Well, BAD!
In fact it's worse than bad, it's so bad that we actually need new words added to the language to adequately describe just how bad this film is. I've just watched it for the first time today and it's 1 hour 23 minutes of my life that i'm never getting back. Even by early nineties Die Hard genre movies, it's terrible. Which is saying a lot, given the standards of the time. Ugh!
Jeeves, pass me that bottle of brain bleach!
Not sure how you can say its an awful movie. It's very 90's formulatic. Good guy + terrorists in an enclosed environment + hot chick.
On the plus side for the movie, it had one of the 90's hottest hot chicks. If Liz Hurley had worn less clothing, it would have been stellar. As it sits, for a 90's action flick it rates a 7, as an overall flick it gets a 4.
Hardly awful.
Passenger 57 is one of my guilty pleasures. It's not a great movie, it's typical Hollywood formula. But it's in the tradition of Arnie's and Seagal's action movies, with one liners like 'always bet on black'. I have seen far worse movies.
shareIt's not a bad film however you want to argue that case unless you're Mormon or something which forbids witnessing violence.
share