User Reviews (1,038)

  • agent1719 August 2006
    Don't get high on the hype.
    A lot of people on IMDb have given Snakes on a Plane a 10/10 rating and left comments like "omg this is best movie ever lol." Unfortunately, most of these people had come to this conclusion before seeing the movie, and are still high on the Internet hype that built the movie up to be something it's not.

    I guess there's no real point to writing a review of Snakes On A Plane. With a title like that, you've already made up your mind about if you want to see it. But keep this in mind...

    Snakes On A Plane isn't a comedy movie. It isn't a horribly cheesy or bad (intentionally or not) movie, either, or one that's "so bad it's good," which is a phrase that gets thrown around a lot in SOAP discussions. Also, the movie's not all about Samuel L. Jackson being a badass or swearing a lot, although it happens. Snakes On A Plane is a entertaining mid-grade thriller movie that pretty much delivers what you'd expect from a Hollywood movie about snakes on an airplane. No more, no less.

    Don't see this movie if you're expecting to constantly laugh at Samuel L. Jackson showing off how cool he is. There are plenty of moments where Sam kicks ass and gives some great one-liners and does amusing things, but he is offscreen just as often as he is on it.

    Snakes On A Plane isn't the best movie of the year. It's not the funniest movie of the year or the scariest, but it is a good movie if you're looking for mindless fun involving a lot of snakes on an airplane, some gratuitous gore and nudity, and a few great Samuel L. Jackson moments, check it out.
  • dr_foreman20 August 2006
    The Internet spawned a monster...
    I'm confident that "Snakes on a Plane" will prove once and for all that Internet culture and mainstream culture are not one and the same.

    Because, my friends, the Internet will tell you that SOAP (as those in the know call it) is a classic film - the best "bad movie" ever made. But I think any more sensible member of the general public will tell you that SOAP is nothing more than a mildly competent action movie. It's not hysterically funny. It's not scary. It's occasionally exciting. And it sure ain't a "10" on the IMDb scale.

    Don't misunderstand me; I had fun watching the movie. I was even willing to be generous, until I saw the outrageously high rating on this site and all the strangely gushing reviews. Frankly, I'm a bit astonished. Why heap such praise on this particular film? If you love camp, over-the-top action movies, then why not worship a camp action film that's actually good? ("Wrath of Khan" springs to mind - also "Batman.")

    The truth is that parts of SOAP are pretty lame. Samuel L. Jackson is good, but his role is weirdly small. And, aside from his one power catchphrase, most of his dialog is banal and dull. The rest of the actors aren't even worth commenting on, since they're stuck with stock and boring "funny" characters.

    Speaking of dull, how many different ways can snakes really kill someone? They hiss...they lunge...they bite...over and over and over again. It's not particularly cinematic. And most of them are fake CGI anyway, so they're not even remotely frightening.

    Face it, the only reason to see this is because it's camp and bad. It's part of the whole culture of worshiping lame junk that's prevalent right now. It's hip to like terrible garage bands and lame movies because people are either too impatient, or too unsophisticated, to take the time to absorb entertainment that's actually artistic. So we watch and listen to junk, and imagine that we're superior to it, and that makes us feel good. Apparently.

    Is there anything wrong with liking junk? Not really - I review and praise junk on this site all the time. But putting junk on a pedestal? That's very, very wrong.

    Sermon over.
  • Pete Simone (ps42)16 August 2006
    Oh, yes, Snakes on a Plane does indeed rock.
    Warning: Spoilers
    A small part of me has died today. I realized something when I exited the theater, fresh from the prescreening of Snakes on a Plane (SoaP) at the cinema at which I work, that I may never again see another film that rocks this hard. If you are looking for a deep introspective look at the horrors of airborne terrorism and reptilian exploitation, look somewhere else, and don't complain about it. If you are like me, and I would assume you are since you are reading my review, and are looking for a solid hour and a half of ass-kickery, then congratulations. You just hit the jackpot with SoaP. I can honestly say that the film lived up to my every expectation. I was so pumped by the end of the movie that I threw my shoes across the (empty) theater in a fit of ecstasy. I kid you not.

    Boiled down to its very essence, SoaP is the pretty much the essence of all that is manly. Think of it like an anti-chick flick. If you enjoy any of the following, then this movie is for you: gruesome deaths, breasts, cheesy physical humor, Samuel L. Jackson, or venomous reptiles. If not, then you clearly have a vagina, but may still manage to enjoy SoaP.

