Boeing and Airbus release new aircraft.

The competition between Boeing and Airbus in producing commercial aircraft took a dramatic leap forward on September 27 when British Airways, long a steady customer of the Boeing Company, ordered 12 Airbus A380 double-decked ‘superjumbos’ along with 24 Boeing 787s. These new aircraft, due to be introduced in October 2007 and May 2008, have been hailed by many as beginning the transition into the new era of commercial aircraft. However, at the same time, British Airways sent an alarming signal to Boeing. Not only did they purchase the new A380 from Boeing’s rival, Airbus, but they also reduced the original order of 787s and declined to purchase any of the new Boeing 747-8 Intercontinentals; planes that had been designed by Boeing to offset the appeal of the A380.

Airbus began the competition in the early 1990s by developing plans for a very large airliner that would compete with Boeing’s famed 747 which is known worldwide for its range, comfort and speed. The end result was the A380, which has shocked experts with its size and capabilities. Boeing responded by designing and producing the 787, which has won high praise so far for its fuel efficiency, durability and comfort. In 2005 they also developed the 747-8, which was designed to keep many of the characteristics of the famed original 747 while at the same time accommodating more passengers and therefore offsetting the appeal of the A380 in that regard.

The signal sent by British Airways has marked a trend, as to date only one airline has ordered any 747-8s at all, and that is the German airline, Lufthansa, which has ordered twenty. While the Airbus A380 has not done much better, this still marks the first time that Boeing has been outdone that badly by Airbus. In addition, though Boeing executives say that Airbus’ success is not really a blow, other analysts are inclined to believe otherwise. Many believe that Boeing will suffer financial reductions that could harm their production capabilities until the 787 and the planned 797 finally begin to produce and turn out, but even then it could be too late to recoup financially as the 787 will not begin service till May and the 797 is not set for release till 2014.

Government. Which is the best?

As a History and Political Science major, I have found an underlying question at the root of several of my classes and discussions. This question is simple: which type of government is best? I have found that the answer to this question is not addressed, for the “response” to the question is that it is for the individual to decide. In researching the question, I have found that this answer is both right and wrong. In some ways, individuals must decide what form of government is proper for their country, but the decision should reflect the circumstances surrounding the area and time which is to be ruled by the government that individuals are establishing. In other ways, it is not solely the decision of individuals, as they will not be in control forever and therefore what may work for them at that time, may not work in the future. As one Christendom professor has eloquently said: “You can’t guarantee that the right people will always be in power.”

All types of government can work in certain circumstances, but only if the particular type of government are led well. Democratic republics can represent their people (early United States), or they can be disastrous for the people they “represent” (Provisional Russia, Feb. – Nov. 1917). Absolute monarchies such as that of Louis XIV of France were tyrannical, while St. Louis IX of France’s brought prosperity and good government to his people. On the opposite end of the monarchical spectrum, Great Britain has protected the rights of her people as a constitutional monarchy since the American War for Independence, while her predecessor, independent England, collapsed into tyranny under the first constitutional monarchy, led by Oliver Cromwell. Even dictatorship and theocracy can work if led well (Franco in Spain, David in Israel) though if the wrong person leads them they fail (Mussolini in Italy, Khomeini in Iran). So, as we can see, there is no such thing as a perfect type of government; any type of government can work, but only if the right people run it justly.

The argument of which form of government is best has been debated for centuries by numerous thinkers around the world. It reached its climax in the French Revolution of 1789 when a number of free-thinkers and liberals tried to settle this question by coming up with new ideas and trying to guarantee that all men would be treated equally forever. However, where they departed from the right course was in departing from Natural Law and opposing the voice of Natural Law, the Catholic Church. Government is the way in which man is given authority by God to protect his fellow men from evil; God gave us the instructions on how to use and rule His creation, the earth, in Natural Law and the expanded teachings of the Church. This core principle was rejected by the makers of the French Revolution from the beginning, especially in the Tennis Court Oath of the Third Estate. As a result, tyranny and suffering ensued which swept Europe for the next twenty-six years; its legacy survives today in the Communist nations of China, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos and Cuba, where the Church is attacked and Natural Law is ignored, causing much suffering within these nations. Though some (even on this campus) do not realize it, no government and no government-changing event which omits Natural Law from its core principles can be called a good thing, and can only bring about suffering and chaos for years which ultimately harms the Church in the long run.

