IMDb > Mach 2 (2001) > IMDb user comments

IMDb user comments for
Mach 2 (2001) More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]
Index 13 comments in total 

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
why did i rent it!!!!, 18 May 2001
1/10
Author: omeryusaf from New York

I still am mad at myself as to why did i chose to rent this movie in the first place. Pathetic is written all over the movie and i still failed to see it......hope time will heal my wounds! If you are planning to watch this one i would suggest there are other better movies out there.

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
decent acting is all that carried this movie, 17 April 2007
5/10
Author: sslealos from United States

The acting by Brian Bosworth, Shannon Whirry, Ciff Robertson and Michael Dorn was pretty solid despite the script they had to work with.

Steve Latshaw wrote a very pedestrian script filled with weak clichés and one liners. The dialogue is only part of what brought this film down.

The direction was horrid. Fred Olen Ray, who had directed such classics as Vampire Vixens from Venus and Bikini Drive In, does a horrid job directing this movie. The cuts, the angles, the closeups - everything he did was pedestrian. The music, the sound editing, everything was bad.

If it wasn't for some solid acting from a few select cast members this wouldn't be worth the time. As is, it is a fair little action flick. Just don't expect much. At all ...

Was the above comment useful to you?

5 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
Something to avoid, 19 May 2003
1/10
Author: Michel Leonard Goldstein from Stillwater, Oklahoma

Very brief summary of what I thought about the movie: weak acting, very overused storyline full of things that make little sense, no research at all about airplanes and military procedures. If you have the guts to watch the movie, pay attention in some things like: there are no weapons in the F14s! Where do they get these missiles from? Why do the missiles explode in mid-air without hitting anything? How does the guy explode the car that was following him? How come the American fighters enter French airspace and the only people that see that were the people in the air control? France doesn't have any military force?

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
A trashy Concorde Airport rip-off, 25 August 2006
2/10
Author: Stillwater_girl from Stillwater, MN

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

I have been wanting to see this movie for years but when I finally watched it I was hugely disappointed. It is about terrorists that hijack a Concorde and a guy with little flight experience and the air force tries to shoot it down. Almost all of the shots that show the Concorde flying were stolen right from the Concorde Airport, which is by far a much better movie. The entire landing sequence was stolen right from the Concorde Airport. Also this movie is full of technical errors. The writers obviously didn't know anything about aviation when they wrote the screenplay. For starters, the cockpit in the movie was not the cockpit of a Concorde. The entire interior didn't look at all like that of the Concorde. Also, when the terrorists opened the door, there was no decompression and at twice the speed of sound it would have torn apart the plane. When the guy put his arm out the door to wave the white flag, the speed of the wind would have torn off his arm. Overall, Mach 2 was a very bad movie and if you want to see a good movie about Concordes in danger, just see The Concorde Airport or The Concorde Affair. I wouldn't recommend this movie to my worst enemy, I'm just not that cruel.

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
Hilarious as most TV productions, 30 July 2005
1/10
Author: coosy from coosy.net

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Where am I supposed to start with this movie? I seriously have no idea. Okay, so it's a typical US-made TV production and as it appears, all TV directors have made an agreement to produce such nonsense. Actors with average performance are put into what is supposed to be a Concorde supersonic aircraft and are taken hostage by Secret Service agents on behalf of a president and vice president who is supporting the war in the Balcan to have his economy prosper. Well, let's have a look at the aircraft. Okay, it's been a while that I have seen the insides of a Concorde, but what they are showing here has no resemblance whatsoever with the aircraft. Some scenes with F-14 Tomcats are taken from "Top Gun" and all in all, you can see that the budget ended before they could actually do some action scenes. Produced in 2001, this movie contains mainly very old scenes in the outdoor shots, so that they also were able to use car chases and a car crash from an old European spy movie. That one gave me a really good laugh. Before indulging too much into all the details here, let me just say that I was really surprised to find that at the Paris Airport they were using US-made ambulances. While that actually is possible, I was even more surprised to find that they also had US number plates on them.

Forgive me for being a bit sarcastic, but such movies really spoil the joy of watching TV. It's not necessarily in the plot or the actors, but it's the details.

The plot behind "Mach 2" in principle is good and the different threads could make for three different movies. A aircraft hijack, a presidential intrigue and an international spy connection. However, they gallantly left out anything that would have made this movie "intellectually challenging".

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
Horrible, 19 July 2007
2/10
Author: Asen Filipov from Belgium

This was one of the worst movies I have ever seen.The acting,the effects,the plot basically all of the movie was horrible.The F-14 who can't take down a simple Concorde,the stupid lines,the fact that fuel is leaking from the end of the plain where the baggage compartment is and so on,an so on.There was the sexy role of Shannon Whirry which brightens up the movie a little bid.There is also Brian Bosworth who is playing a Michael Dudikoff type of hero who is going to save everybody and he sucked as the hole movie if you ask me.But hey if there are movies like that young actors can find work.And it was a super commercial for the Concorde too.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
sexy,dumb,sad,and stupid., 10 April 2004
1/10
Author: ulisez03-1 (ulisez03@yahoo.com) from U.S.

i bought this movie thinking that the movie was going to be better than great but i was proven really wrong! first this movies is fake above all secondly it copies Airport 79, the Concorde far much better this piece of crap, and even actually it takes scenes from airport 79 and put it into the movie this people are so cheapo that they can't afford a piece of set for a day! worst movie ever! plus supposibly they took off from washington dc and it showed palm trees! well they filmed it in pacoima or burbank or something and they had porn star as the air traffic controller that i know because of the funny film commentary the only good thing about this movie. so please don't watch i only watch this movie with the movie commentary.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
Did I watch this one before ?, 23 June 2000
4/10
Author: snyder-4 from Nicosia

After watching this movie last night on tv. I asked myself if I haven't seen Mach 2 before. The fact is it was on the tv for the first time.If you are one action movie fan like me you have seen tons of stories like this. Neve Campbell look-a-like female is exciting but that's about it.

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
ok movie, with ok acting, and ok action, and ok story..., 5 April 2001
4/10
Author: dwpollar from Bothell, Washington

1st watched 4/4/2001 - 4 out of 10(Dir-Fred Olen Ray): ok movie, with ok acting, and ok action, and ok story. This type of movie has been done before with much more intensity with some of the same things done that are supposed to bring up the tension(Aka. Person flying the plane at the climatic end of movie has never flown before), corrupt politicians at the top (Aka. President Cliff Richardson) with gung-ho save-all action hero(Aka. Brian Bosworth), and weak love interest(Aka. Sharron Whirry). Lame attempt to recycle.

Was the above comment useful to you?

0 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Worth Watching, 7 April 2001
Author: Garridon

An unexpectedly good movie that could have benefited a lot from a larger budget. Miniatures are used in the shots of the Concorde, and it shows. It was rated R for violence, though it had less violence than most TV shows. Profanity throughout was unnecessary and could have been edited out. Brian Bosworth does an adequate job as the Air Force officer who gets called on when anything goes wrong. Michael Dorn shines in a non-Worf role that shows he can play someone else other than a Trek character. David Hedison is great as the U.S. Senator and is the only actor to look like he was actually walking on a a real plane. Shannon Whirry, who plays his political assistant, shows that she can handle an action role. Best of all are the scenes with the NSA agents.

Was the above comment useful to you?
Page 1 of 2:[1] [2] [Next]

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user comments
Your vote history