Turbulent Skies (TV Movie 2010) Poster

(2010 TV Movie)

User Reviews

Review this title
22 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
1/10
Truly woeful
connollyk4621 February 2011
Oh Lord! Another dreadful, cliché ridden, air disaster film. I laughed all the way through.It made Airplane look like a Shakespearean production. Even if you never worked in the airline industry (as I did) you could not help but notice the many glaring inaccuracies. At least I got to see it for free on HBO. I wouldn't have been laughing so much if I had paid to see it in a cinema. I often wonder if actors really know what their signing up for when they agree to do films like this, or are they just desperate for the money! You also have to wonder who the technical adviser was for this disaster of a disaster film... Oh hang on, maybe it was meant to be a comedy??!!
18 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
don't waste your time
troydhen21 September 2010
The worst movie that I have seen in several years. Not interesting enough to watch to see how bad it is. Your time would be better spent knitting while listening to old Lawrence Welk broadcasts. It is unfortunate that the star of Staship Trooper had to stoop to this level. The only redeeming value was seeing an SR71 in action although it made only a limited appearance. This films budget should have been donated to the Haitian relief effort. I saw the movie on Cinemax during prime time slot. How a pay cable channel plans on staying in business with this kind of presentation in the seven pm time slot is beyond my understanding.
23 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
So substandard that you should see it to believe it
fakkeldij4 June 2010
This was broadcasted by commercial TV RTL who apparently have the distribution right and released it in Holland a few weeks ago. We estimated the movie to be from the '80's or earlier given the pathetic "special effects" (well, they were special - I'm sure my two 11 year's old nephews could have matched the computer art work easily). But it appeared to be brand new. The acting looked like it was some kind of parody on something but as nothing was funny we think it wasn't. The story, ...never mind. Goofs are sometimes hard to find but in this movie they are just common. The writer must never have been in a plane let alone the cockpit of it.

The 4 is because it's so bad that you should see it to believe and that makes it funny in a way....

Dick & Elke
9 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Is this a joke? Warning: Spoilers
This movie was meant as comedy? Rarely seen a movie worse than this. The text is like those from a bad soap opera, the camera work fits in exactly. The timeline in the film is utter nonsense. An aircraft that already was flying for an hour by 700 miles is within two minutes passed by an aircraft that had to come from across the country. The acting is not much better. Unlikely characters, real silly technicalities. Top of the nonsense is the change in mid-air through a fuel hose in a commercial airliner by a simple door. A waste of time to watch this movie. Probably this film was meant seriously but there is really nothing good to say about it. Maybe you should approached this as a parody .
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
airplane disaster movie
robstrid28 May 2011
The reviews for this movie are wholly inaccurate, it wasn't as good as that, Airplane disaster movies are hard to get right and the makers of this one didn't try very hard. The acting is truly dreadful. Possibly because the actors involved thought "thought what's the point? The only way for our careers to survive this load of utter tosh is for it to be totally forgettable" The mistakes are glaring, Push three wires into a hole in the console and hey presto the radio is working again ( I think I saw something similar in an episode of Mr, Bean, and that got a big laugh) Then, with the help of the air traffic controller, a course change, a push down on the yolk , a gear down, ( in fact I'm not sure if he even told her how to put the gear down… he just said…. Put the gear down. ) an unqualified woman flying the plane does a text book landing. This is a movie that is well worth missing.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
The actors should have bailed out at 10,000 feet
GeorgeSickler7 November 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Oh, wow! This movies is so awful that it quickly stopped being ridiculously stupid and funny, and just returned to being awful again.

Just one over-worn "disaster movie" event after another, which frankly doesn't make sense in so many places in the first place.

Just for a few highlights:

What on earth is this blinking light doing in the cockpit that's controlling everything and wants to kill the captain and injure the first officer, change the flight plan and eventually try to kill everybody?