Therefore one may conclude that the only government that works is one which is run by the right people in the right place which follows Natural Law. As Catholics we must remember that government’s main purpose is to control human behavior so that everyone may live and pursue God’s purpose for their lives, and that it is structured to prevent those who do not control their own behavior from harming others. Therefore we must respect the government that is in power (except in very extreme circumstances such as a tyrant like Hitler), and then work within the bounds of Natural Law to place the right people in places of power so that peace may always be preserved and Natural Law followed.

The War Wagon (1967)

Directed by: Burt Kennedy
Music by: Dimitri Tiomkin, Ed Ames
Starring: John Wayne, Kirk Douglas, Howard Keel, Robert Walker Jr., Bruce Cabot, Bruce Dern, Valora Noland
MPAA Rating: NR
My Rating: 9.5 out of 10

This movie crossed paths with me when I was a senior in High School and though I couldn't pay attention to most of it, I caught enough of it to want to see it fully through. Not too long ago I decided to get it and watch it and I was really glad I did. This movie is very entertaining. Though not really a thriller in the modern sense of the word, it was still well-made and the plot was very well thought out and well-planned. The cinematography was well-done and the on-scene locations were beautiful. I can safely say that it is definitely one of my favorite movies.

The movie involves the return of ex-convict Taw Jackson (John Wayne) who was framed and robbed of his land and gold mine by evil cattle baron Frank Pierce (Bruce Cabot) and his thugs led by gunner Hammond (Bruce Dern). To get his property back, Jackson enlists the help of sureshot safecracker Lomax (Kirk Douglas), 'wise' Indian Levi Walking Bear (Howard Keel), explosives expert Billy Hyatt (Robert Walker Jr., son of Alfred Hitchcock favorite Robert Walker), and a Pierce employee and his wife (Valora Noland) to capture and rob Pierce's gold-transporting ironclad stagecoach named the War Wagon.

Though no one knew it at the time the movie was made, this movie was an all-star cast. Wayne was the star he always was, Keel and Cabot were stars in decline, Walker was riding off his father's popularity, and Douglas, Dern and Noland were stars on the rise. This in itself makes the movie fun to watch as you keep the lookout for familiar faces. Plus for those who have seen the hilarious John Wayne comedy McLintock!(1963), you will recognize even more people as this film included many minor actors that also appeared in that film. This makes the film that much more entertaining.

Like in The Sting (1973), this movie has no 'morality'. None of the characters are truly moral in the true sense of the word. Unlike The Sting the outward immorality is very subdued. There are just three to four very tame instances of bad language, the one bedroom scene is implied, not shown visibly (and it is supposedly between a husband and wife anyway), and though people are shot (as they always are in Westerns), the scenes of the shooting are much less graphic than in The Sting. Basically you hear the shot and see the person fall, but you don't see blood spurt all over the place as in The Sting. Oh, and did I mention there is a barroom brawl that combines the elements of the mud fight in Wayne's movie McLintock!, and the elements of the barn fight in Keel's best performance Seven Brides for Seven Brothers? Very interesting.

Overall I would say that this movie is very good for family entertainment though I would have parents there to explain some things that the kids might misunderstand or get bad examples from, just to be safe. You should enjoy this movie though. Oh, and laugh all you want at some of the great quotes that these actors throw at each other at points in this movie.

