Wenn der Mond auf die Erde stürzt

Wow. Where do I start? This is a really silly movie. Any knowledge of space that the writer or director may have comes from watching old "Star Trek" reruns. One ridiculous and impossible thing follows another. I laughed out loud a few times at how cheesy it was. They should have hired a scientific consultant, but I'm guessing they didn't have the budget.

I definitely wouldn't pay to see this movie, but I got it as part of my monthly movie package, so I don't mind. If you don't take it seriously, it's kinda fun.

Warning: This movie's writer also did "Solar Strike" (2005, TV), which is equally silly and scientifically sketchy. Watch it only if you feel like making fun of a bad movie.

This is what I get for being bored on a Monday night. I mean how bad can it be, Steve Baldwin, Dirk Benedict (Starbuck, where ya been). I at least hope they were able to pay their rent for the month after this.

As the title of this review states the movie is basically Armagedon but instead of an asteroid we are in peril due to the moon and a fault line which has opened up on its surface. The Ed Wood reference is because everything else in the film makes me think that if Ed was still alive and had even the slightest budget this is what he would be making. The shuttle set kept making me remember the plane cockpit from Plan 9, except no curtain for a door this time. All of the effects have a Nintendo 64 look to them (even a PS2 would be better) or a rip from a Discovery channel special on space travel.

Of the acting I can't really complain, nothing great but nothing overly bad. I was excited at the beginning to see Dirk Benedict acting again but he seems to just come in and out of the film.

In the end I think I laughed more then anything, not something to get worked up about for sure.

Also, not to my country's credit, this is a Canadian film not an American one as the IMDb site states. At the end of the credits it clearly states that it is a Ontario-Quebec co-production (so sad).

Just when you though there was now way you could top the effort in 'Darkstorm', Baldwin has come up with a beauty in 'Earthstorm'. We pray that he gets over his drug addiction or replace the word drug with any other vice that comes to mind, there must be some excuse for taking these roles. But we live in a world of relativism, and relatively speaking he may not be as good as Alec, or have Adam's comedy. But enough said on that matter, because those boys look like they could put down. Anyhow the movie is worth the trouble if you need to play a practical joke on a friend, how you seen this great movie and couldn't stop watching it. Good trick on getting your name marked off on someones xmas list.

This movie was just another Armageddon ripoff except with VERY bad acting and even worse special effects. The story is not even believable and they use a lot of technical jargon to try to overcome the obvious flaws in the plot. I cant believe I actually watched the whole thing! Stephen Baldwin should have not even been in this movie.

The rest of the cast didn't flow well together. There were way too many computer generated special effects that were too obvious. I can not stress enough how bad this movie was.

I don't recommend this at all!

SIMPLY HORRIBLE on sooooo many levels!!!

Alright, if you are at all thinking about seeing this movie, you already know that it is going to be terrible, but the question is will it be terrible in a fun way. For me it was.

Looking at the list of actors, the only recognizable names were Dirk Bennedict and Stephen Baldwin. Of the two I would give Dirk a very slight edge. The actresses do a good to passable job in their roles (in sci-fi channel movies, all the actresses are inevitably very pretty and much better at acting than the men. Of course they are usually confined to sex appeal roles such as in Earthstorm where the assistant is wearing shorts in the opening scene where everyone else is wearing jackets... Aside over), even if they don't have much to work with.

The science in this movie is just terrible. This might have been excusable in the 1950's, but not anymore. Although much of the terrible science is due to bad movie cliché than attempts at actual science. Take the shuttle flying as if there was air in space. Most people aren't ready to have the shuttle flying around with the engines off, or pointed the "wrong way" (since really the shuttle would be spinning like mad to orient the main engines to thrust generally perpendicular to the direction of travel). Then there is the whole gravity on the shuttle thing. This is a cheap movie, no budget to fake zero-G. At least they didn't make believe that there is an artificial gravity, they just ignored that little problem. Oh, and ducking into a tent, that's right a tent, to escape the debris from a collapsing building. Too funny.

Oh, and the clichés! They run rampant. Renegade scientist whose theory ends up saving the day. Child who rebelled against her father, who conveniently died before the movie starts, acts to honor him. The master crackpot scientist who is in charge of creating every do-dad needed in the movie, says it can't be done then does it in twenty minutes. Oh, and let's not forget the evil scientist/politician who constantly stands in the way of the real scientist. It would be hard to put more clichés in this movie.

The funniest part, to me at least, was that they were afraid or perhaps banned, from using NASA in the movie. Unfortunately they couldn't seem to decide if "ASI" stood for American Science Institute or American Space Institute. They also had to make up a science university in Boston, the Plymouth Institute of Technology. Ha ha ha.

Really, if you go into this with a sense of humor, you might get some enjoyment out of it.