Is it H.A.L. Jr., the son of H.A.L. that went amok in the classic "2001--A Space Odyssey" movie from the 1960s? At least this H.A.L. Jr. didn't say, "I'm sorry Dave. You can't do that." after killing all the rest, as his dad did with the crew on the "2001" spaceship.

Only after "H.A.L. Jr." drops the plane to 10,000 feet does it decide to turn off the oxygen and everybody begins to pass out. Well, pressurized aircraft don't pump oxygen into the cabin in the first place. It's outside air that goes through a pressurization process, even at 35,000 or more feet.

And at 10,000 feet, you don't need a pressurized cabin. They could open a window in the cockpit. Even back in the 1930s, the first DC-3 could fly over the Rockies, during a test, on one engine at a higher altitude than 10,000 feet, and it wasn't a pressurized aircraft.

For that matter, passengers who went to the bathroom and lifted the lid to the toilet on a DC-3 got a straight-down view of the ground.

And it just goes on and on. The SR-71 "Blackbird" that transferred the guy to the Boeing 747 was designed to operate at several times the speed of sound, not the speed of a 747.

The 747 aircraft itself, in flight, was stock footage from Boeing.

And, when the gal finally landed the plane, she didn't lower the flaps until the wheels almost touched. Huh? And the guy in the tower forgot to tell her how to reverse thrust, increase RPM and apply the wheel breaks to bring the aircraft to a stop.

UGH! And they all lived happily ever after.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
About What You Would Expect From Fred Olen Ray
gavin694218 July 2011
When a new airplane that's equipped with a new computer that can fly the plane on its own, is about to have its first flight...

This film reunites Casper Van Dien and Patrick Muldoon from "Starship Troopers". One as an intelligent computer programmer and the other as a slick, handsome playboy. In fact, it is one of two films that reunites them this year, so there has to be a connection there... but that is a discussion for another time. Also here is horror veteran Brad Dourif and "Baywatch" babe Nicole Eggert.

This comes from Fred Olen Ray, the director of "Alienator" and many other B-movies in the sci-fi genre. So if you are expecting a great film in the normal sense of "great", you chose the wrong film. But if you like basking in cheesy glory, this is a film for you. A crazy computer that wants to kill all its passengers? Oh man, grab a beer and have fun!

