Turbulence (1997)

Disturbing yet enthralling

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

Mostly, the movie is committed to the value of a good time.

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

I only tuned into this to see Brendan Gleeson. He didn't last long, so there was nothing left to hold my interest.It's a formulaic action picture with enough plot holes to drive a 747 through.First it's an empty plane (just 12 passengers) on Christmas Eve. Nobody want to go home to Momma? The airlines sure lost money on this flight.Christmas decorations on a plane? I've never seen that.Can't this plane fly above a storm?Can a 747 fly upside down?I remember in Con Air, that the plane went down when it sheered off a sign. This plane can sheer buildings, signs and parked cars and keep going. Boy, it's sturdy.Ray Liotta can play some crazy dudes!

Airplane thrillers - it's a common plot line. Whether it's a hijacking by a villain or simple mechanical malfunction, there have been several types of films that run in a similar fashion. Airport (1970) or Executive Decision (1996), just to name a couple, all take place on a plane with the possibility of it crashing and killing a ton of lives. Unfortunately, there are only so many ways something can be done. And as for this production, nothing really stands out.This story is about a female flight attendant who gets caught in the crossfire on a moving plane that's transporting two dangerous criminals to another city jail. Problem is, she's the only person left alive to fly the plane. It would be OK if this was the only focus but the writer, Jonathan Brett decided to include another subplot - the plane is headed into a level six storm. Thus the name of the title. Not impressive. I'm sure a better title could've been created even if the subplot of the storm wasn't included.The writer, Jonathan Brett isn't a truly established professional. None of his work is well known and for the films he is given credit for, isn't considered to be even mediocre. For example, why would anyone have two licensed criminals board a passenger airplane? And, when they do get on the plane, there are only 10 passengers,….so why is it so empty? What kind of writing is this? That's not a good sign and it shows throughout the film. The cast may surprise people though. Ray Liotta, Hector Elizondo, Rachel Ticotin {Melina from Total Recall (1990)}, Catherine Hicks and John Finn all have number of scenes long enough for viewers to appreciate their presence. However, this doesn't mean their performances are good or even close to being any different than their past roles in films.One of the criminals who is the main antagonist is played by Ray Liotta. This isn't a surprise. Liotta proved he could play a scary character in Unlawful Entry (1992) and it was much more realistic. Here, Liotta still can be scary but his performance is either underdone or overdone. Almost like he has a split personality. That would've been more entertaining if that had been written into the screenplay. As for the other actors mentioned, they just play minor characters which is nice when they're on screen but when they aren't, the plot runs extremely slow. Lauren Holly, who plays Teri, the flight attendant isn't entertaining either. Her fear looks real but her voice is irritating and can make it hard for people to sympathize with the character.I'm honestly surprised that the direction wasn't better. The movie is directed by Robert Butler who has 3 Primetime Emmys and a few other awards. The special effects aren't bad either, they at least matched the era of the decade. At least that worked as well as Shirley Walker's score to the film. It wasn't memorable and didn't have a theme but at least it corresponded at all the right moments of each scene. There definitely was the right emotion for each particular segment. But that is it.For a thriller with a B list cast of actors from the small and big screens, one would think this would turn out at least somewhat watchable. It has OK music and special effects but the writing isn't special or even close to being a little different and the acting is poor.

At one point there is an untutored bloodied flight attendant in a bra trying to fly a jumbo jet over Los Angeles during a level six (out of six) thunderstorm so she can land at LAX, while behind her a cackling maniac who has just murdered everyone else on board and wants to crash the plane into a densely populated area has just disabled the auto pilot with a mountain-climbing ax and is now hacking his way through the floor of the flight deck so he can rape and murder the flight attendant at the controls.Every moment is like this. It's as if a committee had sat around a table drinking cafe lattes until they started brainstorming on all the things that could go wrong, or could threaten to go wrong, while a couple of convicts were being transported by U. S. Marshals on an airplane.It makes one nostalgic for the 1970s when these kinds of movies were just getting started and depended on plot, character, and atmosphere a bit more. Remember "Jaws"? What this movie is like, is what "Jaws" would have been like if it had opened with a shot of "Bruce's" head surging out of the water towards the camera, mouth agape, and the remaining two hours were taken up with the shark chomping on everything in sight. We'd never get to know the sheriff or his family or any of the other characters, except in the most one-dimensional way. (The guy in the black T shirt is the sheriff. The guy with the glasses is some kind of scientist. Etc.) It wasn't so long ago that they knew how to do these things with a bit of panache, relying less on strobe lightning and electronic thunder and more on suspense. "The Taking of Pelham One Two Three" is as unpretentious as this and yet is easier to watch because it's so much more interesting to know something about the people involved, something more than that they have destructible physical bodies.Going back even farther in filmic history, I'm beginning to weep with a sense of loss, going back even farther, imagine how "King Kong" would have turned out if, instead of Kong not showing up until the movie was half over, the entire movie had Kong trashing the ship's crew and then all of New York City -- during a thunderstorm.There isn't a moment's pause in "Turbulence." It snaps from crisis to crisis so quickly and with such little logic that it makes "The Taking of Pelham One Two Three" look like a masterpiece.Let me comment on the acting. I think I liked Ben Cross's part the best. He plays a British pilot in another airliner who coaches the flight attendant once in a while. His role never requires him to leave his seat.Are you down in the dumps? Are you obsessing over a lost love? Do you want your mind benumbed for about an hour and a half, so thoroughly that it takes you a while to answer the question, "What is the name of the planet you're on?" This is your movie.

Distributor: HBO Home VideoPlot: When a 747 heading from New york to L.A. is taken over by a seductive psychopathic killer, and the only one who can stop him is a beautiful young flight attendant, you'd better fasten your seat belts because this trip is going to be a killer ride.Audio/Video: The VHS edition has perfect picture quality and has an excellent sound quality.Extras: No extras on the video.Final thoughts: Turbulence is a thrilling movie with great acting ans excellent special effects, but after watching it a couple of times, it really starts to get boring. The sequel is pretty good. I have yet to see the 3rd part, but part 2 is cool, check it out.