The reference is from Turbulence 3: Heavy Metal, a film I saw yesterday and which seems excellent to begin a discussion of the difference of exploitation films. Now, one of the difficult things to explain about these films is exactly why some are successful and some are utter crap. Turbulence 3 falls into the latter camp, something I had definitely expected. There are a number of similarities between this film and Snakes on a Plane, but the differences are perhaps where we can begin to point out some differences between successful and unsuccessful exploitation films.
First, the plot of Turbulence is as simple as it is poorly executed. A ‘death metal’ band led by the famous Slade Craven. The band’s last performance takes place on a plane, but the armed satanic hijackers impose as Slade, hijack the plane, wait til 10 million people log on to the newsfeed and then attempt to crash the plane in order to release the dark angel. They are foiled by Slade, who lands the plane with the help of a superhacker, who knows how to fly because of endless hours of flight simulators.
Obviously contrived and utterly unrealistic, it shares a number of similarities with Snakes on a Plane, even to the extent that video games are good enough practice let you land a plane. However, the campy, excessive humor of Snakes is in no way present in Turbulence, making the film unenjoyable and dry. Here is at least a first clue to the difference between the two films; Snakes is tongue-in-cheek, while Turbulence seems to take itself seriously.
We don’t believe in, nor do we need to believe in, the diegesis of an exploitation film. We know that these tings are completely out of touch with reality. What we do need, is that the film does not believe in its own diegesis either. This is a difference from the typical B-movie camp enjoyment, such as Plan 9 From Outer Space, where we enjoy the feeble attempts of proper diegetic creation. However, exploitation films depend on providing us with the exploitation subject, and knowing winks at the audience are part of this genre. In this way, there is a distinct metafictional dimension to exploitation films - a metacommunication which functions to reassert the common ground between film, filmmaker and viewer.
In Turbulence, this meta-dimension is completely missing. Instead, it seems as if the film expects us to take it as seriously as we would a Hollywood blockbuster, something it is clearly not. The narrative ends up feeling ridiculous because of this, as there is no metafunction to let us know this is simply an exploitation film.
Secondly, Turbulence does not truly have any real exploitation qualities, as its representation of ‘death metal’ is far from the actual music. The music is more like bad mid-90s industrial/goth music and it is clear that Slade is a caricature of Marilyn Manson. Unfortunately, rather than relishing in this subject matter, the film mocks the music and so does not present the fans with what they might enjoy. Because of this mocking, the film ends up falling flat on its face in attempting to engage with a genre it so clearly misrepresents.