    Plot is pretty thin, something generic about a kid (Nathan Phillips) who witnessed a mob murder and has to be transported to L.A. to testify in court, but I doubt anyone will mind. We know the basic story. There is a plane in the air that has both venomous snakes and Samuel L. Jackson on board. Samuel L. Jackson defeat snakes in a number of thoroughly awesome ways, which I will not reveal as to not diminish their awesomeness, and simultaneously deals with whiny, stereotypical frightened passengers. Trust me though, seeing the snakes rampaging through the plane and wreaking havoc on said stereotypical passengers is indeed sweet.

    The acting is as solid as one could hope for from this cast. Jackson takes front and center stage, obviously. He saw the called the pitch, took a beefy swing and hit one into the upper decks. As for the rest of the cast, they did a decent job. Keenan Thompson actually doesn't suck, Nathan Phillips was solid enough, and Julianna Margulies did a fine job.

    Honestly, I can think of no reason not to see Snakes on a Plane. Sure, the critics will lambaste it left and right. There's no doubt about that. However, coming from someone who is ready to accept the film for what it is, I can honestly recommend it to anyone who can appreciate its nostalgic, cheese-ball appeal.

    All things considered, Snakes on a Plane will undoubtedly be the most enjoyable, and the most unlikely blockbuster of the summer. A solid ten out of ten.
  • Peter O (peter-c-odlaug)17 August 2006
    Pure Pop-Corn Fun
    Warning: Spoilers
    The title says everything you need to know. You're in a 200 foot long aluminum tube flying at 35,000 feet with snakes loose everywhere and Sam Jackson is getting very tired of them. I thought that this film, which wasn't screened for critics, lives up to the hype that has buzzed around it. It's entertaining and delivers, unabashedly what it promises. Snakes, some gore and Sam Jackson. The plot is simple enough. A man is witness to a murder by a crime lord and Sam Jackson is an FBI agent protecting the witness until he can get to LA from Hawaii to testify. Snakes are released on the plane in mid-flight and chaos ensues. I would recommend this film. It's fun, funny and extremely entertaining. It's a rare film that delivers straightforward what it promises. A good time, Sam Jackson yelling and lots of snakes on a plane.
  • David Long4 January 2007
    Warning: Spoilers
    Unfortunately from the second that I heard the title I was turned off. I tried to have an open mind when I saw the movie at the theater but it was so bad that I didn't even pay attention to most of it. In fact I spent most of the movie working on my hand-held PC while my family watched. Of coarse the kids liked it, hell,they would like anything. I have recently made myself sit down with the DVD and watch it thoroughly and I have to go with original feelings on this. Did the producers, in some odd way want this to be funny? There are so many stupid things in this movie that would never happen. Oh, and the acting is HORRIBLE. Sam is usually "the man," but not in this one. This movie sucked, from the awful acting of the prosecutor's killer in the beginning to the fake as hell landing of the airplane in the end. And why would someone intentionally shoot out the windows of an airplane? All od the other negative comments (which I have read) in the SOAP comments area are true!! I sit through movies that I don't like with my kids all the time but can still find the humor in them, but nothing even remotely in any way shape or form of this movie was any good at all. This movie is horrific....Awful, awful, awful!!!!!!!!
  • imdb-1599921 October 2006
    one of the worst movies I've ever seen
    it looks like Samuel desperately needed money, it's it not his acting which spoiled the movie, because I think he's a good actor but the rest of the cast just blew it. even the fake snakes will nobody believe. i understand it is a fiction but common it is just bad. maybe if Adam Sander was playing the lead role in this movie I would have rated it better.

    lousy special effect bad acting cheap story

    I was just curious for the end of the movie and would expect a "sorry guys for this bad movie" at the end. but I did not even get there, turned it of with tears in my eyes (of laughing) before the movie credits appeared.
  • LittleSweetFreak20 August 2006
    For the love of God don't see this.
    Warning: Spoilers
    I'd give this a negative rating if I could. I went into this movie not expecting much, but I had an open mind. The whole thing is stupid! The snakes are obviously fake and the first two things they bite are a boob and a guys johnson. Oh how original; if I were a 12 year old boy I might laugh at that. I have no idea how this movie became so popular. Seriously,the worst thing I've ever seen. I wasn't entertained, it wasn't funny,I wasn't even bored! I wasn't anything. It wasn't even so bad it was good, it's just bad. Ridiculous actually. Please do not waste your money on this movie. Don't even rent this movie. No clue how it's getting such a high rating.
  • theredraylives17 August 2006
    Great, cheesy, B-movie summer fun
    Oh my god. I think I might still be a little excited, since I just got back from the advance screening of Snakes on a Plane. I want to preface this review by saying that IT'S NOT SERIOUS. DO NOT go to this film expecting to see some great, dramatic film because you'll be let down. However, if you want to go and see Samuel L. Jackson kick the holy sh*t out of snakes (on a plane) then this is the film for you. It's dumb B-movie summer fun, and it delivered it by the truckload. It knows it isn't serious (with that title, how could it be), and honestly, the whole time everyone involved is just having FUN with it. So go, sit back, have fun, and see some snakes (on a plane).

