A Zombie curse is placed upon a woman, which causes her to have living snakes inside her. Brujo, who is looking after her, attempts to take her to Los Angeles on the train. After several ... See full summary »
While practicing motocross in Hawaii, Sean Jones witnesses the brutal murder of an important American prosecutor by the powerful mobster Eddie Kim. He is protected and persuaded by the FBI agent Neville Flynn to testify against Eddie in Los Angeles. They embark in the red-eye Flight 121 of Pacific Air, occupying the entire first-class. However, Eddie dispatches hundred of different species of snakes airborne with a time operated device in the luggage to release the snakes in the flight with the intent of crashing the plane. Neville and the passengers have to struggle with the snakes to survive. Written by
Claudio Carvalho, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
The snakes in this film would be more likely to attack each other then humans. Would not deliver a fatal dose of venom and most likely would give a dry bite if they did bite instead of just hide. See more »
When the couple is in the lavatory to join the "Mile high club", the guy reaches up and pulls out the smoke detector located in the ceiling so the couple can smoke a joint. Tampering with the smoke detector in this fashion triggers an alarm to the crew as this is a federal offense, and would be immediately investigated. See more »
I'm confident that "Snakes on a Plane" will prove once and for all that Internet culture and mainstream culture are not one and the same.
Because, my friends, the Internet will tell you that SOAP (as those in the know call it) is a classic film - the best "bad movie" ever made. But I think any more sensible member of the general public will tell you that SOAP is nothing more than a mildly competent action movie. It's not hysterically funny. It's not scary. It's occasionally exciting. And it sure ain't a "10" on the IMDb scale.
Don't misunderstand me; I had fun watching the movie. I was even willing to be generous, until I saw the outrageously high rating on this site and all the strangely gushing reviews. Frankly, I'm a bit astonished. Why heap such praise on this particular film? If you love camp, over-the-top action movies, then why not worship a camp action film that's actually good? ("Wrath of Khan" springs to mind - also "Batman.")
The truth is that parts of SOAP are pretty lame. Samuel L. Jackson is good, but his role is weirdly small. And, aside from his one power catchphrase, most of his dialog is banal and dull. The rest of the actors aren't even worth commenting on, since they're stuck with stock and boring "funny" characters.
Speaking of dull, how many different ways can snakes really kill someone? They hiss...they lunge...they bite...over and over and over again. It's not particularly cinematic. And most of them are fake CGI anyway, so they're not even remotely frightening.
Face it, the only reason to see this is because it's camp and bad. It's part of the whole culture of worshiping lame junk that's prevalent right now. It's hip to like terrible garage bands and lame movies because people are either too impatient, or too unsophisticated, to take the time to absorb entertainment that's actually artistic. So we watch and listen to junk, and imagine that we're superior to it, and that makes us feel good. Apparently.
Is there anything wrong with liking junk? Not really - I review and praise junk on this site all the time. But putting junk on a pedestal? That's very, very wrong.
583 of 842 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?