Halle Berry) looks absolutely gorgeous.At one point, Bulworth is dancing with Nina in a Compton after hours club and,to roughly quote an internet reviewer,"this must be the most erotic scene involving two vertical people in all of cinima."What works in Bulworth works so well that the holes and improbableties inherent in the storyline seem beside the point.They certainly don't detract from the overall effect of the movie.I'm every bit as liberal a Warren Beatty and there is no doubt that your politics play a role in how you respond to the movie but I recomend this movie to everyone,you just might find it enligtening.

What were they thinking?
What were they thinking? Nevermind, it's actually pretty obvious.

Far from being the deft parody of modern civics that the producers obviously intended, this is an extremely silly movie that trivializes major problems, and frequently borders on being racist, classist, and anti-semitic.

One problem is that this was Warren Beatty's attempt at being "hip" and reaching out to a whole new generation. Well, I'm part of that generation and let me tell you that it just came out as being creepy and pathetic. Warren Beatty and Halley Berry? "Ew" on so many different levels. Warren Beatty being accepted as some sort of "brothah"? You've got to be kidding me. Warren Beatty rapping? Please, just kill me.

The other problem is that this movie attempts to address "problems" in a way that does nothing but rehash old stereotypes. This "inner city" was obviously dreamed up by an elderly woman from the midwest who has never actually met a black person, but has read books where she learned that some of them have hearts of gold and everyone else is a dangerous criminal intent on selling crack to five year olds.

There is a definate generation gap in who likes this movie and who does not. The young, socially aware people that I know think that this movie is paternalistic, insulting, and stupid: and that Warren Beatty should just deal with the fact that he is no longer Hollywood's #1 Heart-throb. My parents and their friends thought it was great and that Warren still has his old spark. Though even they admited that Warren and Halley was pretty "ew."

racist, socialist nonsense
This is one of the worst movies I've ever seen. Beatty, a wealthy playboy, tries to paint all whites as willingly racist and stepping on the poor, while at the same time demonstrating anti-semitism. Nice divisive garbage, Beatty. Not funny. Not relevant or at all honest.

Ghetto Senator
This movie is about a Senator who gets fed up with lying to the people. However it is a movie that is a matter of taste. If you are sensitive regarding racial issues this is certainly not the picture for you. If you like racially laced humor and politics you will probably like this movie, if not fall in love with it. Warren Beatty is excellent in his role as senator Bulworth and Oliver Platt is a riot as Bulworth's campaign manager. Halle Berry is still the most beautiful women in the world...showing that she can make even a totally straight laced senator turn ghetto. It's got it's ups and downs and craziness...some humor and even some surprises. I thought the ending was somewhat surprising. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

What more can I say?
This is a deliciously wicked satire of legal eagles and their media counterparts. The cast is flawless, not limited to Gina Gershon who skewers her sex-pot image by being both victim and preying mantis (watch the opening sequence -- it's schtick to die for). James Garner just keeps getting better with age. The script is sharp as a tack, the performances and direction right on target. I'll be adding this to my collection! ... Read more

Description

Abandoned by their mentally ill mother, the Tillerman children set off in search of a place to stay. Alone, scared, and with nowhere to turn, they travel cross country to find the reclusive grandmother they've never known (Academy Award winner Anne Bancroft).A Bitter, lonely old woman, Abigail agrees to let them into her house, and finally, into her heart."Bancroft gives a powerful character performance..."- Hollywood Reporter ... Read more

Description

She is a respected doctor and pioneer of woman's rights. She decides on a political career. The media gets hold of a small indiscretion in her past. It causes a political frenzy. She is forced to make a choice...speak her mind and preserve her self-respect at the risk of losing the campaign, or play the media game. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

excellent, little known film
this is a great video, apparently not available everywhere. for people who liked "the candidate," "the contender," and other stuff like that, this is a must see.

A convincing portrayal of the media's role in politics!
This movie (which was based on the play "An American Daughter", by Wendy Wasserstein), shows how the media can turn an innocent past mistake by a political candidate (Christine Lahti) into an issue that the whole country is talking about. Sound familiar? Issues like this constantly plague the news now, and this movie shows how ludicrous it all is. Tom Skerritt is in this movie too, an adds quite a convincing performance as Lahti's seemingly weak husband.

