• Network: ABC
  • Series Premiere Date: May 14, 1995
Metascore
59

Mixed or average reviews - based on 15 Critic Reviews

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 15
  2. Negative: 2 out of 15

Critic Reviews

  1. Dallas Morning News
    Reviewed by: Manuel Mendoza
    Apr 19, 2021
    80
    This self-referential approach works only because the premise is so convincing and the characters are so real. When the mumbo-jumbo kicks in, we're willing to overlook holes in the plot as frighteningly big as the langoliers themselves because we can walk in the characters' shoes. [14 May 1995, p.1C]
  2. Los Angeles Times
    Reviewed by: Ray Loynd
    Apr 19, 2021
    80
    Well worth the wait is the 10-or-so-minute action payoff. It's nightmarish despite the obviously superimposed langoliers (created via digital visual effects) that recharge the final minutes of this miniseries, which isn't over when you think it is. [13 May 1995, p.15]
  3. Reviewed by: Tony Scott
    Apr 19, 2021
    80
    Writer-director Tom Holland has pulled off the viewer-friendliest Stephen King vid adaptation since the Tobe Hooper-Paul Monash "Salem's Lot," at least for the first three hours. Pulling flesh-and-blood characters out of King's stick figures aboard an airplane zooming into a twilight zone, Holland has turned The Langoliers into a TV grabber.
  4. Chicago Sun-Times
    Reviewed by: Lon Grahnke
    Apr 19, 2021
    75
    Writer-director Tom Holland, whose films include "Child's Play" and "Fright Night," keeps the tension pulsing and pounding through most of the four-hour freakout. [12 May 1995, p.57]
  5. Detroit Free Press
    Reviewed by: Mike Duffy
    Apr 19, 2021
    75
    With The Langoliers, there's a primal zing to the story. The cast also gets into the anxiety-fueled swing of things, especially Pinchot, Stockwell and the eerily enchanting Maberly. [12 May 1995, p.1C]
  6. Reviewed by: Ken Tucker
    Apr 19, 2021
    75
    This makes The Langoliers slow going in spots, but it’s also a lot more fun than most TV movies...Pinchot turns in a wonderfully delirious performance as a grown-up abused child driven to succeed as a banker by memories of his cruel daddy. And even though the langoliers are pretty obviously computer-animated special effects, these little meatballs are still pretty scary. I’d rather watch them than a Susan Lucci TV movie any day.
  7. Reviewed by: Tom Shales
    Apr 19, 2021
    70
    The Langoliers casts a fitfully eerie spell. At four hours, it's about two hours too long, but there are some punchy payoffs along the way that keep one intrigued, if not exactly scared to the point of hysteria.
  8. Reviewed by: Scott D. Pierce
    Apr 19, 2021
    60
    The cast, on the whole, creates believable characters in an unbelievable situation. (Pinchot is the exception - too much of his comic persona leaks through and undermines the maniac he's trying to create.)
  9. Boston Globe
    Reviewed by: Frederic M. Biddle
    Apr 19, 2021
    50
    The Langoliers is a rather bumpy flight for Stephen King, so keep the sick bags ready along with the popcorn. But this new miniseries puts an intriguing spin on that most timeworn of sci-fi plots, time travel - as long as you can stomach character cliches that approach parody, not to mention a grand finale of flying creepies who look like hybrids between Pac-Man and the scrubbing bubbles of Dow Bathroom Cleaner. [13 May 1995, p.21]
  10. New York Daily News
    Reviewed by: David Bianculli
    Apr 19, 2021
    50
    What really destroys "The Langoliers," though, is when the langoliers finally appear, looking and acting like a pack of crazed, oversize Pac-Men. Their evil intention is to literally chew the scenery, but Pinchot has already beaten them to it and the special effects are more laughable than terrifying, as if the dinosaurs in "Jurassic Park," after all that buildup, had looked like big Barneys. Until that point, "The Langoliers" is fun but that's not quite enough. If you're curious, though, catch it now, because it's a safe bet this miniseries won't ever be an in-flight movie. [12 May 1995]
  11. Reviewed by: John J. O'Connor
    Apr 19, 2021
    50
    The two-part film is dotted with clever tensions and neat touches, not least a drinks trolley eerily rolling down the aisle of the near-empty plane. But the inflated story goes fairly predictable in a hurry, and the underlining is heavyhanded.
  12. The Hollywood Reporter
    Reviewed by: Miles Beller
    Apr 19, 2021
    40
    This latest King project, though king-size in running time, is considerably less King-ly in terms of its TV content. Indeed, the whole oversize romp winds up an exercise in the overlong, a tale lacking cohesion and solidity, coming across as an overblown "Twilight Zone" robbed of focused staying power. In its video guise, "The Langoliers" is a bloated exercise in "boo" closer to a whimper than full-blast fright show. [10 May 1995]
  13. Reviewed by: David Hiltbrand
    Apr 19, 2021
    40
    For a scary movie, this is incredibly banal. In fact, the events surrounding fateful Flight 29 are a crashing bore.
  14. Reviewed by: David Zurawik
    Apr 19, 2021
    37
    Outside of that brief reprieve, though, it's mainly tedium in the plane's cabin and at a deserted airport in Bangor, Maine. Tedium, and a lot of creaky disaster-movie dialogue.
  15. Reviewed by: John Carman
    Apr 19, 2021
    25
    So here's your "Langoliers" viewing experience -- you spend hours in the company of cardboard characters, under the doughy direction of Tom Holland, waiting for something scary to happen, and at long last your payoff is a couple of minutes of cheesy special effects. Anyone's idea of a good time?
User Score
tbd

