Hyper Sonic

I normally wouldn't waste my time writing comments on drivel like this but it just makes one wonder; who watches a movie like this and gives it a *10*? It truly boggles the mind when one sees that out of 60-some voters, 14 of them voted this carcass a 10 out of 10! It was a B-movie. I can understand where some might consider it to have B-movie charm. But even at that; it might rate a 6 or a 7 at most. Does this movie REALLY, in ANYONE'S view, deserve to be rated alongside the greatest movies of all time? Does even someone who enjoyed the campy eye-candy (which was there in a couple of scenes) consider this to be deserving of being as good as film-making gets?

So I'm ranting. I can only say that such a rant is the BEST commentary this film ever deserves. If anyone wants to know how this film rates; then someone utterly aghast over more than 1 out of every 5 people rating this film a *10/10* speaks volumes about it's quality (or utter lack thereof).

Unfortunately this movie commits the cardinal sin of bad, low-budget movies - it's just really boring. It's not even fun to laugh at how bad it is because nothing really happens. I've watched some other of Phillip J. Roth's terrible, low-budget movies and usually they're so over the top and ridiculous that they're fun even though they're bad. This is definitely not a so bad it's good movie.

The only saving grace and reason to watch this movie Adam Baldwin looking great in his suit and doing the best acting he can with the one dimensional writing for his character, which is why I'm giving it 2 stars instead of 1.

While an interesting movie, it really seemed unfinished. The sound quality and the editing are of the worst I've ever seen in a professional movie. Sometimes during scene changes the original sound is retained during the cuts so it changes volume as the scene changes. There's one really bad noticeable example of this when Chris (Adam Baldwin) is making an announcement and the first part of the scene shows him from the left side, then it cuts to a close up of his face. The audio is extremely different between the two cuts, yet the scene is supposed to be continuous.

Another strange thing about the editing is when they'd "follow" Chris around during the TV broadcasts, but as he would be moving forward, the cuts would be seemly random, from his front, left side, right side, and back. It's hard to explain, but when you watch a person moving forward, the cuts need to progress as if he's moving forward. This movie had him jumping all over the place, it actually gave me a headache.

Other times, really noticeable overdubbing takes place where the voice doesn't even match the movements of the actors mouth. The air-show audience reminded me of an infomercial audience; their energy didn't match what is going on at that time, and their audio cuts in and out abruptly with them, when sometimes the audience audio should have continued into the next scene, fading out over time.

Also, when the two major disasters took place in the air, the audio didn't mirror the "urgency" of the visual. While a disastrous effect is taking place visual, the sound did not raise volume or create urgency -- it took a few moments to realize something bad was happening, because the sound did not give much audio clue to it. I think this alone caused some of the great emotion that could have been attained in this movie to fall completely flat.

And what was with that trailer-trash couple sitting on their couch in the living room that gets cut to during the movie????? My humble opinion is that if you're going to cut to random at-home TV people, at least use a lot of different people so we don't start to think this single at-home TV family is part of the plot.

Honestly, I don't think I've ever seen a movie with such choppy, sloppy, editing, or such bad sound in my entire life. I was shocked as I watched it that a movie could actually be released when it seems it's not even ready.

I liked the story and I liked the actors. It's strange these days to see a movie where the tech is screwed up because normally that's the flawless parts of the movie and it's usually the writing or acting that's bad.

This movie could have been 10 times better if it had better sound or editing! Why didn't the producer fire the editors? That's what I want to know!

The plot, special effects, and any similarity to current day USAF capabilities & operations was so far off-base that I didn't even notice the poor editing job that they previous reviewer mentioned.

I only suffered through the first half-hour of the movie before I had to put myself out of my misery & turn off the TV.

Clearly this was a low-budget movie, and not only did the USAF/DOD run away from any agreement to provide a liaison for basic technical accuracy, but the producer apparently didn't bother to have ANY adviser for military 'culture' or aviation matters.

They couldn't even track down some surplus fighter pilot helmets & oxygen mask assemblies -- what they depicted as O2 masks were actually some modified SCUBA diver breathing regulators!

A perfectly preposterous plot taking place in the "near future" I suppose. It's based on the idea of an "Around the World" hypersonic(what's the difference between Hypersonic and supersonic?) plane race... But that's not all... The race is, of course, being broadcast AND the "network" want's good ratings! Death Race 2020? I love watching the "late movie" on terrestrial broadcasts... It reminds me of when I was a kid. I would love to know who picks these movies. None the less, this is the only way I would see real, contemporary "Cormanesque" B-Movies. This movie is exactly what I crave when tuning in to late Sunday night broadcast television... Totally goofy but, just like a country music song, I have to see what happens in the end.