    The plot on this bad-boy is razor thin with a pathetic, throw-away villain. After witnessing a murder, Sean (Nathan Phillips) is taken into protective custody by the FBI and more specifically, Jackson's Neville Flynn. He has to be flown from Hawaii to LA to testify and blah, blah, blah. Who cares, right? No one, seriously, NO ONE. Our villain, Eddie Kim, is worthless. We get two minutes or so of screen time from him. He's not the villain; the SNAKES are the villains!!!!! The real fireworks start when we GET ON THAT PLANE. You all know what's going to happen, so they don't waste (much) time building up to it. Eventually the snakes (on the plane) are released. People are bitten in hilarious and very painful fashion. Samuel L. Jackson has to control the situation in that bad-ass way that only he can, and he disposes of the snakes in downright hilarious ways (which I won't spoil, you have to see it to believe it). Most of your characters are generally stereotypes and some of the acting is wooden. Most of the characters are very clichéd and stupid as well, and they don't do the most logical things in the situations they are presented. But that's not what you care about. THAT'S NOT IMPORTANT! What is important, is the fact, that there are SNAKES... ON A PLANE! It's cheesy, B-movie fun, and don't let anyone tell you any different. You want to see snakes on a plane, you're going to see snakes on a plane. Period. It also plays homage to some Jackson flicks of old, I'll let you decide which ones, since the scenes are obviously set up in that way. Try to think of other films Jackson has been in with reptiles.

    The special effects were PRETTY good; it was obvious when you were looking at a CGI snake or a real snake, that much I can tell you. But it didn't matter. It doesn't take you out of the movie at all. The action is as good as you can expect from people whooping snakes and vice-versa. It was a good thriller, they kept it moving and didn't slow down, and they kept the tension riding high throughout the film. And it's FUNNY. It's funny if you expect it to be cheesy fun, and it is, and I was constantly laughing throughout. Even as snakes (on a plane) are killing people, you're laughing at it. It was just that good.

    I don't know what else I can say about this, except that if you have the chance, SEE THIS FILM OPENING WEEKEND. Get a crowd in there that wants to have good, dumb, popcorn-movie fun and you will have a blast. My theater was off the hook, and it's seriously the most fun I've had at the movies in longer than I can remember. Go into this film knowing what it is and watch it with exactly that in mind and you'll have a GREAT time. Expect nothing from it and just let yourself have fun for a couple of hours. This film won't be the darling of the critics; it wasn't pre-screened because the makers KNOW what this film is and what they expect from it. I can't think of another instance where a film drew this kind of buzz on its title alone, and where everyone who went to see it completely knew it was going to be "so bad it's good." And it really is. Kudos to the studio that ordered re-shoots after all the buzz on the internet kicked in, it really shines. And thanks for the "line" which is quoted at the head of the review. Everyone in my theater said it with him, and EVERYONE was cheering.

    Snakes on a Plane has landed. And it's good summer fun. With snakes. On a plane. Eight out of ten stars.