The Sting (1973)

Directed by: George Roy Hill
Music by: Marvin Hamlisch
Starring: Paul Newman, Robert Redford, Robert Shaw, Harold Gould, Robert Earl Jones
MPAA rating: PG
My Rating: 8 out of 10

I first saw this movie when I was at my grandparents and it was playing on the TCM channel. Being a young lad, I didn't understand it at the time and in fact I just listened to it, I didn't really watch it as I was engrossed in my hobby at the time. Later when I mentioned it to my Mom, I found that it was a movie we had, and we later watched it. This time I understood it better.

The story revolves around a bunch of swindlers and criminals in 1930s Chicago led by the quick-feet dodger Johnny Hooker (Robert Redford), and the relaxed con artist (professional artistic thief) Henry Gondorff (Paul Newman). When one of their gang (played by James Earl Jones' father, Robert Earl Jones) is murdered by big-time crime boss Doyle Lonnegan (Robert Shaw), the two enlist the help of other con men around Chicago led by Kid Twist (Harold Gould) to hit Lonnegan with the legendary "Sting" whereby they will swindle him out of a ton of money while getting away without him knowing until it is far too late.

Put bluntly there is no real 'morality' in this movie. (The only character in the entire movie who hasn't committed a crime at some point in life is a nine-month old baby). However, the immorality is subdued and a lot of it is not shown. The only big problem with the movie is that there are issues with bad language, there are one or two very subdued 'bedroom' scenes and there is a scene towards the very beginning of the movie at a nightclub...enough said. In addition there are one or two scenes where people get visibly shot and so this movie is not for kids, despite it's PG rating.

Despite it's flaws, the movie is still very well-made. Surprises spring upon you out of no where and the chase scenes at certain points of the movie are nailbiting and have you on the edge of your seat. The cinematography is especially well-done, as seen in the chase scenes. The dialogue also has you fully informed and every word spoken (except the swearwords) is not wasted. Each statement is full of meaning and contributes to the movie. It is also so well-done that it does not give any hints as to the ending so that when the end of the movie hits, you will be surprised and will be thinking: "Huh!? I never expected that!"

Overall this movie is a good one to watch, but it is not for kids under teenage years and some parts of the movie definitely need to be fast-forwarded through. Still, if you like movies full of suspicion with one basic line being followed the whole way through, then you will like this movie. The only thing I would warn you to watch for is your attitude towards the everyday bank clerk or sales agent or amusement park owner after you come out of watching it. Everything is not as portrayed?...or as it seems?

Minnesota Vikings 2007

Runningback Adrian Peterson

The Minnesota Vikings open 2007 with a ton of question marks and a bunch of angry fans (including the author) who are calling for Head Coach Brad Childress' head. After a terrible season in 2006 where both defense and offense proved to be among the league's worst, the Vikings are hoping for somewhat better results. Their 6-10 record was an all too painful reminder of missed opportunities and botched play-calling which had led to their demise as one of the NFC's contenders.

The problem starts and is ultimately the biggest at the coaching level. Childress' big-mouth, trash-talking, player-bashing ways was very detrimental to the Vikings' morale throughout the season and several fans were wishing he would just shut up. Is it any wonder with a Head Coach like that that promising young defensive co-ordinator Mike Tomlin bolted for Pittsburgh? Now the Vikings have Indianapolis Colts' defensive co-ordinator Leslie Frazier calling their defense and the sudden change will have a negative impact on the young defense. There are no doubts about that. Plus the offense will probably still continue to stink under Childress' play calling until he departs Minnesota.

As for the team itself, it all begins on offense. Childress has handed the reigns to Tarvaris Jackson at Quarterback while leaving the door open for Brooks Bollinger to win the job if Jackson falters. However, neither quarterback was competent enough to steal the job away from Brad Johnson during the 2006 season and the only reason Jackson ended up starting for the rest of the season was to get some game experience because the season was clearly lost. This year in the draft though, the Vikings picked up a jewel in seventh round pick Tyler Thigpen from Coastal Carolina. A tough thrower with all the skills and abilities to be a full-time starter, don't be surprised if the season is lost by Week 13, then Childress (or his replacement) benches Jackson and Bollinger and hands the reigns to Thigpen to see what he can do.

Runningback has always been a position of strength on the team, and this year is no different. Good money was spent on the hard-running Chester Taylor who posted a 1200 yard rushing season in 2006. Now in marches No.1 draft choice Adrian Peterson who looks to be a star rusher in the mold of Priest Holmes, LaDanian Tomlinson, Clinton Portis and others. With Peterson and Taylor sharing the carries and Mewelde Moore coming in as the 3rd down back, the Vikings look to be set at runningback. In addition they have good blockers in front of them in Tony Richardson and Jeff Dugan as Richardson has proved to be an excellent fullback and Dugan an excellent H-back for the running game.

Wide Receiver is a wide open position that has fallen a long ways from the days of Randy Moss, Cris Carter, Jake Reed and Matthew Hatchette. After a sub-par season last year from the receivers, the Vikings moved quickly to try and address the problem. They drafted three receivers, Sidney Rice in the second round, Aundrae Allison in the fifth round and Chandler Williams in the seventh round and signed Bobby Wade from Tennessee and Cortez Hankton from Jacksonville to try and complement last year's holdovers Troy Williamson, Billy McMullen, Martin Nance and Jason Carter. At the time of writing, the Vikings' depth chart looks like Williamson and McMullen will be the starters with Rice, Allison and Williams battling for the number three spot and Wade, Hankton, Nance and Carter fighting for their very spots on the roster. If the rookies can contribute as fast as the coaching staff hopes, than the Vikings could be in a lot better shape than they were last year.

Tight end is anyone's guess. Jim Kleinsasser returns for another season as the Vikings' starter, but Jermaine Wiggins was replaced by Visanthe Shiancoe, the ex-Giant and now big question marks remain at tight end as to whether it will still have good production. The team does like what it has seen from Richard Owens and he could be a productive factor at the position this year as well.

On the line, the Vikings have one of the best left sides in football. Center Matt Birk and Guard Steve Hutchinson both went to the Pro Bowl last year and Tackle Bryant McKinnie almost made it. This side of the line has no worries. The worry rests in the right side. Artis Hicks was not the force he was expected to be at right guard when he was acquired from the Eagles, and so Anthony Herrera has been getting long looks at the position. At right tackle, Ryan Cook, the converted center, has been struggling and is now battling ex-starter Marcus Johnson for the position. Depth is thin here too, so the Vikings must be careful with their starters if they want any chance of running the ball and keeping their quarterback upright.

On the defensive side of the ball, the Vikings have hopes that Frazier might be able to pick up where Tomlin left off. The defense was improving, but still one of the league's worst last season and that will need to be remedied quickly if the team wants to compete.

The defensive line is where it starts. Talent abounds up front, and all they need is confidence and a coach who can put them into the right schemes. At the tackles, Kevin Williams and Pat Williams are one of the most formidable duos in football and Spencer Johnson and Darrion Scott provide good depth as their backups. On the ends, Kenechi Udeze didn't have any sacks last year, but that could change dramatically this year. Erasmus James is still fighting his way back from a knee injury and it is unknown when he will be able to get back to full speed. In the meantime the Vikings have two old fourth round picks, Ray Edwards and Brian Robison, who have shown flashes of big time talent and could be pushing to get plenty of playing time in the near future. Edwards now looks like a starter until James returns and Robison could be the wildcard if he can start blocking kicks on special teams. This unit has great potential. Whether it lives up to it remains to be seen.

At linebacker, the Vikings haven't had this much depth since their Super Bowl days. E.J. Henderson finally moves in at middle linebacker for the team and he has shown the signs of being a great one. Flanking him is last year's star free agent Ben Leber, and last year's No.1 draft pick Chad Greenway and both look to be solid so far. Depth is provided in the form of Dontarrious Thomas, (who sees action when four LBs are on the field), Rod Davis, sixth round pick Rufus Alexander, free agent Vinny Ciurciu, and special teamer Heath Farwell.

