Air Panic

How can a hacker control airplanes & lead them to wherever he chooses? FAA Programmer smells a rat & jumps on the flight just in time to battle the Evil Kane (Psychopath). But why??

It must be a long time ago that I have seen such a bad movie. I have to say it is really hard to make a good and/or realistic movie about air disaster but this movie was such a waste of time and money. Also I think this is an unofficial way trying to get a bad reputation on Airbus. First, the cockpit look a lot like an Airbus cockpit, second you got a stick, third using computers to control rudders/elevators/aileron via "fly by wire". When I saw this movie I thought like the intention of the film was "don't fly with computerized airplanes like Airbus, use Boeing instead they have a direct connection of steering and rudders."

All I can say: Bad story, horrible acting (most of the actors), worst film trick ever...

normally,i would say i loved this movie.not for acting,although that was OK.not for the script,which was so-so.the reason i would have normally loved this movie is for the intense action,which starts from the get go and doesn't end until the final credits roll.but,the problem with this movie,and i felt it was a big problem,was the horrible CGI.it looks like they ran out of money and couldn't complete the the effects shots. a lot of the effects look lime they are in their very roughest form.since it is obvious they didn't have enough money to finish the movie,they should not have released it.i actual found the effects insulting.it seems obvious they didn't care about making a decent end product for the consumer.if it weren't for that,i would give this movie a much higher rating.my vote for Air Panic is a 3/10

Suffering severely from a low budget, production people behind the scenes not on the same page, time constraints, controlling studio execs, etc... It wasn't the actors fault for this films shortcomings. Also the location filming in India is very odd. A more polished script, slightly higher budget and less/different CGI work, better consulting and more research about aviation would make all the difference. The main characters seem hindered to show off their talent and acting ability. It definitely has the feeling the studio or crew called in some favors and kept everyone on a tight leash.

If there wasn't so many "cooks in the kitchen" off screen, it might have been more cohesive & accepted more positively for what it is, a straight to video airplane disaster movie. It's going to have all the cliches and similar plots. Like all disaster type movies, limited options and no budget it seems.

The actors were trying but however, the many behind the camera, not so much. Take it for the production flaws and genre it's in and watch with an open mind.

Sure there are better films and there are much worse films with big huge budgets, big names, big money CGI work, actual marketing and advertising.

For most it's a good watch at 2am, while not taking it overly serious. It's decent. A solid 6 first watch, maybe an 8 after a couple viewings if you're open minded about what it actually is and what some were trying to make it be, and using favors instead of an adequate budget.

It's not the actors fault, but "the powers that be" that hurt this movie....

A micro budgeted but energetic thriller involving a scarred madman's plan to kill thousands by taking control of a jetliner from the ground and crashing it into a nuclear facility. Air Panic boasts good acting by Rodney Rowland and Alexander Enberg as his nemesis. The problem is the story is uncomfortably close to the 9/11 terrorist attacks making it highly unlikely to shw up on movie screens or even television.