100 Degrees Below Zero

This disaster movie was about the onset of a mini-ice age in Europe, caused when the ash from numerous volcanoes blocked the sun, cooling the planet. The volcanoes were a accompanied by numerous earthquakes.

I don't watch a lot of low-budget movies, so I found myself fascinated by how cheaply they were able to tell their story. Other movies spend millions showing the effects of an earthquake. In this movie the camera shook and the actors fell down. There were a lot of earthquakes and a lot of falls. To show they effects of the falling ash from the volcanoes, they put the actors in a car, sprinkled what appeared to be clumps of laundry detergent on the window and then sprayed the windshield with a lot of water while the windshield wipers spread the detergent back and forth. As the climate suddenly cooled the actors began rubbing their arms with their hands and remarking how cold it was. And they filmed a car in a location with a minor snow storm.

Now I watched this movie on Netflix. It cost me practically nothing, probably not much more than the movie cost to produce. And it was worth every penny I spent and more.,

Not a bad concept, and with the presence of Jeff Fahey and John Rhys Davies I had hoped for a little better. But, sadly "100 Degrees Below Zero" leaves one standing on a snow bank that isn't quite tall enough to cover you.

The majority of the plot & dialogue circles around the two adult/late teenage children running around the City of Lights (aka Paris), trying to get to a location where their father, played by Jeff Fahey, a former/retired US Air Force Officer & pilot, can 'rescue' them in time to board a NATO flight executing "Operation Down Under". The script could have been a bit better, but the acting from the two children was downright sad, poorly executed, and on the corny side. Given the number of times the son gets hit, falls over or is knocked down to the ground (at least five by my count) one would NOT expect him to be able to get up, let alone run. Some of the accidents & "encounters" with other minor characters seem forced and trite, but in a sense could BE reasonable given the overarching plot.

As one reviewer said, I've seen far worse films executed from the 1950's, 60's & 70's. Thankfully, this film is just under an hour and a half, and is bearable if you really want to waste the time doing something else while watching this. I don't normally like to pan films, however in the hands of a different screenwriter, director, and slightly better talent, this concept could turn out to be as good as or better than Armageddon or 2012.

This is by far the worst excuse for a movie I have ever seen. Even the bad movies on the Sci-Fi channel that usually involve fill in the blank giant creatures eating people are better. I could make a better movie with my cell phone in my basement with my neighbors as the actors. Jeff Fahey was interesting in "Lost" but could have phoned this performance in and he was the only one in the movie with a modicum of acting ability. I can't believe I paid $6.99 to watch this mess on pay- per-view. Not one redeeming quality in the whole movie. My husband and I watched in disbelief as it just went from bad to worse. The special effects were not special at all. They were just ridiculous. The girl actor kept falling down and wasn't very good at it. She should not give up her day job of modeling. The other actors were amateurish. Overall, just terrible.

I don't usually post reviews - BUT WOW. This has got to be one of the worst things I've ever seen. I've watched through all kinds of garbage, sci-fi originals, terrible found footage horror movies and pretty much everything in between. I can't even begin to summarize the worst parts of this pile of crap. This is a truly terrible experience. The "acting", the script (I'm seriously wondering if there was one), The "special effects" pretty much every aspect of this thing is laughable.

In the end I was left with the following questions: How does something of this quality makes it out of the home studio? How long does it take to make something like this, a couple weeks? There are some decent (At least I thought they were before) actors in this, what was the incentive, a trip to Europe? In the end though, really why bother?

This film is about a man trying to rescue his children from a terrible storm. The storm is used as a prop for the family drama and some parts of it seem randomly thrown in and is inconsistent in its application. Hopefully it had a really low budget.

Don't waste your time. This was an accidental online purchase for us. The movie has horrible acting. Sara Malakul Lane and Marc McKevitt Ewins are unbelievable... so bad that their falls are almost humorous. Bad directing probably contributed to the poverty of the film. There is a random girl in film who's reason for being there is flimsy at best. There is an accident near the end that is bizarre and adds nothing. Special effects are reminiscent of special effects from the 70s.