Highly Overrated But Still Good

Fantastic!

Excellent but underrated film

It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

There is nothing new under the sun or under the clouds for that matter.Here are two quick ways to tell if a suspense thriller is going to be aimed at those above the mental age of fourteen or below. These tests are infallible. (1) The camera is perched behind someone's shoulder. The performer picks up a mirror and looks into it. If his reflected face is staring out of the mirror directly at YOU, the viewer, instead of at himself, the audience is still enjoying its physical growth spurt. (2) The villain has set up a time bomb, devised to explode at a certain moment. If anyone views its internal milieu, there is a red digital read out that counts the hours, minutes, and seconds left. Why the bomb maker would want to add this convenient fillip remains a mystery to all but the screenwriters. If both warning signs are present, don't expect much in the way of sophistication. If only one is present, the movie enters liminal status.I don't see that there is any need to run through this tired plot with its tired characters. You know the troublemaker aboard every airplane in jeopardy? He's the guy who's angry and frightened, gets in everyone's hair, demands to know what's going on. He's here, along with the heroic pilot, the youngsters who fall in love under stress, the anxious flight attendants. I missed the little old lady whose prayers save the airplane though. And it's too bad they couldn't have the sick kid aboard, the one that needs a kidney transplant or a transfusion of a rare blood type. Their absence leaves the viewer feeling incomplete, a jigsaw puzzle complete except for half a dozen missing pieces.Not that the film doesn't have its good points. Ernie Hudson has a nice role, for instance, and he's a fine supporting actor. He gave me a good deal of reassurance when he and I were performing in "Weeds" together. "Weeds" is so good, so sublime, that no English word can describe it. It's just superb. (That's the French "superb", not the English.) Except for one essential to the story, we're at least spared multiple back stories of the passengers. And the airplane didn't have to fly through a CGI-created thunderstorm, probably because the budget didn't allow it.Still, it's a thought-provoking movie. The thought it provokes is: "Man was never meant to fly."

I only saw the last 15 minutes of this film, so I cannot say what the overall film was like, however, the part I saw was very good. The acting was very impressive, and the fear was very believable. I was very scared, just from that fifteen minutes, and when it finished I realised that I was shaking, I had been so frightened. Usually when I am channel hopping, I don't stop at films. This one had me gripped from the moment I selected its channel. I, personally recommend it to anyone who likes lots of tension in a film. The only down side is, I never want to go on an American airline now. I really want to see the rest of what promises to be a great film.

This is one of the worst things I have seen on TV. I would have accepted it if it would have been made in the 70s or 80s. Nowhere to Land has all the stupid things you remember from the films from that time. For example:There is a bomb on a plane in Nowhere to Land witch every one know will explode in very short time. The situation is really hectic but there is always time for a the typical "time stop" that you see in American movies. Here we have everything from a nice speech from pilot to wife... a kiss and some talk between a boy and a girl before jumping out of the airplane. All this while the bomb is ticking or deadly gas is spreading in the cabin.The bomb releases a danger gas that are spreading through the cabin. But instead of running away from it the crew always looks at it first for about 10 seconds and then run.The pilots teacher and former co-pilot is on the plane and dies quite heroically in the end trying to move the bomb further away from the passenger. However the movie ends in pure happiness like we should have forgotten all about him.Nowhere to Land includes most of the old clichés that we have seen over and over again and are sick of seeing. Therefore I think it would have been better to make this a comedy and change the title to "Not another plane movie".

Spoiler: At one point the plane has descended below 5000 feet and no problems. Did the plane have enough fuel to make it to, say, Denver or some other city or field with a higher elevation? That way the plane could land without triggering the device.