5/10
Not the best way to spend two hours!
25 September 2015
Warning: Spoilers
The major fault of this movie lies in the construction and conclusion of its story. If ever a film's story-line needed an unexpected twist, this picture is the number one contender. The plot hinges upon a dream that an airline passenger experienced. In the dream, the plane crashed. So, when the passenger actually boards the plane, events soon start to match the dream. The plot thus poses a simple question: Will the plane crash or will it not? A really on- the-ball director may have been able to make something of this repetitive narrative, but Leslie Norman is not that director. His background was in film editing too! So why he didn't make some effort to speed it up, is beyond me. Yet, I see the movie has received some excellent reviews. Maybe they were swayed by Rank publicity that the story was true. In any case, it would seem that many people obviously like a slow, repetitive approach with every point emphasized at least twice over. But frankly, I believe some of these enthusiasts are not actually reviewing the 94 minutes version at all. With commercial breaks, that version would certainly run for two hours on TV. Of course, it's possible that when broken up by commercials, the plot may not seem so repetitive. (Contemporary movies in which the emphasis is on speed, speed and more speed – and never mind logic – must drive them crazy).
4 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed