6 December 2010. A year before the more quirky comedy drama PUSHING TIN (1999) came out starring John Cusack and Billy Bob Thorton, the more mainstream disaster thriller GROUND CONTROL was released starring television's 24 Keifer Sutherland with co-starring roles for 1986's Kelly McGillis (TOP GUN, 1986) and Kristy Swanson (FERRIS BUELLER'S DAY OFF). GROUND CONTROL is relatively traditional, predictable, interestingly in a way less sensationalized, dramatized than PUSHING TIN and less relational and more focused fascinating active air control dynamics which in some ways makes this more watchable than average dramatic thrillers. **Added January 9, 2012 - With a decent storyline that keeps building, this is good entertainment. What makes this dramatic thriller on solid ground is its use of stereotypes but in a way that never overextends their use, the irritated man's eventual response to the babies, the way the ending wasn't as pat as most dramatic endings are with its more realistic and, literally, twists and turns, and even the non-verbal exchanges at the end make for a believable and satisfying landing.**
Add a Review
-
tabuno18 January 2019
-
As an aviation enthusiast, I was interested in this movie, but technical errors and some flaws in the plot made the movie fall short of being great.
One scene starts off with a 747 flying through clouds. As this flight evolves into a state of emergency, we later find out that the plane was really a 737. Anyone who's been at an airport knows the difference between the two.
From the opening scene Kiefer Sutherland's character alludes to the home expansion project he's working on, presumably because of a new kid on the way. We never see the wife or this new kid, or what effect the stress an air traffic controller goes through has on a family. Including scenes with the wife and kid could have added something to the movie.
Ever since the end of Happy Days, we do not see much of Henry Winkler on TV or on the screen, but he effectively plays the role of a mechanic, frustrated by budget constraints and using the "I told you so" attitude when a problem arises. Kelly McGillis is also a performer seen less often these days, but does well as the savvy and assertive airport administrator.
The performers did their homework when it came to radio protocol and terminology. So often in the past, this is done so poorly. Hollywood may have finally caught on to this.
Another problem I had is that the movie appeared to have taken some of its content from the United Airlines DC-10 crash landing in Sioux City in 1989. They then took this incident and tweaked it a little to fit the story better. If the electrical components are fried and hydraulics are disabled, why was the distressed plane able to extend its landing gear? If only UAL flight 289 could have been so lucky ten years ago!
I think that it's a good movie, but not a great one... 6/10. -
rmax30482320 December 2015A handful of Air Traffic Controllers in Phoenix manage a crowded sky and nurse an injured airliner back to earth. Kiefer Sutherland is an ace at the job, but he quit after one of his airplanes crashed. Now he's called back to help on a night full of tension.
And there IS a lot of tension after the introductory period that walks us through the character and their equipment. It's one of those movies in which, if anything can go wrong, it goes wrong. The equipment blows out, a goose flies into the radar fan, conflicts between the ATCs emerge, and so forth. Brief spurts of Morse code add to the mystery behind all that technology, but only two letters are heard in Morse: "s" and "u".
Actually it's a vast improvement over most airplane-in-jeopardy movies. First of all, we don't have a single airliner filled with diverse passengers whose back stories must be explored seriatim. Second, and most important, the ATC people are on the ground, where all human beings belong. Man was not meant to fly. I can't speak for women and children. In fact, all means of mass transport are suspect. I thought the driver on my last Greyhound bus looked a little odd.
The narrative comes through neatly and cleanly. It begins in an exploratory mode and ends in crisis and triumph, accompanied by generic music. The performances are all decent, with perhaps the best acting laid on by Robert Sean Leonard as Cruise, the competent and low-keyed controller who becomes rattled by too much stress. Sutherland's role is the flashier of the two. Also notable in minor roles are Alex Wexo as a pilot and especially Drew Snyder as the avuncular pilot of a stricken airliner. It would be so easy to overact, but Snyder does a fine job. Knowing his airplane and its passengers are doomed, he languidly tells Phoenix, "Keep us away from a city." But in any case it's really an ensemble movie.
