I'm sorry, but someone submitted a review for this movie from the cover description on the box and had not even seen the film?.
This is not so much the reviewers issue as that of IMDb, no one can perceive a movie from a cover description. For that review to be left up only cements what most people already perceive about IMDb and that is the star rating doesn't mean a thing because the reviews are not regulated.
The person who submitted the review should be removed as they are contributing NOTHING.
On with my review, this is my first, but rest assured I have at least seen the movie in question.
From the outset I had low expectations and I didn't have to wait long to be disappointed, the actors for the most part cannot act and as a result over act to compensate for their lack of skills.
The command that starts the saga was clearly given by someone with a different voice, but over radio and in flight I guess that can be overlooked, however the proceeding court case cannot be, I understand that for the movie to get off the ground (pardon the pun) one must somewhat breeze over certain things, but the way in which the court verdict is conducted is terrible, there's just no way in real life these pilots would have lost their wings in the manner depicted in this movie.
The actors in some scenes are wooden and for the most part seem like they are reading from the script and are so distracted by the reading they forget to act.
Trying to create memorable lines that would eventually become real life quotes is another annoying factor with this movie, such as ""it's like Toy's R us, you break it you buy it", and yet another quote "It's Dejavu all over again" forgive me but isn't that the very meaning of Dejavu?. I think about as much imagination went into the entire script as what went into those lines.....not much.
CGI is not brilliant, the night scenes in what looks like a Junkers JU-52 and later an Antonov AN-2 are at best mediocre. Moreover the CGI explosions and some of the pilot scenes are of 1960's quality, just horrible.
Most everything about this movie is shallow, including the jail scene with the Russian woman (Mariya Guzeeva) who is cooperating with the U.S, the close ups of her ass and eventually even a camel toe are not required and just digs a larger hole to bury this film in.
The movie is riddled with mistakes, for instance, a reference to the AN-2 while the engine is smoking the comment is made about a "cracked pan" these engines use a dry sump, regardless a engine without oil wont smoke, rather it will seize, the AK-47's referenced are actually Type 52's (Chinese copies). Bullets that hit 'glass' aircraft canopies are clearly incorrect as aircraft do not use glass for canopies, they use perspex.
I couldn't help but laugh when a fighter pilot (Mario Van Peebles) is using a SU-27's machine gun he shows a recoil affect even thought the guns are controlled remotely.
Bill Pullman was poorly cast in this movie, he seems to be constantly grinning or smirking, almost (to me at least) at the script itself. Rachael Leigh Cook needs to have her eyes fixed if she is to be taken seriously as they are a distraction to what seems to be an otherwise fairly good actress, Cam Gigandet needs to stop trying to be the next Brad Pitt. Mario Van Peebles has yet another notch in his belt, sadly none of his notches reflect good movies or acting, I fail to see the attraction.
In conclusion Red Sky is a misery to watch, both painful and rather smelly. It's one of those movies where you ask yourself 'should I turn it off now?' when your only five minutes into it.
Any reference to Top Gun should only be done so for benchmark reasons and nothing more, sadly this movie does no justice to the 'jet fighter' movie genre.
I only completed watching the movie to write this review, hopefully I can save others from the pain I endured. 2/10
This is not so much the reviewers issue as that of IMDb, no one can perceive a movie from a cover description. For that review to be left up only cements what most people already perceive about IMDb and that is the star rating doesn't mean a thing because the reviews are not regulated.
The person who submitted the review should be removed as they are contributing NOTHING.
On with my review, this is my first, but rest assured I have at least seen the movie in question.
From the outset I had low expectations and I didn't have to wait long to be disappointed, the actors for the most part cannot act and as a result over act to compensate for their lack of skills.
The command that starts the saga was clearly given by someone with a different voice, but over radio and in flight I guess that can be overlooked, however the proceeding court case cannot be, I understand that for the movie to get off the ground (pardon the pun) one must somewhat breeze over certain things, but the way in which the court verdict is conducted is terrible, there's just no way in real life these pilots would have lost their wings in the manner depicted in this movie.
The actors in some scenes are wooden and for the most part seem like they are reading from the script and are so distracted by the reading they forget to act.
Trying to create memorable lines that would eventually become real life quotes is another annoying factor with this movie, such as ""it's like Toy's R us, you break it you buy it", and yet another quote "It's Dejavu all over again" forgive me but isn't that the very meaning of Dejavu?. I think about as much imagination went into the entire script as what went into those lines.....not much.
CGI is not brilliant, the night scenes in what looks like a Junkers JU-52 and later an Antonov AN-2 are at best mediocre. Moreover the CGI explosions and some of the pilot scenes are of 1960's quality, just horrible.
Most everything about this movie is shallow, including the jail scene with the Russian woman (Mariya Guzeeva) who is cooperating with the U.S, the close ups of her ass and eventually even a camel toe are not required and just digs a larger hole to bury this film in.
The movie is riddled with mistakes, for instance, a reference to the AN-2 while the engine is smoking the comment is made about a "cracked pan" these engines use a dry sump, regardless a engine without oil wont smoke, rather it will seize, the AK-47's referenced are actually Type 52's (Chinese copies). Bullets that hit 'glass' aircraft canopies are clearly incorrect as aircraft do not use glass for canopies, they use perspex.
I couldn't help but laugh when a fighter pilot (Mario Van Peebles) is using a SU-27's machine gun he shows a recoil affect even thought the guns are controlled remotely.
Bill Pullman was poorly cast in this movie, he seems to be constantly grinning or smirking, almost (to me at least) at the script itself. Rachael Leigh Cook needs to have her eyes fixed if she is to be taken seriously as they are a distraction to what seems to be an otherwise fairly good actress, Cam Gigandet needs to stop trying to be the next Brad Pitt. Mario Van Peebles has yet another notch in his belt, sadly none of his notches reflect good movies or acting, I fail to see the attraction.
In conclusion Red Sky is a misery to watch, both painful and rather smelly. It's one of those movies where you ask yourself 'should I turn it off now?' when your only five minutes into it.
Any reference to Top Gun should only be done so for benchmark reasons and nothing more, sadly this movie does no justice to the 'jet fighter' movie genre.
I only completed watching the movie to write this review, hopefully I can save others from the pain I endured. 2/10