    • Sgt. Fluffy
  • thorfy22 August 2006
    If you like planes, snakes, Samuel L. Jackson or small children, please don't see this movie
    Warning: Spoilers
    Oh Dear Lord, How on Earth was any part of this film ever approved by anyone? It reeks of cheese from start to finish, but it's not even good cheese. It's the scummiest, moldiest, most tasteless cheese there is, and I cannot believe there is anyone out there who actually, truly enjoyed it. Yes, if you saw it with a load of drunk/stoned buddies then some bits might be funny in a sad kind of way, but for the rest of the audience the only entertaining parts are when said group of buddies are throwing popcorn and abusive insults at each other and the screen. I watched it with an up-for-a-few-laughs guy, having had a few beers in preparation to chuckle away at the film's expected crapness. We got the crapness (plenty of it), but not the chuckles. It doesn't even qualify as a so-bad-it's-good movie. It's just plain bad. Very, very bad. Here's why (look away if you're spoilerphobic): The movie starts out with a guy beating another guy to death. OK, I was a few minutes late in so not sure why this was, but I think I grasped the 'this guy is a bit of a badass who you don't want to mess with' message behind the ingenious scene. Oh, and a guy witnesses it. So, we already have our ultra-evil bad guy, and wussy but cute (apparently) good guy. Cue Hero. Big Sam steps on the scene in the usual fashion, saving good guy in the usual inane way that only poor action films can accomplish, i.e. Hero is immune to bullets, everyone else falls over rather clumsily. Cue first plot hole. How the bloody hell did Sammy know where this guy was, or that he'd watched the murder. Perhaps this, and the answers to all my plot-hole related questions, was explained in the 2 minutes before I got into the cinema, but I doubt it. In fact, I'm going to stop poking holes in the plot right here, lest I turn the movie into something resembling swiss cheese (which we all know is good cheese). So, the 'plot' (a very generous word to use). Good guy must get to LA, evil guy would rather he didn't, Hero Sam stands between the two. Cue scenery for the next vomit-inducing hour - the passenger plane. As I said, no more poking at plot holes, I'll just leave it there. Passenger plane. Next, the vital ingredient up until now missing from this gem of a movie, and what makes it everything it is - Snakes. Yay! Oh, pause. First we have the introduction to all the obligatory characters that a lame movie must have. Hot, horny couple (see if you can guess how they die), dead-before-any-snakes-even-appear British guy (those pesky Brits, eh?), cute kids, and Jo Brand. For all you Americans that's an English comic famous for her size and unattractiveness. Now that we've met the cast, let's watch all of them die (except of course the cute kids). Don't expect anything original, it's just snake bites on various and ever-increasingly hilarious (really not) parts of the body. Use your imagination, since the film-makers obviously didn't use theirs.

    So, that's most of the film wrapped up, so now for the best bit, the ending. As expected, everything is just so happy as the plane lands that everyone in sight starts sucking face. Yep, Ice-cool Sammy included. But wait, we're not all off the plane yet! The last guy to get off is good guy, but just as he does he gets bitten by a (you guessed it) snake (of all things). Clearly this one had been hiding in Mr. Jackson's hair the whole time, since it somehow managed to resist the air pressure trick that the good old hero had employed a few minutes earlier, despite the 200ft constrictor (the one that ate that pesky British bugger) being unable to. So, Sam shoots him and the snake in one fell swoop. At this point I prayed that the movie was about to make a much-needed U-turn and reveal that all along the hero was actually a traitor of some sort. But no. In a kind of icing on the cake way (but with stale cheese, remember), it is revealed that the climax of the film was involving a bullet proof vest. How anyone can think that an audience 10 years ago, let alone in 2006 would be impressed by their ingenuity is beyond me, but it did well in summing up the film.

    Actually, we're not quite done yet. After everyone has sucked face (Uncle Sam with leading actress, good guy with Tiffany, token Black guy with token White girl, and the hot couple in a heart warming bout of necrophilia), it's time for good guy and hero to get it on....In Bali!!! Nope, it wasn't at all exciting, the exclamation marks were just there to represent my utter joy at seeing the credits roll. Yes, the final shot of the film is a celebratory surfing trip to convey the message that a bit of male bonding has occurred, and a chance for any morons that actually enjoyed the movie to whoop a few times. That's it. This is the first time I've ever posted a movie review, but I felt so strongly that somebody must speak out against this scourge of cinematography. If you like planes, snakes, Samuel L.Jackson, air hostesses, bad guys, surfing, dogs in bags or English people, then please, please don't see this movie. It will pollute your opinion of all of the above so far that you'll never want to come into contact with any of them ever again. Go see United 93 instead. THAT was good.
  • acastil788024 August 2006
    Worst than Date Movie. Anaconda was better
    This movie was the worst movie I have seen since "Date Movie." I was laughing through out the whole movie instead of being scared. It was funny how the snakes would search for particular section of the passengers body to attack for example, the eye, the tongue, the butt, the breast. If we have seen national geographic channel we know snakes wont stay clinched on the body once they bite. For each particular scene the snakes would bite the passengers and would stay on the body biting the person. I believe the producer did not study his information on snakes and their behavior. I cant believe I wasted my money on this movie.So I don't recommend this movie trust just wait until it is at the dollar theatre or rent it.
  • laika-lives20 August 2006
    Samuel L. Jackson in "Revenge of the Focus Group!"
    Warning: Spoilers
    This is not a film you can really analyse separately from it's production. The audience became the film-makers to an extent unprecedented in the history of the American film industry; we felt so involved that viewing it becomes like watching the work of a friend. How is it possible to be objective? This is our movie, isn't it? Or is it? There may be nothing more disingenuous than a film-maker who promotes himself as the audience's friend, giving them all the naughty treats that the nannyish critics would deny them. Just look at that prime self-publicist Eli Roth, promising gore-hounds all the viscera missing from literally gutless mainstream horror films, only to churn out a watered down and technically incompetent piece of work like 'Hostel'.