The director does not indulge himself in razzle dazzle techniques. The film was shot on stilts, not by a hand-held camera wobbled around by a spazz. Even during the scenes of second-by-second action, the images remain steady. -
tankcoates1 March 2003i was bought this film as a gift and was not expecting much from it. After 10 minutes of the film i was hooked. The story line is a little predictable however, its done very well. Keifer Sutherland is at his best and delivers a great performance. It just goes to show that just because a film is not packed with special FX and CGI doesn't mean its not a top notch film.
-
davejp8 March 2003Having just become a fan of "24" I bought this as a cheap DVD because of Kiefer Sutherland. Although the movie isn't an all time great it is certainly worth a watch. It won't tax you mentally but it isn't bad for a quiet night in with a beer and a pizza. Rating 7/10.
-
je-remy5 August 2012This movie has glaring continuity errors. Like Sutherland tapping on a laptop which vacillates between being on and off.
And its clichés - the ex-air traffic controller involved in a previous disaster who's brought back to save the day. Groan. It really didn't need worn out clichés which only made me think "Airplane!". A regular guy in the job would have sufficed. And moments like the instant brewing romance lacked subtlety too.
Set those flaws aside though and this is a good movie. Most of the acting is convincing. And even though the plot is simple it kept my interest and had me rooting for them till the end.
Despite its flaws it drew me in. A simple story and for the most part, well told. Well worth watching. -
mark-13068 February 2007I'm currently in process to become an air traffic controller, so I'm at the point where I devour anything relating to ATC. I don't need to write anything else about the inaccuracies in the movie, as a couple of former ATC's have done that. The phraseology, the scopes, the sets - they're pretty far from the real thing.
What I'd like to do, however, is talk about what I found *right* about the movie. There are three pretty big things that I felt get across the overall theme of ATC: 1) When Kristy Swanson's character starts screwing up after first plugging in, Kiefer's character plugs in with her. After saving her butt, he goes into a discussion of how to look at the scope. In your mind, you need to turn this 2D display into a 3D representation. Then, you use the information you have about each aircraft - its speed, altitude, and direction - to see and resolve conflicts ahead of time.
I felt that was a pretty accurate description of what's going through a controller's mind when he's looking at the scope.
2) The bit by the young "hotshot" controller, where he talks about how controllers view airplanes, is pretty spot on. You can't view them as individual airplanes full of hundreds of people - you need to detach yourself from that completely, or otherwise you'll go crazy with the pressure. I've talked with many controllers, and they each use different methods. Some picture empty airplanes in their mind, some just see "targets", some view them as math problems to solved, as is the case in the movie.
3) The constant battle of safety vs. budget. If you look at today's FAA, they have slashed controller pay, forced out the more experienced higher-paid controllers, blown billions on failed technology upgrade projects, and generally made a mess of things. The facility where I'm being assigned to has constant equipment failures, mainly because the equipment in question is over 30 years old. Miami Center's Oceanic sector - which covers the entire strip of ocean from Miami to the Dominican Republic - has frequent radar outages which take days to fix.
And as traffic increases more and more every year, there are fewer controllers to guide them. Everyone will tell you that ATC is a stressful job, and that you need to unplug every time knowing you had 100% accuracy. Now imagine forcing someone to work 10 hours a day, 6 days a week under that pressure. That's the reality at the world's busiest facilities - like Atlanta Center - which are understaffed. Take a look at what happened with that fatal ComAir crash in Kentucky. The tower was short staffed, so they only had 1 controller on duty instead of the required two. 50 people died as a result.
And through every error, the FAA always says: "Safety was never compromised". For that reason, I found the conflicts between the working controllers and the management to be pretty realistic. The controllers want things to run safely, whereas the management wants to cut corners and boost their own careers.