The secondary looks to be in much better shape for the Vikings than it ever has been. Antoine Winfield has solidified himself as a starting cornerback and opposite him second-year man Cedric Griffin is turning into a real good cornerback. Rookie third round pick Marcus McCauley has also turned in a great training camp and he looks to be the head nickel back while Charles Gordon and Dovonte Edwards are running neck to neck for the dime back spot. At safety, the Vikings have so much depth that they don't know what to do with it. Darren Sharper and Dwight Smith look to be the front runners for the starting spots, but free agents Tank Williams and Mike Doss plus last year's opening day starting rookie Greg Blue are all giving them a run for their money, and this battle will come down to the wire.

Special Teams for the Vikings looks to be in good shape as well. Ryan Longwell was well worth the money the Vikings paid to lure him away from Green Bay, and as a result he is unopposed for the kicking job. Punter Chris Kluwe turned in another nice season last year, but he is being challenged by rookie Alex Reyes and this battle won't be decided until the pre-season ends. Mewelde Moore and Troy Williamson look to have the return jobs in hand if they secure their roster spots while Cullen Loeffler returns as the Vikings long-snapper and he looks to have his job nailed down.

The 2007 Vikings are a work in progress, and they probably won't go very far. Their best bet is to continue to work through this season, get their starting quarterback (whoever that ends up being) some experience, let the receiving corps come together, let the defense jell under the new co-ordinator, and just watch and see who looks like the teams they will have to face down in the near-future for the playoffs and championship runs. They will only go as far as their morale will take them, and right now it doesn't look like very far. Still, there is hope for the future.

Go Vikings!

Airport '79

Directed by: David Lowell Rich
Music by: Lalo Schifrin
Starring: George Kennedy, Alain Delon, Eddie Albert, Robert Wagner
MPAA rating: PG
My Rating: 1 out of 10

One word can explain this movie to all interested viewers: stupid. This movie is truly not worth your time to watch. The layout of the film is sporadic and hard to follow, morality is just about non-existent, and the dialogue is just plain stupid. I, for one, know that it is going to be a very long time before I will even consider watching this movie again.
Airport ’79 begins with the inaugural flight of the new Concorde Supersonic airliner flying from Washington D.C. to Paris to Moscow. Piloted by the now-legendary Joe Patroni (George Kennedy) and France’s best pilot Paul Metrand (Alain Delon), and with the airline’s owner (Eddie Albert) aboard, the plane sets off on it’s historic flight. However, the Concorde also has documents aboard incriminating an arms manufacturer (Robert Wagner) as a Communist spy. Determined to save himself, Wagner uses all weapons at his disposal to bring down the Concorde as it flies towards Moscow. Nuclear missiles and fighter jets set out to bring the plane down over the Atlantic, and another Communist spy unlatches the cargo door so as to depressurize the plane. Patroni and Metrand subsequently have to undertake some very evasive maneuvers and make some radical decisions in order to try and save the plane and its passengers before it breaks up and goes down.
As in the previous two sequels Airport 1975 and Airport ’77, the plot has promise, is doable and could have made a great movie. What absolutely ruins it however is just the way the film was put together. The quality of the picture is good but is harmed immensely by the newsreel shots which are obviously taken from some low-profile TV station of the late 70s/ early 80s. The special effects, though spectacular, are obviously computer generated which hurts pretty bad. The dialogue is hard to follow, full of bad language, and contains several unacceptable references. Finally, to top it all off, the ending is completely random and has no influence whatsoever on the movie. I still remember seeing the ending shot and thinking: “Huh?”
To sum it up, this movie is just plain stupid and I recommend you invest your time more wisely. This movie did mark the end of the heyday of the disaster movie and I can see why. The genre had just burned itself out by this point, and they were ready to move on to the next big thing in film-making. That also happens to be where I am headed, for now I shall leave the disaster movies behind.

