|
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 |