    David R. Ellis may not have spawned the monster that was the internet response to his film, but he was, quite understandably, quick to engage with it. He took the carnival-huckster school of film-making to a new level, getting the fans to build what they would eventually buy. So many have enthused over this interactive, democratic approach to film-making that they seem to have missed the point - that this is the most cynical form of film-as-marketing. Nothing is included that the film-makers know the fans won't buy, and any old suggestion that will get bums on seats is incorporated. The fact that the pitch became the title tells you all you need to know.

    Isn't this just the evolution of the focus group approach? Individual creativity, talent, craft, ideas, all are sacrificed before the inane chatter of the masses. It's a critical commonplace that focus groups and test screenings don't make for good movies - why should the preemptive intervention of internet enthusiasts be any different? Because we happen to be film fans? Well, thank god for us, because otherwise I might not have seen a topless woman get her nipple bitten by a snake.

    So, yes, I had fun at the movie - a midnight showing, fresh from the pub and with a bucket of ice-cream - but it actually had relatively little to do with the film, and quite a lot to do with the atmosphere. Like Christmas, everyone seemed determined that they would have fun, no matter what. There was laughter, but I don't know if it was with the film, or at the film. With a film as calculated as this one, is that even a meaningful distinction? There are some genuinely good aspects to the film. Samuel L. Jackson gives a well-judged performance, pure self-parody but with a real sense of pleasure. Rachel Blanchard and Lin Shaye are decent in limited roles, and there are one or two inspired moments - the fate of the lap dog is genuinely funny black comedy that the rest of the film fails to emulate.

    The stock characters are to be expected, but the total lack of suspense isn't. What's the point of a film that combines two great phobias if there's no creeping menace? There are several snake-jumps-out moments, but they're incredibly badly staged. Only the annoying British man gets a decent pulpy death scene - the other killings are oddly flat. The demise of the honeymoon couple, for instance, is shamefully botched. Most of the actors fail to make an impression; it's a shame that a charismatic actress like Julianna Margulies should seem so tired (when she tells two kids to close their eyes and pretend the turbulent flight is a roller-coaster, she could be talking to the audience - the film falls far short).

    There are worse movies, but there are many, many better; another reviewer on this site compared this film with 'Lake Placid', and it's as apt a contrast as any I can think of. That film worked so magnificently because the performances were excellent, the jokes were funny, the suspense sequences were scary, and it wasn't devised by committee. That the characters had a little depth and shading was an unexpected bonus. I don't need a post-pub midnight showing to have a good time with that film.

    This film will, in time, fade to become a mere footnote in film history. If it sets a precedent, however, I'm genuinely worried about what might be crossing our screens in a couple of years time. In all probability, nothing much will come of it. Perennial popcorn favourites - 'Raiders of the Lost Ark', 'Alien', 'Halloween' and of course, 'Star Wars' - just aren't produced by group-think.

    In the mean time, I'll tell you what - I haven't half got a craving for some Ingmar Bergman.
  • vailsy22 August 2006
    the snakes look CRAP
    when discussing a movie titled 'snakes on a plane', we should point out early that the snakes are pretty darn important to the plot.

    what we have here are very bad cgi snakes that neither look nor move like real snakes. snakes are scary because they appear to be slimy, they crawl they slither. these snakes do nothing of the sort. they glide along like they would in a video game. they are cartoon snakes. i would go as far to say that even someone that had a major phobia against real snakes would not find these ones scary

    why on earth then would you want to include extreme close ups of these cgi failures? why not rely on suspense.. the whole 'less is more' ethic. or better still, why not just make them look good in the first place? and then maybe still use them sparingly

    take one look at john carpenters 'the thing'. here we have real slime, and gore of eerie proportions. 20 years go by and we get this pile of stinking sfx crap 'snakes on a plane'. when are these people going to wake up and smell the coffee? special effects are going backwards!

