Avalanche - Alptraum im Schnee

It really is about as bad a movie as I have ever seen. It is hard to find a single redeeming thing to say about it. The acting was awful; the romance totally unbelievable. I guess I'd never seen Juneau before in a movie. I would recommend that you watch it only if trapped in a mountain cabin room with a TV but no other furniture, books, people, radios or light and if you aren't tired already because this one will certainly put you to sleep. I like disaster movies and can watch the worst of them, and have, but this one has made me rethink ever watching one ever again. It gave a whole new meaning to the catchphrase disaster movie, it is a disaster to watch, not just about a disaster.

first off this is not a horrible movie as most of you in these discussion boards have pointed out,, do I care that polar bears don't go as far south as Juneau,, no I really don't care.. most people won't ever even know the difference till some people decide to nit-pick a movie to death. Thomas Ian Griffith did a great job with the movie,, to bad the female lead was awful,, liked R. Lee Ermey's character. John Ashton was good to. I loved all of the wonderful Alaskan scenery as depicted in the movie. and yes the polar bears south of Juneau too, the storyline was great.. about the Pipeline, being built by a company knowing that it sits right on an area where avalanches are prone to happen, great action in this one. plot pretty good,, I just wish people wouldn't be so harsh on a movie like this.

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.

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.

I would have to say based on Hollow Point, Black Point, TimeCop 3 and Ulterior Motives, OF COURSE Griffith would do a movie like this. It's practically perfect for him. I'm not saying he's a bad actor or that the movie was particularly good. I think maybe his performance made the movie worth watching.

The story line is a bit too simple but it does have a plot and that is after all what it takes to keep most movie fans in the zone. The budget was clearly too small because there was way to much green screen. But the stunts were rather good, the lines were pretty realistic and most important of all, the acting was good. It's wasn't great but no where near bad.