And really, it is not a bad film. I saw a review that said "worst film in a long time". Please. That is so not true. This film is a cut above anything the SyFy Channel has shown ever, so I can name a dozen films this year that are worse than "Turbulent Skies". This is not to say it is great, either. But just know what to expect when you sit down on the couch and you may come out happier.
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
A disaster in every sense of the word
horsegoggles27 January 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I was actually hoping the plane would go down, just to end the dreadful mess. Every conceivable cliché ever used in an air disaster film was present in this one. I kept watching simply in anticipation of the next over acted scene, thinking at some point it would have to show a sign of something loosely plausible. The hole just kept getting deeper, right up to the end. Were all flight safety rules set aside by the FAA for this particular flight? I'm not an air safety expert, but shouldn't there be at least a co-pilot at the controls at all times. I gave it a two because even if for all the wrong reasons I did purpose to sit through it. It could have almost been a comedy. I often flashed back to one of the AIRPLANE movies of the seventies expecting a laugh. Watch it for it's goofiness. That's the only entertaining thing about it.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Turbulent plane and passengers.
pugadam22 January 2018
Rotten tomatoes.I wasted my time because I did not read the reviews.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Flying destination to nowhere...
TheLittleSongbird23 April 2014
There are worse disaster movies out there than Turbulent Skies, it at least has some novelty value in how goofy it is, but it is still poorly done in many ways. The movie has a cheap and grainy-coloured look to it, right from the choppy way it's edited and the effects at best are laughable. The music sounds very cheesy, the ambiance has a lot to do with it, and is often inappropriately used. For example like drowning out what's happening and what's being said or being scored in a way that jars with the mood of the scene. You even laugh hearing the dialogue and not in a good way, it sounds very awkward and often delivered in a strained way, the worst of the lines causing unintentional humour. The dramatic parts seem melodramatic and ham-fisted and parts that should be fun have no tension whatsoever and are so ridiculous even for a disaster movie, a genre where suspension of disbelief happens a lot but this ridiculousness comes across as insulting. The story has novelty value, but often goes at a pedestrian pace, it's so predictable you have no problem what happens next and there is very little sense that anybody cares about the situation they're in, diluting any kind of suspense and tension. The acting is poor too, not even Brad Dourif, a talented actor who has had his share of good films, can save it. Casper Van Dien, who's quite wooden here, and Patrick Muldoon can't do anything with their material and most of the cast don't even try to act. Nicole Eggert's cleavage has more personality than them. In conclusion, very bad in pretty much every area apart from some novelty value, and that's only really if you're in a generous mood. 2/10 Bethany Cox
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
flying nowhere
mikelang4216 October 2011
This is totally awful,in fact so bad that Plan 9 from Outer Space becomes a masterpiece. Why Plan 9? The interior of the super plane resembles the flying saucer set of said film.MFI comes to mind. The whole film looks as though it was made for less than 1000 dollars.What has happened to Casper Van Dien? Brilliant in Starship Troopers,here looking old, tired, bored stiff as you will be on looking at this drivel, this once promising actor has lost his way,plus the usual crackpot performance from Brad Dourif.Does he know no other style of acting? As for the rest of the cast, nothing can be said in any ones favour. There is also no excuse now days that a film is made for TV. Many are better than the current load of multiplex crap ie Real Steel,The Three Musketeers and Johnny English 2. Just catch recent TV made Sci Fi movie The Lost Future (2010) to see what i mean.Enough said.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Flashback Time
CaptSquid20 July 2011
Warning: Spoilers
This film is strangely reminiscent of "Executive Decision." The first film, improbable as it was, was actually a good film, but not worth re-watching. This film, however, was a complete waste, not even worthy of the bargain bin at Wally World.

In "Executive Decision," the improbability was using an F-117, a single seat fighter/bomber, as a transport for far too many men. This film uses an SR-71 in approximately the same role, that of a personnel transport. Couple that with the passengers (?) of the SR-71 not being suited up for high speed, high altitude flight, and your disgust level rises quickly. And why send an aircraft capable of Mach 3 flight speeds after an aircraft that doesn't exceed Mach 1?

Then, there's the issue of people passing out from lack of oxygen -- AT 10,000 FEET! The air may be thin at that elevation, but not non-supportive of human life.

Finally, there's a remote connection with "Die Hard 2," where the wife smacks the antagonist at the end of the film.

This DVD would make a dandy coaster, albeit an expensive one.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
The plot is so transparent as to be invisible
lacemaker566 May 2010
Warning: Spoilers
The maiden flight of a computer flown 747 goes wrong because of a computer glitch inserted accidentally by the son of the owner, causing the plane to veer off course into an electrical storm where it is naturally hit. With the two standby pilots either dead or incapacitated the task of saving the plane from being shot down by the military, the original inventor of the device is forced to enter the plane via an untried process from another plane (previously used in the film Executive Decision) and bypass the computer.

The actualities of this film are poorly researched. the acting is very wooden and the plot is so transparent as to be invisible.
2 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
IT HURTS. MAKE IT STOP MOMMY!
nogodnomasters8 April 2018
Warning: Spoilers
A plane's engine is on fire. The pilot opts to cut off the fuel in flight to stop the fire, however the engine doesn't restart and the plane crashes. The operator was blamed for "human error" even though the black box (never mentioned) would have exonerated the pilot. Brad Dourif plays the evil capitalist wanting to exploit the accident to promote his new CD-70 automatic pilot, based on predator drone technology. Casper Van Dien is not too sure about using the M-5 eh ah CD-70. Lets see...if I was to guess they use the CD-70, it messes up and Casper must save the day by killing giant alien bugs. And the reason why I am guessing is that it became too painful to watch the film all the way through. It was bad...real bad, as in destroy your copy, don't give it away bad.