    sure you could say.. but the movie is a joke, get it? sure i'm with that idea, but do it well! in addition to the above, this movie has crap dialogue. and the music and sound effects are not creepy or memorable in any way.

    i could handle every other actor being part of this movie, except for jackson. what was he doing there? the man who starred in pulp fiction 10 years ago. is this career progression? are you offering people value for money? no. i'd like to know what Tarantino thought when he was half way through this stinker of a movie

    the current generation seem to have very low expectations. and Hollywood seems to be offering them just what they want. on leaving the cinema i saw a number of advertisements for some truly horrendous looking future releases including... DOA: dead or alive, (another) cgi animal film called 'flushed away', and another crap looking comedy named 'click'. in addition to that i saw some awful trailers, including one for (another) crap British horror/comedy. i've truly not seen the movie industry in a mess like this for a long time

    expect to see this movie for sale in the DVD bargain section for £1 in 6 months time. and if you're expecting to see a black comedy with tonnes of great looking snakes, and some bad ass cool dialogue coming from samuel l jacksons lips. forget it.
  • Lonny21 August 2006
    Amusing title, Everyday movie, Suspicious voting behaviour
    What can I say? I'm a secret fan of 'over the top' action and horror films. Especially when it comes with a lot of lots of humour and innuendo, but I'm not a fan of Snake on a Plane.

    There are three potential draws to this film: • The comedy of the situation; • The horror; and • The novelty of hundreds of snakes being of a plane.

    Firstly, this film isn't written as a tongue-in-cheek horror or a comedy, and there are only 1 or 2 points in the film where you'll smile to yourself. If you want to get the feel of the film, the trailer genuinely represents the movie, a horror.

    Secondly, if you're expecting a film full of action and shocks, you won't be disappointed. It doesn't stand out above other movies, but it always keeps your attention.

    Thirdly, Although the novelty of Snakes of a Plane doesn't wear off, but you'll leave the cinema thinking "what was all the fuss about".

    I know this movie has a high rating, but it doesn't add up. A) Many of the reviews where written before the film was released and, B) The breakdown of user ratings has a lot less variation than normal 77% of people rating the movie 10/10, with only 7% of people giving it 9/10 - Why such an enormous gap?
  • sequined_insanity17 August 2006
    See this movie with a group of friends. It'll be more fun!
    I was surprised at how much i was NOT disappointed by this movie. I was expecting the cheesy lines, and the predictable actions (and re-actions) of the characters, but knowing I was going into a movie that was hyped as "so bad, it's good!" made it easier to ignore logic and just enjoy myself. Seeing it with a big gang of friends certainly didn't hinder that enjoyment either. In fact, I don't think i would've enjoyed it as much if I didn't have 6 other people laughing their asses off right along with me! And having the entire audience yell out THAT line along with Sam Jackson was incredibly amusing. "Snakes on a Plane"- I don't know if I'd label it a "Best Worst" movie (it's no Deathrace 2000); I think I honestly liked it too much for that. I found it hilarious, campy, and gratifying. It's a must-see for B-is-for-bad movie fans, and mainstream followers will get a kick out of it too. Just for fun: bring along a pocket full of rubber snakes. I'm sure you'll think of SOMETHING to do with them!!
  • jamescoffee2 January 2007
    This unfortunate movie founds its popular success on the simple and sad fact that its viewers have been pre-exposed to tens of thousands of grotesque images and that they find entertainment in a concentrated dosage of grotesque images. This movie has no redeeming qualities -none- except to the coffers of the cretins who made it. The revolting and trite juxtapositions of sexuality and blood-rendering; the purportedly tongue-in-cheek posturing of good vs. evil; the dearth of acting talent; the unusually awful special effects; the bad miking; the racist use of blaxploition; almost all and everything a greedy but infertile mind could bring together to cause a blighted society to spend money on a movie comes together in this piece of garbage. Barring the works of a certain director of violence-without-consequence movies, this is the worst piece of brainless drivel I have ever had the misfortune of witnessing.
  • Richard Lawson18 August 2006
    "Snakes on a Plane" is a fun experience
    I'm calling this an "experience" rather than a "review", because a review wouldn't really encapsulate how enjoyable this movie is. If I was forced to review the movie, I'd talk about how slow it is in the beginning, how although some of the dialog is witty quite a lot of it is hackneyed (a scene with SLJ telling JM to "Be strong" was especially cringe-worthy), and the climax didn't have a lot of tension and was a bit disappointing. Five stars out of ten sounds about right, and is perhaps a bit generous.

