Escape from Alaska (1999)
A helicopter pilot work with a husband and his wife in the frozen North tagging foxes for the Environmental Protection Agency. When an avalanche hits the group, the husband is killed and only by the pilot's perseverance is the wife saved. Two years later, the wife takes on a corporation which wants to extend an oil pipeline across the tundra above Juneau. She is convinced that this will cause an avalanche on the town. Of course, she is rejected by the corporation executives. She recruits the pilot to try to aid her, but with no success.
Watch Trailer
Cast
Reviews
As Good As It Gets
It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.
A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.
The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.
I read the reviews just after watching the first 15 minutes, and didn't think they were good reviews at the time, because the film had a very good start.Then the rest of the movie sunk in.While I don't agree with this being the worst, or even one of the worst, ever, it was very disappointing after a start that looked like it had potential.We begin with three chief characters, a young couple who are protecting wildlife in Alaska, and their handsome pilot friend. They aren't Grizzly people. They're tagging and watching the cute little animals.It all begins rather well. They are likable, and their friends seem fairly real. After an avalanche changes the status quo, two years pass, and the pilot has lost a lot of his confidence, which made this look like it was going into a fresh direction.Well, then it looks like they brought in a new writer named Joe Cliché. It got very trite after that. You would have to watch it to know how trite it became. Unbelievable, after what looked like a decent beginning.This made the movie more disappointing than everything. I still liked the two leads, because they were worth liking, and that salvaged the movie for at least "treadmill or elliptical" viewing, but it was very corny.And while I liked to see them survive their brushes with death, I would prefer those escapes to be at least partially credible. We cross over all lines of credibility. And that's disappointing.I'm too flabbergasted by the clichés to even begin to mention them. If you scratch the first 15 minutes, it might even look like a comic farce.It's one of those movies in which the people involved probably think they either made something much better, or much worse, than they actually did. When you're involved in a project like this, you don't see the glass as half empty. It's either full or empty. Truth be told, it's less than half full, but still passes for mild entertainment.
An interesting premise--is the pipeline an oil company is building in the mountains above an Alaskan town in danger of causing an avalanche that could destroy the town?--is ruined by a poor script, a limp "romance" between the lead actors and special effects that are shoddy even for a PM Entertainment picture. Stars Thomas Ian Griffith and Caroleen Feeney have no chemistry at all, making their budding "romance" completely unbelievable. C. Thomas Howell is his usual annoying self, but thankfully he isn't in the picture all that long. R. Lee Ermey is a bit more interesting as a crusty oil-company employee, and there is some well-integrated stock footage of some terrifying actual avalanches, but the "climactic" avalanche at the end is marred by patently phony-looking miniatures and inept CGI effects. Some of the aerial shots of the Alaskan tundra and mountains are pretty, but overall the film has a lot more minuses than it does pluses. It might be worth a rental if you want to see what Alaska looks like, but otherwise don't expect much from this picture, because you won't get it.
The movie isn't as bad as many of the voters up till now are saying. The movie is nice to watch, although it isn't a high budget Hollywood movie as STAR WARS 3. So, you may expect that the special effects and avalanches shown are not as real as you could get them , but still they are acceptable. The story makes up for it. Don't watch this movie for it's special effects, but just to see a nice watchable movie which is in general of medium+ quality, taking all things together.The is certain a tension building up while watching the movie, which is also a little predictable, but, again, still acceptable.Generally speaking, the votes on IMDb are low, for many many movies. Why ? I don't know. It's isn't me, I think, having watched 1000+ DVD's. Indeed there are bad made movies, but this one isn't all that bad at all. If you wanted to see a movie , just for fun, with no complicated but reasonable enjoyable plot, this is surely one for rent.I'll give it 7 point, just making a statement it's not a super movie but worth watching.
Want one Reason to buy or watch Avalanche 1999? Want it or not it's Hilary Shepard as Annie. Let the non-existent polar bear eat the others, but give me more of that killer babe in those tight spray-on pants. Like the best wines she just keeps getting better with age. Great casting, even better wardrobe, and who cares what she says or doesn't! She looks great doing it !!!!! Stock footage? Who cares???? Hilary forgives a multitude of sins! If she were on the other side of the confessional, I wouldn't miss going! Avalanche is a better view than the nightly news, a credit I'd take, and cash is cash - no pro on the pic has anything to be embarrassed about. Not every pic needs to have or can have a 'billion' dollar budget. It's a watch able film & I'd for one visit Alaska because of it. It's probably more accurate, true to life, etc. than Election 2004. A good film to have on in the background or work to.