The acting and script felt like a bad movie made for TV circa 1975. Don't waste your time or money.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Very unrealistic from an aviation perspective. How difficult would it have been for them to find out how planes are flown before making a film about how planes are flown?
caspian-932435 June 2017
Warning: Spoilers
I have watched four minutes of this film, and can bear to watch no more. In these four minutes alone, I have seen:

1. An airliner flying at FL250 (or 25,000ft) with the landing gear extended and with the flaps in a landing configuration.

2. The first officer says that the #2 engine N1 is falling, then it cuts to the engine display where the N1 is stable.

3. The captain and the first officer are both flying manually, each holding their yokes at the same time.

4. After the flight attendant informs the pilots that the engine is on fire, the first officer looks at the captain and asks: "What do we do? Captain?" - in fact he should know exactly what to do, as it would have formed a huge part of his training and type certification. There are checklists that exist for that very procedure.

5. They then try to restart the engines by slamming the throttle levers to full, then idle, then full, then idle.

6. They make a mayday call to 'Central Tower' at FL250.

7. Footage of the plane 'crashing' reveals a third engine...

I'm sorry, I can't bring myself to watch any more. If you know absolutely nothing about aviation, then perhaps you would be able to watch this film - but I just cant do it. I'm sorry.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
a badly made flight disaster movie
lauermarkus26 May 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Without taking anything from the plot, there is to mention, that some inaccuracies appear in this film: - In the beginning (the first plane appearing with the elderly captain) has the landing gear extended during the flight at 25.000 feet altitude. This is highly unrealistic, as the gear would not stand such a force. Normally landing gear is retracted immediately after getting airborne. - Lightning cannot affect the pilot's activity in the cockpit. The plane builds a "Faraday's Cage" meaning that lightning, when hitting the plane, gets diverted in different directions along the fuselage, causing no impact to people inside the plane. - the captains decision to shut down the burning engine in the first chapter of the film was not wrong, so it cannot been taken as an argument for an automated pilot. Having said this, the captains behavior is quite indecisive for an experienced pilot, he appears rather senile.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
One of the worst movies ever
ryan-410-266587 April 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Don't waste your time watching this terrible movie. It is so fake and ridiculous it hurts to watch. That stealth plane connected to that thing effortlessly like they do it every day but yet the guy hand him a rebreather at the last second as if they wouldn't have been already highly prepared. The guy going on the plane never asked before hand like how the hell am I going to breathe? Then the guy just jams stripped wires into a hole all twisted together as if that would ever fix anything . Sorry this move is just terrible.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Cheesy at best, The inclusion of the SR-71 Blackbird in this film only dishonors it.
draggynsmate5 February 2016
Warning: Spoilers
The use of the SR-71 Blackbird in this film itself is laughable.

Any fan worth their salt will call BS on this one. It takes time to plan a mission for that beast, logistics, route planning, refuel points, getting the craft prepped, getting the KC-135Q tankers ready, ensuring the backup craft is also prepped, and the list goes on..

Hollywood got this one wrong where the SR-71 Blackbird is concerned. They chopped the footage and added in an actor in a standard flight suit WRONG. Didn't even bother to edit the footage to remove the original pilots left hand, in the pressure suit, running up the throttles which is bright orange compared to the flat color of the flight suit the pilot was wearing. The original cockpit audio was completely scrubbed, which would have fit the movie much better than the junk chatter the tossed in there. Since when does the SR-71 carry passengers?? They would have us believe that they are going to carry two people in the central bay of it, it doesn't have one. That area is a fuel cell, not to mention it's not pressurized and subject to all manner of stresses. Supposedly this was to be flown to catch up with and dock to a commercial passenger aircraft to transfer people, seriously? Utterly laughable.. It was so bad I turned it off.

