Eric Stevenson
I am surprised that the score is so low. Okay, I admit the movie is technically bad but at least we got to see a lot of familiar faces here. You rarely see that in a TV movie. This is the only time I've seen Regis Philban in a movie of any kind. It was hard to recognize Billy Crystal. Probably the coolest part of this movie was when it showed that explosion. A pity it was just that one scene. I know that this movie is really clichéd. It probably helps that "Airplane!" is my favorite comedy too. They mocked stuff like this perfectly.The version I saw was 92 minutes (on "Mystery Science Theater 3000"). This says it's only 89 minutes. Wow, that is the first time I have ever heard of a movie having a longer version being shown like that. It was certainly an interesting episode as it was their longest ever. Yeah, it's not worth watching on its own, but I think there have been many worse disaster films. I guess it probably did go on too long and there's still nothing unique about it. **
dakki78
The truth is that about 80% of the people who see (have seen) this movie won't like it. Why? Because it is not that original. But in saying that, I happen to belong to the 20% who really like it.I first saw it back in the eighties when I was about 8 or 9 years old. Now almost 20 years on I saw it again, and it really brought back nostalgic memories from when I was a kid.Some people say this movie has bad acting. I don't agree at all. While the story might not be the best ever, there is definitely nothing wrong with the acting. And the supersonic Maiden One plane looks absolutely stunning, even though it is 70's B-TV-movie material.I really recommend it to fans of disaster movies. It is hard to get a hold of these days, but if you have a chance to see it, do so.
rjs_bird
I am a fan of Bert Convy. Unfortunately, though, I have to say this, BUT, this film was a complete failure as were some of Bert's other films (BUT SOME WERE VERY GOOD). It was basically a good actor in Bert Convy, who, tragically didn't get some good parts. He plays a guy talking about his bimbo-girlfriend which didn't make sense. Many other well-known people are in this too including Regis Philbin, who plays an ANNOYING television reporter, Billy Crystal as a FEY STEWARD.., Peter Graves, and Lorne Greene. This was like a "rip-off" version of the later-to-become "AIRPLANE" in 1980 which was a success then. Some things in this movie really didn't make sense. Some good actors just didn't get a good movie.
Eric-62-2
The success of "Airport", "The Poseidon Adventure" and "The Towering Inferno" proved there was a big appetite for disaster movies so naturally television felt they had to get into the act by offering their own lower budget knockoffs of the Irwin Allen disaster movie formula. "SST: Disaster In The Sky" is the ultimate example of this, since not only do we see a gaggle of 70s TV stars (all of whom it should be noted had one thing in common at the time. Their once popular series had all been cancelled by then!) like Robert Reed, Martin Milner, Peter Graves etc. we even see two future 80s TV stars Billy Crystal and John DeLancie in smaller roles (I hope David Letterman some day springs a clip of this on Crystal the next time he appears on the show). That alone is enough to make you keep watching despite the bad dialogue (characters have to engage in a lot of implausible exposition at various points in order for certain things to make sense), cheap FX and silly plot resolutions at the climax. Heck, "SST" is even better than some of the worst theatrical disaster movies coming out by then like the dreadful "Concorde: Airport 1979" so if you loved the quality disaster movies of the time like "Airport" and "Towering Inferno" settle back and enjoy this intriguing TV knockoff of the genre.
AD