    But I came out of the movie with a smile on my face, because it was fun. The audience was really, really into it. When the title of the movie appeared, everyone cheered (I haven't seen that happen in a movie theater since Episode 1). Every over-the-top "death by snake" was cheered and applauded. The people who were going to die were fairly easily identified, and people eagerly awaited their death scenes. (In a nod to the movie writers, I expected one character to die for being a complete jerk, and they surprised me by having that character survive.) And, as could be expected, when SLJ delivers his much-discussed line towards the end of the film, the audience cheered throughout its entire delivery. I laughed; it was just fun to listen to the audience.

    This is not a movie you download via BitTorrent. This is not a movie you watch on cable, or rent via DVD. This is a movie you watch in a crowded movie theater. Because only then will it be fun; only then will the energy of the movie and the audience make the experience worthwhile.
  • millerisgood5 January 2007
    playstaion 2
    Warning: Spoilers
    what the hell is going on in this world when a snake can jump on to a mans snake and bite it off while he's taking a leek, the only thing good about this movie is a bite of side nip from the blonde. plus if a snake can give pleasure to a woman at least make her attractive, not some fat old Mexican broad that hasn't got lied in her stinking life. I'm not even going to go into the rest but one last thing............ Playstation bloody 2, the fat one out of keenan and kell lands the plan cause he played a GAME you got to be shitting me, the plane shouldn't have lift off with the fat mess on it in the first place! if i were you i would watch maria carey's glitter for Christ sake, geeks beware you fooled me for the last time.
  • canvine19 November 2006
    What planet is everyone on?
    Perhaps I am the strange one, but I thought this film was terrible. I cannot see what was enjoyable about the film, unless of course they were trying to make it so awful that it made it funny. I did find myself laughing at the corniness in a few places, but overall it was just painful to watch! Samuel L Jackson has sold out his cool persona in the worst way possible in my opinion. He just made the film seem more out of place. I would expect an unknown lead in a film of this poor quality. The only good thing about the film was the special effects, but the fact that they involved unbelievable killer snakes took away any enjoyment of this. To top it all off, the pathetic attempt at shock factor (the snakes attacking rude or bizarre body parts) was laughable and I honestly couldn't care a less whether anyone survived.

    I would appreciate it if someone could explain why this was given such a high score - I imagine it must be the same people who voted for the film Gerry!
  • jawschlech17 August 2006
    There is NOTHING bad about this movie!
    If you got at all caught up in the hype of this movie, even so much as chuckled at any of the viral videos inspired by its epic title (or at the title itself!), you will LOVE this film. It was everything I had hoped for and more. Sex, drugs, violence, gore, guns, other unlikely weapons, deadly reptiles, predictable plot, occasionally questionable acting, tacky CGI, factual inaccuracies, physical impossibilities... I mean, this movie has something for anyone with a pulse.

    It has achieved the perfect balance: it is bad enough to be funny, but good enough to be great. If you ever find yourself less than thrilled to be watching it, all you have to do is remember the title and suddenly it's amazing! Really the best thing about it (other than the concept/title) is that, on the whole, it's not a terribly made film. Plus, at least for the screening at our theater, the whole audience was completely into it. People were cheering and clapping and everyone was psyched just to be there.

    If you think the idea is lame, if you don't "get it" and don't want to, well, I don't know what to tell you. You've already made up your mind what you're going to think about this movie. But even if you've never heard of it, approach with an open mind and you won't be disappointed. GO SEE IT!
  • mrpocketwatch22 August 2006
    This movie deserves more than a 1. But I'm giving it a one because so many fricken fan boys have given it a 10 resulting in it getting a rating that'll take it into the top 100 list. Seriously it's not that great its not that bad. Its a stupid cult classic with so many fricken fan boys it's ridiculous. These are the types who probably still laugh at Chuck Norris jokes and still say "I'm rick james b!tch" No matter how old or annoying it gets. I dread having to hear "I'm tired of MFn snakes on this MFn plane" months from now from idiots trying to be funny. Its crappy plot crap acting etc. Its Okay to love a bad movie, but you still gotta admit its a bad movie.

    Wait for the Marine starring John Cena if you wanna see a real movie
  • G D21 August 2006
    But it's Snakes on a plane! Get it?
    I am sick and tired of all these little weenies going on about how this movie "rocked". It is pure CG over-acted CRAP! Don't send an Assassin, it's much more sensible to smuggle hundreds of brightly colored, aggressive, venomous Snakes on a Plane! The only reason people like this movie because they feel they have to. It is not "so bad it's good" It's so bad I'd rather be poked in the eye with a sharp stick then be subjected to this again. I honestly thought was going to be a COMEDY like AIRPLANE! A spoof! Was I wrong. It's that whole "It sucks, get it!" Or Samuel A. Jackson yells "Snakes on the Plane! thing. Well I'm sorry, I don't get it. It looks like a bunch of wimps gave the movie industry more money to make more movies like Triple X and Die Hard. If you what spend money to watch a movie in the company of the same people who bought William Hung's CD, still live in their mommies basement, and stink of plastic chair sweat from days on the computer playing online games and looking at porn, then rush to the theater and ask for one (since I doubt you have a girlfriend) ticket for Snakes on a stupid-butt Plane. To hell with movies like Full metal Jacket, Pulp Fiction, True Romance, 12 Monkeys, Clerks, etc. There's no irony in watching good movies. The true decline of the western civilization. Calling this a cult film is an Insult to true Cult classics like Repo man, or even Orgazmo. I've said enough here.
  • rrregenold19 August 2006
    Very little to offer those not of the cult following.
    I saw the 10p.m. showing and I must say that this movie was nothing special. Although I did not leave the theater wanting my time back (as I don't actually pay for movies anymore) I didn't really find any redeeming qualities.

    There were a few lines and such that made me chuckle, but mostly the film seemed to consist of rampant fan service to the younger (in mind more than age as this film is rated R) male audience. The fan service seemed out of place and rather distracting as well. I know you all want to hear Samuel L. say his infamous line, but let's be honest, it's a whole lot of hype for very little pay off. The only truly horrible part of the film was the CG, which looked very digitized and did not mesh well with the live action on the screen.

    Now I am a reasonable man, I knew going into the theater that I wasn't going to be seeing "Casablanka," and I am at least thankful that this film is an original (albiet inane) idea and not some re-make or franchise spin off. However to be honest, if you are not a part of the cult following you are probably better off spending your money elsewhere and seeing the film either in a second run theater in a few weeks or renting it in a few months.
  • beesknees220 August 2006
    You can't manufacture cult films
    $25,000 Pyramid Clues: Deep Blue Sea. Tremors. Slither. Eight Legged Freaks.

    Pyramid Category: Movies that were funnier and more thrilling than Snakes on a Plane.

    Hell, with that definition I'd have to include the relatively harrowing journey of Ted and Elaine in Airplane! as superior to Snakes in both laughs and thrills.

    The sad truth is that this isn't even close to the mother of all unintentionally intentional funny snake movies: Anaconda! Besides the never to be seen again casting of JLo-Cube-O.Wilson-Stoltz-Wuhrer in the same flick, you had Jon Voight pulling off the all-time cinematic heist. His final scene alone represents everything SOAP tried and failed to do as a "so-ludicrous-it's-fun" movie.

    In the end, Snakes on a Plane is definitive proof that studio execs and fanboys make the worst collaborators possible. Every big scene had been discussed and dissected so much the last year, all that was left to amuse by opening night was the amount of fanboy flop-sweat that had to be mopped up at my theater. I heard more forced laughs here than at a studio taping for "According to Jim".
  • Sofabutt24 August 2006
    Bad or shall I say, it ssssucked?
    I only went to this movie because it was going to be bad, and it did not disappoint.

    Unfortunately the people who have voted before me (almost all 10.6k of them) are liars. The movie does not rate a 8.6 or whatever it has at this point. It was bad, but it was so bad it is a must see movie. I have never seen a B movie with such polish or talent. If you have 2 hours to kill and you are not likely to walk out of the theater because it sucks, then you should see it.

    If there was a sequel I wouldn't bother seeing it at the theaters, but shamefully I will end up watching it.

    It would have been a tad better if the audio was dubbed over and out of sync with the mafia characters as they spoke, but you can't have everything.
  • Andy Roberts2 January 2007
    Don't Bother
    Warning: Spoilers
    The movie started well I thought but totally lost the plot mid way and most definitely at the end. I couldn't decide whether this was a comedy or an attempt at a serious movie. For me I was laughing all the way! It was obvious that all the pilots were going to suffer the snake wrath but what really made me laugh my head off was the idea a kid with "5000 hours" of flight time on the Play Station 2 could land a 747 along with all the attitude on the radio!! That was enough, had to reach for the tissues to wipe away my tears of laughter. I guess it's worth watching just for that! Please don't make a "Snakes on the Plane 2 The Return Journey or The Revenge of the Rattler" or something!!
An error has occured. Please try again.