No user score yet- Awaiting 3 more ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 0 out of 1
  2. Negative: 0 out of 1
  1. Jun 19, 2021
    6
    It is enjoyable but has weaknesses in the script and the poor special effects destroy the immersion which is rare for me to criticize. It isIt is enjoyable but has weaknesses in the script and the poor special effects destroy the immersion which is rare for me to criticize. It is based on a story from Stephen Kings novella collection “Four past Midnight” which I did not read so you will not get the unavoidable “The books are better” statement (Which is by the way mostly a valid statement even if I hate to make it). By the way Stephen King never had much luck with movie adaptations of his works. For each good adaptation or movie there are at least 3 bad ones. Story: It is a story of a diverse group of people that attend a flight from Los Angeles to Boston. During the flight a strange event happen when they fly through an aurora borealis and this left them in a strange situation they could not have imagined. Now they are up to figure a way out and deal with the increasing struggles of the group. It had to be vague to avoid spoilers. The story is interesting, enjoyable and the cast is really good on one hand. On the other hand some scenes are poorly executed and destroy the immersion. For example there is a scene that should be the most tragic moment in the movie with a likable character suffering but despite being sad all I could (mostly) think of was that it was a suicidal idea to do what she did and so foreseeable. Even Star Trek red-shirts will facepalm. Another immersion breaker are the effects. The titular Langoliers do neither look convincing or scary (Mayor critique by many viewers by the way). Because these are carefully set up by the movie it is even more of a let down. I will repeat that I rarely criticize special effects in movies. Maybe not in the double digit numbers in over 250 movie reviews (including a lot of B movies). However here it is a valid point. Actors: I truly liked the cast and they deliver a really good performance. My favorites are Kate Maberly as Dinah Catherine Bellman who does an amazing job as child actor, Bronson Pinchot as Craig Toomy who is such a slimeball and love to hate character and of cause Dean Stockwell as Bob Jekins. This is for me a case of a great cast of actors in a weaker script. Sidenote: I recently discovered that there is even a small cameo by Stephen King himself. Overall this had potential and I see the sparks of a better movie underneath. It is enjoyable but is dragged down by the script and effects. Maybe a remake with a better director and ironed out script would be a good idea. Cant recommend to watch it but say it has redeeming qualities. It is also not garbage enough to give a lower rating. For Stephen King adaptations I will recommend however “The Shawshank Redemption” movie as it is an excellent movie and a book adaptation I consider better than its already great source from Stephen King (Warning it has no supernatural, horror or fantasy elements). Full Review »