They used the majority of footage from the following video. https://youtu.be/hZIGKwhQ8dw

If the link does not work, search YouTube for Blackbird101, and locate his video SR-71 Blackbird Launch. This contains all the scenes from the movie in full along with the original cockpit audio.

The engine ignition sequence, hangar rollout and marshaling, taxi to runway, takeoff and climb to altitude. Whoever made this needs to learn how to research something before making it public.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Watch for free.. don't buy this crap
mbheusdens12 December 2015
Another Casper Van Dien worse than B flick. Gave it 2 stars since it was better than that snoring Sleeping Beauty version starring Casper.

As with most any made-for-TV movies, there is no need to spend money buying the DVD on the poor writing, directing, plot and character development. Just watch it for free on numerous free movie sites (I caught this one on tubiTV). I was actually quite surprised this was not an Asylum Production movie. The poor graphics, script, knowledge, and overall shoddy production/directing value matches them spot on. There was absolutely nothing worth trying to save this movie. It couldn't even be salvage within the first two minutes.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This movie is a disaster
SSRhodes21 May 2013
Everything about this movie - from the plot, to the script, to the casting - is simply disastrous. The writers and technical specialists should have done their homework - something the obviously did not do. And just a note to casting directors - filling your cast with pretty women and good-looking men does not necessarily make a good film. It just means you are down-right lazy. As for the so-called "acting" ... wow. Bad. Just ... bad. One exception - and quite honestly, the biggest surprise was Casper Van Dien; not usually a heavyweight when it comes to acting-chops, he's actually pretty good in this sorry excuse for a movie.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
TURDulent Skies
jgodfre620 September 2013
Warning: Spoilers
I try to be openly objective about movies, I have seen many bad movies, and some like Sharknado are so bad that they become funny, this movie is so bad that it cant even be funny. I think an average person with no theater experience and average writing skills could have done a better job with this crap-tastic excuse of a movie. There are hundreds of issues with this movie other than the lack of decent directed acting.

1. The FAA would not in the foreseeable future accept an aircraft that is completely controlled by an Artificial Intelligence with no remote switch or remote manual control, and even with remote control would it be extremely unlikely to get accepted.

2. Why would an aircraft a FL250 (25,000 feet above sea level) have its landing gear down and flaps set to landing configuration? THERE IS NO REASON, EVER! 3. At one point in the movie the main characters seem to easily move the throttle's forward and backward with no force what so ever, later on the "hero" has to help his wife push the throttles forward as she seems to be too weak to do so. This is not how a Boeing aircraft works, and Airbus will be like this yet with minimal force required, however this aircraft was a Boeing 747.

4. Why would they use an SR-71A Blackbird which is no longer in service and has not been in service since the 1990's, when there are plenty of other aircraft that can intercept the 747 without burning hundreds of thousands of gallons of JET-A1.

5. The "Air-Bridge" that was used is entirely a farce, and attempting to attach something to an aircraft at FL360 (36,000 feet) going about 480 KTAS (610 Miles Per Hour) is going to have disastrous consequences, the tube was also not even pressurized and Casper Van Dien would have died with everyone else on the plane as they opened the door; however in real life the door would not open due to safety measures placed on the door which prevent it from being opened while the aircraft is airborne.

Do yourself a favor and skip this movie, save your eyes for something better like Sharknado.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
garbage
skeeezx29 July 2011
i cannot believe i watched the whole thing ridiculous poor acting the worst movie i have ever seen and i have seen some real junk how anyone could release something like this is beyond me..if i was one of the actors i would change my name and move to cuba maybe i could start over there. complete and utter useless piece of trash. no redeeming qualities at all in any way shape or form i cannot believe that a studio would release something like this.poor acting the worst movie i have ever seen and i have seen some real junk how anyone could release something like this is beyond me..if i was one of the actors i would change my name and move to cuba maybe i could start over there. complete and utter useless piece of trash. no redeeming qualities at all in any way shape or form i cannot believe that a studio would release something like this.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed