Mayday (2005) Reviews

• Sanitized disaster.

  fayremead2005-10-03

  This film may have been less far-fetched than the Nelson DeMille/Thomas Block novel on which it is based, but it lacks the tension which the authors provided so well. Director T.J. Scott is obviously constrained by the network-television format, which allows little blood and no coarse language -- still, he should have let the main characters look increasingly unkempt and sweaty after the accident. Other mistakes include a subplot involving several characters who weren't in the book, and some weakly interpreted villains (Johnson suffers the most; where is his swagger and sardonic humor). This rates a 5 because the cast members do their best, the effects are good for a TV-movie, and there are a few nice touches (at one point the film refers to a change of terminology between the 1978 and 1997 versions of the novel). It's sad, though, that "Mayday" never got a big-budget blockbuster treatment. -Tony

• Awful.

  layer82005-10-02

  So let's see: The American Navy is testing a new missile, somehow manages to miss the fact that a passenger airliner is in the test airspace, missile hits plane. Explosive decompression somehow lasts TWO FREAKING MINUTES, and sucks many people out of the plane. It's powerful enough to rip a set of bolted chairs out of the floor and out of the plane .(It's about 15 minutes into the movie, and already you can tell the people making this movie have no clue about airplanes... or basic physics for that matter.) Captain dies from lack of oxygen and the co-pilot is in a coma for the same reason. (What?!) A "weekend pilot" takes over the controls and has to land the plane. Meanwhile, both the Navy and the airline's insurance company are independently scheming to secretly destroy the crippled plane, so they can hide their idiocy and save money, respectively. Thanks to a "sympathetic" admiral, who for much of the movie stood by while orders to destroy the plane were given and almost followed, but then declared self-righteously that his report to the Pentagon would tell it "like it happened", we can assume that justice will be done. Of course the heroic pilot manages to bring the plane in for a dramatic landing, everyone is happy, and thanks to evidence he gathered, the insurance guys will get their just deserts as well. The plot is unbelievable to say the least. The actors are variously over-acting, under-acting, or acting dead. (The last group did the best job, I think.) The music screams: THIS IS THE EXCITING PART! THIS IS THE SAD PART! BE ANGRY! CRY! ON THE EDGE OF YOU SEAT, NOW! After a while you tune it out. The whole movie, I mean. Save yourself two hours, and don't watch this piece of crap. The only reason this is getting 2 out of 10 and not 1 is because I have seen a few movies that were worse... but very few.

• Not bad at all

  Gowin4me2005-10-03

  As far as made for TV disaster movies go I think this movie is on par with others if not a little above that. The story line of the movie is simple, but it is effective in conveying emotions of what is going on, and the motives of the people that do not want the plane to land. Charles S Dutton does an excellent job in a minor role, it is a perfect compliment to his role on Threshold. Aiden Quinn does an excellent job as the hero of the movie, and his character was written in such a way that you can believe he is an everyday person who happened to be caught up in this whole mess. In her limited role Gail O'Grady does an excellent job, it makes me remember her character from Medusa's child; except instead of being stuck in the bad situation she is trying to dictate the situation from an insurance/business point of view. The rest of the cast is solid in their roles, and right on par with most made for TV movie casts. As with all disaster movies there are obviously certain elements that you cannot believe easily, but if you get away from that and watch the movie for what it is then you will definitely enjoy this movie. If you have any first hand, or at the least close personal experience to any kind of plane disaster I would not recommend this since it may stir up bad memories, but for everyone else it is definitely worth seeing once.

• A Decent to Watch

  howitzer438812005-10-03

  I saw it, and I thought it was a very decent movie. It is certainly not a waste of time, and it was like a breath of fresh air compared to all the other crap showing on local broadcast TV. The plot was not original, but I like how they presented it. And I also thought the jet was cool. The acting was 'OK'. I have certainly seen worse in the movie theater, but it could have been better. The music score fit the movie well and the actors were OK. The plane was cool to look at. The plot, although not original, was interesting. It also has a good cliff hanger to it, and at one point in the movie I was afraid of the dreaded "To be Continued" (this was before I knew I was watching a movie). The over all feel to it was like a really good episode of "24". Bottom Line: Not a waste of time, but not exactly super-fantastic either.

• I liked it.

  x_sweettragedy2005-10-03

  I thought it was good. Though I also heard it is true, not too sure. Thats why I came to this site. I was wondering if anyone knew if there was any truths that this movie was the basis upon because if that is true then it should be opening a lot of peoples eyes to a lot of things. I don't see why people are giving it such bad credit - I thought it was well plotted and well done. Not to mention it does keep you on the edge of your seats! Does anyone know if there was any truths in it though? IT would be great to know for sure or not. Most of the movie was about correct on what would happen also. (air compressure, shock, and the like). I seriously thought it was a good movie, and NBS was right to show it. It wasn't a waste of television, if you ask me. Thanks.