Airport '77

Directed by: Jerry Jameson
Music by: John Cacavas
Starring: Jack Lemmon, Brenda Vaccaro, Christopher Lee, Olivia de Havilland, George Kennedy, James Stewart
MPAA rating: PG
My Rating: 7 out of 10

All I can really say is that I expected more from this movie than what was shown. Like it’s predecessor Airport 1975, it had great potential to be a very good movie, even greater than it’s predecessor as it turned out. In the end however, like the other movies, this one has to be taken with a grain of salt and scrutinized carefully which makes it that much less enjoyable.
Airport ’77 begins when wealthy art collector Phillip Stevens (James Stewart) purchases a luxury Boeing 747 airliner to fly guests and art treasures down for the grand opening of his museum. However the plane, run by pilot Don Gallagher (Jack Lemmon) and Stewardess Eve Clayton (Brenda Vaccaro), is hijacked halfway into the flight, hits an offshore oil platform, and crashes into the ocean intact trapping the occupants underwater.
Stevens enlists the help of Admiral Herb Corrigan (Charles Macaulay) and the ever-present Joe Patroni (George Kennedy) to locate the plane and rescue the occupants while Gallagher and diver Martin Wallace (Christopher Lee) seek to find a way to get everyone out before the plane collapses and floods.
As with it’s immediate predecessor, Airport ’77 has an excellent plot, and the scenario is very well thought out. The special effects in the film are spectacular as always and the dialogue and flow of the film has you fully informed and on the edge of your seat from start to finish. Again what ruins the film is character development and morality. Unlike Airport 1975, the film takes longer to develop the characters which is good. However, the characters are not developed enough and the development is abruptly cut off leaving a lot of loose ends and questions about the characters.
Like Airport 1975, the biggest issue in this movie is the morality. At the beginning of the movie Gallagher and Clayton are portrayed as middle-aged people in love with each other, but the way in which it is portrayed brings up serious concerns. They are obviously living together already, Clayton states that she has been through a divorce just recently, and Gallagher states that he doesn’t care if he has kids or a wife first. Not a good sign. In addition swearing runs rampant throughout the film (Lemmon is particularly free with his language). The swearing is obviously not needed and just completely makes the dialogue and story flow hard to follow as a result.
This movie might be worth seeing, but it is not for children under college years. It comes closer to being as good as the original Airport, but still comes up short in many areas. However, you should still look for great performances from Stewart, Lee and De Havilland.

Airport 1975

Directed by: Jack Smight
Music by: John Cacavas
Starring: Charlton Heston, Karen Black, George Kennedy, Gloria Swanson, Efrem Zimbalist, Jr., Myrna Loy, Dana Andrews
MPAA rating: PG
My Rating: 6 out of 10

After I saw the first Airport, I immediately wanted to take a peek at the three sequels that were made. I was warned by certain film critics that the three that followed were not up to the standard of the original, but I was a little unprepared for the ways in which this one departed from the original. As a result, after I finished watching it I came out thinking: “Good, but…Why?”

Airport 1975 begins by introducing two lovers, head pilot Al Murdock (Charlton Heston) and stewardess Nancy Pryor (Karen Black) as they prepare to travel to Los Angeles. Murdock leaves early and reaches LA without incident. However, Nancy’s trip takes a different twist. A businessman (Dana Andrews) flying a twin engine business plane, suddenly dies and his plane spins out of control and smashes into the flight deck of the plane Nancy is flying on, wiping out the flight crew.

With no one aboard who can land the plane, and the plane flying out of control through the mountains of Utah, Murdock teams up with Joe Patroni (George Kennedy) and rushes to Utah where they try to pull off a mid-air transfer to get a pilot into the damaged plane to bring it back under control and land it safely before it crashes into the mountains.