Think about that the next time you fly. -
chrismulkeyisgod15 January 2011After watching the final season of Lost I purchased Ground Control for 1/2 Lb. (this accounts for inflation, I think) from a small, local England shop. I was pleasantly surprised at how entertained I felt--keep in mind that most things do not entertain me anymore; I feel very grim most of the time. But surprisingly, despite myself not being an aviation buff of any kind I was able to follow along with most of the jargon which is normally an impediment with me (for example, if the movie is about a stock market I have a hard time following the lingo, especially if the film is American) But it all seemed very realistic to me and my husband. Who watched it with me. It makes me wonder about all the "close calls" that go by every day underneath our nose. Usually when I fly; which is pretty regularly, now; I don't pay any mind to all of the magic that goes on behind the scenes of the flight. Now I will pay attention. This is a great movie, especially if you love Keither Sutherland (and both me and my husband DO). I give this movie 8/10 stars--it could have used a more romantic subplot involving a woman and Keither Sutherland, and I saw the ending coming a mile away WITH or WITHOUT the help of ATC (lol!)
-
Bri2229 April 1999"Ground Control" tells the story of Jack Harris, a former air-traffic controller who quit after a "situation" with a flight he was handling. Jack is pressed into service as an ATC again during a staffing crisis at the control center. Needless to say, Jack has brief "flashbacks" at work. Also needless to say, he steps in to "save the day" during an extraordinary problem at the control center. Predictable? Heavens, yes. Oddly enjoyable? Yeah, sure...keep your expectations low, though...
-
gibsonb7420 February 2020Who cares about technical inaccuracies of radio jargon or airplane details. The majority of watchers do not know and dont care. To me the only thing that is a little bit unbelievable is how the airport could have "too many planes coming in." Dont they have control of that? Anyway, it's a good show with a good outcome, even if somewhat predictable.
-
kdryan28 February 2004If any airport in the US were this badly maintained, it would be shut down before you could say 'Thrust Reverser'. The number of thing that go wrong here and the jury-rigged way this tower is put together is almost comical.
Having said that, Keifer's acting is rock solid as always. Kelly McGillis is not so bad, and Buffy takes an unusual turn as a nerd. Not anything I would go out of my way to see, but not bad if you come across it on TV either...
Note: The steering by way of using the thrust on the engines was a real life incident. Unfortunately, the results were not quite so good.
BTW, why didn't Fonzie just bang his fist on the computers to fix them? Ayyyy!!! -
sabad12 April 2005General Synopsis of the movie is that after a crash, a top rated Air traffic controller leaves the business. Then 5 years later is brought back for one night due to the facility being understaffed and too many planes coming in....
This movie actually should have been pegged as a drama instead of action/adventure...but be that as it may, it was rather good. One could go on and on about how it isn't realistic, but in truth...how many movies really are?
The title role of Jack Harris is played by Kiefer Sutherland. This is a key factor to the movies success. His uncanny ability to visibly portray emotions is essential to the role. As usual, he brings the "I'll do anything to make me a human on film" trademark with him. (Anyone for getting sick in the bathroom sink?) This trademark is what has endeared him over the years to so many fans and critics alike.
Also Staring were Robert Sean Leonard as the cocky hotshot air traffic controller; Bruce McGill as the overworked supervisor who pleads with Jack to come back, even if just for one night; Kelly McGillis as the politically minded administrator (she ends up being a good guy in the end); Kristy Swanson as the "newbie" air traffic controller fresh out of the academy; and our beloved Henry Winkler as the facility mechanic who keeps everything running, even though the equipment is old and some without replacement.
Although the movie is meant to "entertain", the whole crux of the movie is to tell a story about being an Air Traffic Controller and the absolute stress behind that job. This is something they did quite well.
All in all, it was a rather good film. It will hold interest up until the end and has a very climatic, edge of your seat, finish.
Who will like this movie? 1. Probably air traffic controllers (even though it might not be completely factual) 2. People who like a good human interest story 3. The over 40 crowd. 4. Kiefer fans
Who will not like this movie? Those whose mentalities require constant barrages of special effects, action, cussing, sex, violence and/or blood pass on this one, it won't fill your needs.
Ending notes: If you fall into the "who will like this movie" group definitely give it a try. I think you will be pleasantly surprised. -
Jack Harris (Kiefer Sutherland) is an air traffic controller in Chicago, one of the best of the crew. His boss (Bruce McGill) values him highly. But, one tragic day, a plane goes down shortly after takeoff, killing over 150 passengers. Although it was NOT his fault, Jack goes off the deep end. In time, we learn he started drinking, went to re-hab and currently holds a job as a programmer for traffic control software. Flash forwarding a few years, the Chicago crew has a new boss, Susan (Kelly McGillis) who is out to prove something, even when it puts her underlings at risk. The operations manager (Henry Winkler) tries to tell her she is cutting corners with equipment while the comptroller (Michael Gross) is constantly annoying everyone. New AT controller Julie (Kristy Swanson) appears to be more timid than she should be. Things again comes to a crisis at the center, as Susan accepts more planes from a shut-down airport and some staff is off for the holidays. In desperation, the manager reaches out to Jack to "come back" to the station and help out NOW. Once there, will Mr. Harris have the skills and serenity to avoid another catastrophe? Will he be a hero or another victim? This by- the-book thriller has its good points, surely. The cast is the greatest asset, as the flat script is improved with their readings. Gross is a snarly hoot, as far from his understanding father in Families Ties as one can get. There is not much in the way of sets or costumes, as most action takes place inside the air traffic hub. Perhaps the direction deserves more than faint praise, for even with its formulaic premise, the movie does hold a viewer's interest. Therefore, if you like the cast members or disaster-themed films, this one will do for you.
-
I'm a retired air traffic controller and simply put, I was amazed that this garbage was released. Another IMDB commenter said that, "[t]he performers did their homework when it came to radio protocol and terminology." Well, they may well have done their homework, but none of the well-studied proper phraseology came out of their mouths. ("...maintain flight level six zero zero zero?" Oh please...) What's more, the instructions given to the aircraft either made no sense or were so vague as to be dangerous. And other parts (telling the pilot to spin twice: "gimme $4,000 worth"--a VERY old ATC joke) were nothing more than apocryphal.
In the past 20 minutes I've written and deleted a dozen examples illustrating why this is such a bad movie, and THAT exercise appears to have been cathartic enough that I now feel that I can just go to bed. But allow me this one indulgence: having spent 25 years in this field (no, not as a "sim" controller... the airplanes I worked had real mass), this movie actually angered me. What in the world is the point of replacing believable control instructions with the trash that appeared in this film? This is a movie built around air traffic control, for heaven's sake. Why give such short shrift to the lifeblood--the very structure of that undertaking? Millions of folks who would be interested in this subject matter will LISTEN to what's being said and reject it as absurd. Somebody hired an ATC consultant for this film. Why would they disregard his advice? Bottom line: there is no excuse for the intellectually lazy approach this film took to ATC. It wouldn't have cost any more to do it right, and the dialog would have been at least as poignant. What's more, they wouldn't have alienated those of us who love this stuff. From my standpoint, NONE of this movie was "right on."
P.S. I had a hard time sitting still for this film, so I'm sure I must have missed it, but could somebody explain why it is called "Ground Control?" Ground Control is the position in a tower that works airplanes on the surface of the airport. There is nothing in a Center that has anything to do with Ground Control. While I did see tower scenes in this movie, I don't recall Ground Control having a big part to play. Somebody PLEASE tell me that this wasn't called "Ground Control" because the writers thought that that was the proper name for air traffic control in general. Because if THAT was why they did it, then NOBODY did their homework... -
astrobob217 February 2004As an aviation buff I was really excited to see this movie. Although there were a few inaccuracies (such as planes changing models and such), it really wasnt a bad film. I could really identify with the characters and you could really care or hate them. Overall I'd give this movie an 8/10.
PS: To all the people who posted about the "real" crash footage....it was from Delta Flight 191 and it was an L1011 that crashed at Dallas in 85. United 232 was a DC-10 and it crashed in Sioux City Iowa in 1989. -
One has to wonder why the likes of Kiefer Sutherland, Kelly McGillis, Kristy Swanson and Henry Winkler would lend their talents to a routine drama like this. While not exactly at the peak of their game – Sutherland was still in a lull before "24" reinvigorated his career; McGillis, Swanson and Winkler were well past the heyday years of "Top Gun", "Buffy" and "Happy Days" respectively – they're collectively too good to be wasted on such uninspired fare. This drama set in the world of air traffic control is routine in every department. Watching it will not offend your sensibilities in any way, shape or form . but neither will it have you raving to all your friends what an undiscovered masterpiece you've just unearthed.
Jack Harris (Kiefer Sutherland) used to be an ace air traffic controller, until one night in Chicago he listened helplessly as a flight in his sector crashed, killing all 174 passengers and crew. Although Harris was blameless, the incident left him deeply scarred. Five years later he makes a living in Phoenix, designing computer software and gradually recovering from the break-up of his relationship and battle with alcoholism. Harris's old air traffic buddy TC Bryant (Bruce McGill) – who has also moved down to Phoenix - approaches him one New Year, asking Harris to help out at the air traffic control centre during a staff shortage. Harris is reluctant but he eventually agrees. As it happens, Phoenix is excessively busy with aircraft that night as a storm has diverted more than fifty extra flights their way. Other controllers trying to land the planes safely that night include cocksure Cruise (Robert Sean Leonard) and first-night-on-the-job rookie Julie Albrecht (Kristy Swanson). As the pressure builds, Harris finds himself struggling to remain focused and he keeps experiencing flashbacks to that fateful night in Chicago. Then the unthinkable happens – an aircraft puts in a distress call. They've lost all power and hydraulics, they can't even turn the plane, they're low on fuel and they're carrying over 130 passengers. Harris thinks he knows a way to bring the plane in safely . but will his nerves hold?
Ground Control is clichéd stuff. Every character is lifted from stock – if you have your tick boxes ready, there's the flawed hero (Sutherland) - check; the cocky rival (Leonard) - check; the rookie (Swanson) - check; the dryly humorous technical boffin (Winkler) - check; the pig-headed boss (McGillis) – check; and the inspirational father figure who draws everyone together in a crisis (McGill) – check! Much of the dialogue is incomprehensible air traffic lingo ("turn right on a 2-9er-2 heading and reduce air speed by 15 knots"), and some scenes become tedious due to the sheer weight of technical babble. However the film is not all that badly done. The actors at least try quite hard in their cardboard roles, and the final twenty minutes or so, during which they battle to bring in the stricken plane, has an element of excitement. This is an unexceptional, workmanlike drama – easy viewing for those with an hour and a half to spare. -
Mediocre, By the Numbers (there are a lot of numbers, too many to count, in this one), Air Traffic Control Drama. One gets the Idea that this was made to "Spit" in the Face of President Ronald Reagan (there's even a poster on the wall) but by the Time it was made, Reagan was in the Nursing Home, so probably didn't have a Clue.
Reagan started the "Demonization" of Unions with His Firing of the ATC who went on Strike. The Rest is History (now mostly unspoken in Conservative circles) because these were Real People with Real High Tech, High Stress, Jobs and were Dedicated Patriots who were just Collective Bargaining for Better Pay and Benefits.
This Movie makes it Clear that these Folks should not have been Fired or "Demonized", but Rewarded for Their Skill and Dedication. It's a Cheaply Made Movie that wasn't Released Theatrically in the USA (only in Italy).
Kiefer Sutherland leads a Good Cast. There is some Bad Acting Silliness (Henry Winkler) and some Awful Low-Budget Sets, and the Script is one Cliché after another. But if this Type of Thing is to Your Liking, it can be an Entertaining Time Passer with Low Expectations, but don't Expect Many Surprises. -
shortz7 January 2007So bad it was fun! I've not watched a movie in a long time that had me shouting at the screen like this one. I've been an air traffic control engineer for 29 years, so I may know a little bit about this stuff. Not one piece of equipment or system was accurately portrayed in this movie. They say one thing has failed and then Fonzie goes out and fixes something quite different. If they did hire an ATC consultant I can only guess they got a retired cleaner who had heard some ATC talk and glimpsed the equipment many years ago. Then they ignored what their "expert" told them!!
