Drop Zone

This movie was made at the same time as „Terminal velocity" with Charlie Sheen. Some people are complaining that one movie is a rip-off the other. To be honest I don't know who is right. I don't really care. Both movies are on the same level. Both are decent popcorn movies to kill some time. Nothing to write home about.

I have a soft spot for Gary Busey and I'm happy that he's the villain in "Drop zone" . Wesley Snipes as hero is nice , because he gives his rather generic hero some depth. You can obviously feel his pain.

The movie has some quite attractive photography and interesting music. It also gives us some insight at the skydivers community.

All in all it's not a bad way to spend a night. I give it 4/10.

i liked this movie,but i didn't love it.if you like watching people jump out of parachutes,you'll enjoy this one.there are a few good action sequences,including a involving bad guys kidnapping someone from a 747 at 38,000 feet and escaping with parachutes.Wesley Snipes is in this one as a U.S Marshal on their trail and he also has a personal stake in catching them.he has some decent fighting scenes,but he has been better.Malcolm-Jamal Warner also appears in a definite departure from his Cosby Days character of Theo Huxtable. Gary Busey is also in the movie,and is his usual reliable self.Michael Jeter is also good for some laughs.and of course,for eye candy,we have Yancy Butler,who is also a fairly good actress.at least i have always thought so.when you put everything together,the movie is pretty good though not great.still, i enjoyed it for the most part.my vote for "Drop Zone":7/10

<*sigh!*> Am I the only one this entire sad, weary world who notices that all these action films use the exact (and I mean exact!) same plot? Or am I just the only one who cares?

As action movies go, this one is OK, I guess. (But that's a little bit like saying "As cases of diarrhea go, this one was OK.") On the plus side, the aerial photography depicting the skydiving scenes was spectacular. There were the requisite number of explosions, chase scenes, and witty banter on the part of both the hero (Wesley Snipes) and the villain (Gary Busey), delivered archly in the expectation that one of their ripostes might become a popular catchphrase. And Yancy Butler is not too hard to look at, either.

However, if I pay $8 or $9$ to watch a film, I expect a little more than something made from a cookie cutter. Hollywood spends a great deal of time, effort and money putting together movies with extraordinary special effects, and they've become quite good at it. OK, so I'm impressed! Can't a few more of them work a little bit on story, characterization and dialogue? Is that really too much to ask?

As I watched this movie (and to be fair, I stumbled across it on television rather than paying an exorbitant ticket price at the theater; this probably made me more disposed to be tolerant) All I could think was that this is what Coleman Francis might have made had he had a bigger budget. Maybe he would have thrown in more coffee, cigarettes, booze and bad tempered swearing as well.

Drop Zone is pretty much your typical action movie - at least plot wise. Wesley Snipes turns in another passenger 57ish performance, not great but competent. and Gary Busey is always competent playing a guy you always want to die no matter how bad the plot gets.

The movie however, is worth watching more than other bland action movies because firstly, the skydiving scenes are shot wonderfully. The cinematographer and the stuntpeople (unless thats Snipes in a free fall, which i doubt) are the true stars of this one. I really enjoyed watching the skydiving sequences in this movie.

plot wise, the movie kinda plods along, not a whole lot of suspense but enough of a story to keep people entertained. I think its worth watching at least once, purely for the skydiving and action sequences.

Also, besides being a fairly competent actress - one I can actually believe skydives - Yancy Butler is really hot.

A '4' is twice what this turkey deserves (a '2') but it's appropriate for a number of reasons, and the primary reason is John Badham who does an excellent job when given something to work with (WarGames, Stakeout 1 & 2, Point of No Return, Bird on a Wire, et al). But since making this flick all his movie projects have been real duds. Maybe there's a connection?

Another two reasons are Yancy Butler and Claire Stansfield who provide the requisite eye candy. Another reason is Gary Busey who always knows how to play the stereotypical slime ball and do it at least half well. And the final reason is the skydiving which is exciting.

But that's where it ends. This is otherwise a movie much like Do or Die, made with preconceptions in mind ('hey let's make a movie with lots of skydiving sequences') and no worries if the story actually makes any sense. And don't you worry about it either because it doesn't. One could elaborate here but those elaborations would be spoilers. And hey - dramatic denouement it ain't but if you don't got that...

So why a '4' instead of a '2'? Why when the lead is being done by - Wesley Snipes? Why indeed? Precisely for the above reasons - and because as a whole it's exciting and not a total waste of time. In other words it isn't Gone with the Wind but maybe you don't feel like seeing Gone with the Wind tonight anyhow.