It is a good plot and the tense buildup to the accident is one of the best I have ever seen. In addition the special effects are amazing, especially the shots of the plane flying out of control through the mountains. However, the film departs from the original in regards to character development and morality. The characters are not as developed as in the original and as a result the characters are seen as weak-minded people with no purpose in life but alcohol, pleasure or envy. Flirtations between the flight crew and stewardesses are annoying and unnecessary, and they don’t really seem to be people until the disaster hits. Also, swearing and bad language run rampant in this movie and is inexcusable. Unlike Airport however, the language issues even go so far as to ruin the dialogue in certain areas which makes it that much more inexcusable.

Overall this movie had potential to be as good as the original, and if you can put up with (or fast forward through) the junky parts it might be worth seeing, but if you watch it expecting something as good as the original than you are in for a disappointment. Oh, and prepare for Karen Black to freak you out at certain points of the movie.

Airport (1970)

Directed by: George Seaton
Music by: Alfred Newman
Starring: Burt Lancaster, Dean Martin, George Kennedy, Jean Seberg, Jacqueline Bisset, Barry Nelson, Van Heflin, Helen Hayes
MPAA rating: G
My Rating: 9.5 out of 10

I first heard of this movie some years ago when it was brought up in a conversation between my Dad and myself. What caught my interest about it was that it was filmed almost entirely at the Minneapolis/St Paul International Airport, which is about a five minute drive from my boyhood home. As a result, this past summer when I spotted it on the shelf at St. John the Evangelist Library, I was quick to borrow it and watch it. The result? I was very impressed.
The film is based on the Arthur Hailey novel of the same name. It relates the tale of Mel Bakersfield (Burt Lancaster), an airport manager who is teaming with mechanical genius Joe Patroni (George Kennedy) to keep an airport hit by a bad blizzard and a airplane accident open to rescue a bomb-damaged airliner piloted by Vernon Demarest (Dean Martin) and Anson Harris (Barry Nelson). Directed by George Seaton and with a score produced by the legendary Alfred Newman, this film was nominated for several of the 1970 Academy Awards, just barely losing out to Cool Hand Luke in all but one of them.
While this movie has many of the vices that plagued the movies of the 70s, I still found it to be better than most I have seen. What surprised me the most about it was that there was some powerful messages underneath it that are still relevant today. The first message is one of the importance of good and faithful marriages. Bakersfield and Demarest are engaged in affairs and as a result are unhappy or uncertain of themselves. They, in turn, look up to men whom they consider to be better than themselves, namely Patroni and Harris who, by contrast, are happily married men known for their wit and wisdom. Secondly, there is a pro-life message portrayed powerfully by Jacqueline Bisset who plays a pregnant stewardess considering an abortion. She decides against it because she realizes that she is carrying a real, unique and special human being who deserves the right to live. Finally there is a powerful message of responsibility brought forth by Demarest when he assumes responsibility for what he has done wrong in his past and is willing to take the consequences.
As far as the movie quality goes, it is very good. The character development takes a little longer than some people would like, but that is excusable due to the number of characters important to the film’s general storyline. As such, by the time the climax hits you really know the characters and what they are going through. In addition the special effects are also well-done, and once the buildup to the climax begins, the movie rolls along in a fast-paced adventure style that has you on the edge of your seat until the end.
The movie does have flaws though. The use of bad language in certain areas is inexcusable. In addition, Helen Hayes’ character, supposed to be a sweet old stowaway, is absolutely obnoxious as a snotty, sneaky thief who talks people’s ears off and is just generally annoying. Her character, though necessary for the movie, could have been reduced significantly to make it bearable, and is the most significant flaw of the entire movie.
Overall, the movie is entertaining and a good Friday night thriller. It is very well-made and at times you can be swept away by the story as it unfolds. It was so successful in its day that it spawned three sequels, and is generally credited with beginning the Disaster Movie genre. (Though modern critics now attribute the true beginning of the genre to The Poseidon Adventure in 1972). The film is safe for children even though I still recommend that parents be there to just explain one or two things that might be hard to understand. Plus, for your everyday college student who travels a lot, it will give you a greater appreciation for those who run air travel for us when we go flying on college breaks.