Everything about this movie was wrong, ATC, people, aeroplanes and equipment. Good fun to watch if you have any knowledge of the subject at all so you can play spot the mistake. Spotting the accurate bit would be much more of a challenge. If you don't know anything about ATC rest assured in real life its not like this at all. -
I loved this movie. The story was exciting. The characters were wonderful. The acting was great. I have seen it more than once and keeps me interested and excited every time. I can really empathize with air traffic controllers after watching "Ground Control". I wish they would do a sequel.
-
CQKRIS7 December 2005Question. How do you make a film when you have no money?
Answer. Well whatyou do is, hire a studio, get some old computers, a couple of maps of America and you get the Sutherland in and plaster his name and picture all over the front cover. What else you do is record some footage of aeroplanes off the TV and use this as if it was your own.
This pretty much sums up this film.
And yes it is true - the Sutherland is living on his reputation. His performance here isn't even worth commenting on, its that bad. His performance here actually reminded me of Dean Stockwell in The Langoliers, thats how bad his acting is. Rather than being a film about the pressures of air traffic controllers, it is more of a story of the Sutherland's triumphant return to the air traffic control desk.
Excited? Well wait to you see Fonsy ex happy days in this one. This is worth watching - not because its good but because it is hilarious how bad his acting is. Its hilarious.
Watch it just for this. -
'Ground Control' is probably the biggest surprise I've ever encountered since I became a movie fan years ago. It's incredibly well done, with great performances all around, and is seriously the best independent action film I've ever seen, if that could be imagined. The climax is truly riveting, aided by tight editing and strong direction. The real surprise with this movie is that almost all of it takes place in a single set, a fact that the director/editor managed to cover up. It seems that real care was poured into 'Ground Control', a rare feat these days with the countless B action flicks being pumped out each month, and it shows. It's sad that the movie didn't enjoy even a short theatrical run, as it more than deserves it, especially after the similar, and far inferior, 'Pushing Tin' making it into theaters a year later.
It's as if the producers managed to find the only actors that actually have talent and haven't yet made it big time, and casted them in this movie. Kiefer Sutherland (The Lost Boys) is great in the main role, and is given strong support from Kelly McGillis (Top Gun, Witness- and the only real high profile actor in the film), Kristy Swanson (The Chase) and Robert Sean Leonard (Dead Poets Society)
The production values are unexpectantly high, especially for a movie on a budget like this one. Very good direction, commendable editing, and a superb script. The dialog is crisp and realistic, with a few really good one-liners, something I've never seen in a low budget action movie. The musical score is original and also very good, comparable to that of many large studio productions.
Despite a few flaws already pointed out in previous postings, I absolutely loved this movie, and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in seeing a refreshing break from the norm.
9/10 -
Kenner-21 September 1999simply put -- awful!! I am an Air Traffic Controller and, although I tried to overlook the many terrible inaccuracies with regard to my profession, this movie is still putrid, predictable and poor.
-
jsl912 October 2005I wish just once film makers would stay consistent with their aircraft (it's not that hard, and very noticeable) a 747 was crashing at the beginning, but with L1011 wreckage. Then the 747 "Transgolf" turns into a 737 on the outside and a 727 on the inside, lovely. Plus, everything just goes wrong doesn't it. The "Transgolf" plane incident seems remarkably familiar to the United plane that crash-landed in Cedar Rapids, IA a few years back too.
All in all it's somewhat fun to watch but you have to realize that it's so obviously stupid and these seemingly minor inconsistencies bring down the quality of the film so much. -
As a real life instrument pilot and simulated air traffic controller, I can say this film presents the most realistic view of the trials and tribulations of a Center Controller I've ever seen. Sure they jazz up the sets a little, but the jargon, problems and other ATC details are right on.