Two thumbs up for the movie and for Lahti!! I feel this is one of Christine Lahti's best performances. She takes you inside the life of a politician, who is being shunned by the media (thus, the nation) for reasons that are debatable.

Great Flick!
This movie brilliantly explores the challenges of being a woman and having power. In order to achieve, women are forced to sacrifice so much, and are often sabotaged by a society that feels threatened by their accomplishments. With suburb acting, this movie rings particularly true in our modern age. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

When Bollywood tries to make a Hollywood movie.
the movie kept me engrossed. Not for the reasons you may think. You see, I am from India, from Hyderabad to be specific. And it seems this movie was shot in India and in Hyderabad in particular. a 200% B Grade movie if there ever was one. The 'H-Tech' building at madhapur is shown as "FAA Building" , cheesy models and even cheesier special effects. Every second actor or extra is an Indian, and almost 90% of the crew mentioned in the end titles are indians.

Stupid movie plot (well actually may not be stupid) but the execution is right down criminal. Is there a category called Z Grade movie?

A full year before 911
Guess what: A movie about a terrorist crashing planes into buildings. Moreover, the NSA blames a muslim terrorist group for this unprovoked attack! How does it sounds? If you said that this is a movie about 911, you would be very wrong! This movie was completed before (yes, before) September 11, 2001. And they say that reality does not mimic art (I use the term loosely)!
Although it is hard to imagine such a film in a US theather anytime soon, you can get the DVD here at Amazon. The whole thing is not so good, but it deserves recognition. It is a sort of "Airport" for the new milenium. Anyway, who cares? Just the fact that it was completed before 911 is worth the buy.
Get it before it is banned!

I'LL STAY ON TERRA FIRMA
B-movies of our time are not all that different from those wonderful B-movies of the 50s and 60s. Take one hunky hero (Rod Rowlands, a marvelous actor---check out SOULKEEPER); a beautiful airline attendant T3's Kristina Lokken); a nasty nasty villain; a planeload of stereotypical passengers; and throw in some cheesy special effects. This is AIR PANIC, and I thoroughly enjoyed it for the above reasons. Also add veteran actors Ted Shackelford and Barbara Carrera, and you know you're in for a good B-flight.
In all honesty, this movie works because it attacks your visceral level of being terrified when the plane you are on goes a little wacky. Not a cinematic classic, but I found it engrossing and entertaining. ... Read more

Reviews (3)

When Bollywood tries to make a Hollywood movie.
the movie kept me engrossed. Not for the reasons you may think. You see, I am from India, from Hyderabad to be specific. And it seems this movie was shot in India and in Hyderabad in particular. a 200% B Grade movie if there ever was one. The 'H-Tech' building at madhapur is shown as "FAA Building" , cheesy models and even cheesier special effects. Every second actor or extra is an Indian, and almost 90% of the crew mentioned in the end titles are indians.

Stupid movie plot (well actually may not be stupid) but the execution is right down criminal. Is there a category called Z Grade movie?

A full year before 911
Guess what: A movie about a terrorist crashing planes into buildings. Moreover, the NSA blames a muslim terrorist group for this unprovoked attack! How does it sounds? If you said that this is a movie about 911, you would be very wrong! This movie was completed before (yes, before) September 11, 2001. And they say that reality does not mimic art (I use the term loosely)!
Although it is hard to imagine such a film in a US theather anytime soon, you can get the DVD here at Amazon. The whole thing is not so good, but it deserves recognition. It is a sort of "Airport" for the new milenium. Anyway, who cares? Just the fact that it was completed before 911 is worth the buy.
Get it before it is banned!

I'LL STAY ON TERRA FIRMA
B-movies of our time are not all that different from those wonderful B-movies of the 50s and 60s. Take one hunky hero (Rod Rowlands, a marvelous actor---check out SOULKEEPER); a beautiful airline attendant T3's Kristina Lokken); a nasty nasty villain; a planeload of stereotypical passengers; and throw in some cheesy special effects. This is AIR PANIC, and I thoroughly enjoyed it for the above reasons. Also add veteran actors Ted Shackelford and Barbara Carrera, and you know you're in for a good B-flight.
In all honesty, this movie works because it attacks your visceral level of being terrified when the plane you are on goes a little wacky. Not a cinematic classic, but I found it engrossing and entertaining. ... Read more