Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueOn the eve of the new millenium, the American military are alerted of a long missing nuclear missile hidden deep in the jungle which is set to go off in January 2000, due to the millenium bu... Tout lireOn the eve of the new millenium, the American military are alerted of a long missing nuclear missile hidden deep in the jungle which is set to go off in January 2000, due to the millenium bug. They must race against time to stop it.On the eve of the new millenium, the American military are alerted of a long missing nuclear missile hidden deep in the jungle which is set to go off in January 2000, due to the millenium bug. They must race against time to stop it.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Ismael 'East' Carlo
- Camarillo
- (as Ismael Carlo)
Adam J. Harrington
- Ken
- (as Adam Harrington)
Ken Camroux-Taylor
- Blanchard
- (as Ken Camroux)
Alannah Stewartt
- Stripper#1
- (as Alannah Stewart)
Avis à la une
Brilliant title infers a film with hundreds of possibilities, and they chose this one? everyone's into Y2K, it'll be an anagram associated with the year 1999 and let's face it -- it's *&^&^%^%ing spooky, eh? so what do we get? a half-baked testosterone fest with godawful dialogue poorly acted.
the "movie" bearing those dread three characters Y2K is supposedly about a U.S. missile in South America -- "We had missiles here?" the computer geek of the piece asks. "Duh," respond audiences. -- that gets a little bit kooky when it fritzes in response to 2000. (absolutely every other piece of technology seems to be functioning 100%, however.)
until an ending that takes forever to reach (you won't believe the one character's justification for his actions), we suffer through sheer stupidity.
if apocalypse does come with the calendar's turn, i think the time until then could be better spent in millions of ways.
the "movie" bearing those dread three characters Y2K is supposedly about a U.S. missile in South America -- "We had missiles here?" the computer geek of the piece asks. "Duh," respond audiences. -- that gets a little bit kooky when it fritzes in response to 2000. (absolutely every other piece of technology seems to be functioning 100%, however.)
until an ending that takes forever to reach (you won't believe the one character's justification for his actions), we suffer through sheer stupidity.
if apocalypse does come with the calendar's turn, i think the time until then could be better spent in millions of ways.
Nice idea. A secret silo has a computer failure at the change of the year (y2k, get the title?). A skilled team is coerced to go in and fix it, but their efforts are fatigued by drug lords and internal US armed forces strife. Unfortunately the characters are hollow and the idea is poorly executed. Remove the y2k theme and the glib characters, and there might be a solid movie here. Definitely worthy of a remake! If you watch it, don't sweat the details (which aren't terrible, just bad) and try to enjoy the underlying concept. While the current version is a 'MacGyver' movie (at best), a remake could be on par with 'Force 10 from Navarone.' If you like tension, a good plot, well developed characters, and nice plot twists... wait for the remake.
Y2K has squandered a perfect opportunity to make a good, tense action movie. When a powerful missile activates itself on a countdown for the millenium, the usual rag-tag team are sent to de-activate it. The trailer for this movie looked good, but in the actual film there is hardly any action or violence as expected and the story plods along without creating anything interesting in the dull boring characters. Overall the film is poor and boring. 3/10.
Louis Gossett, Jr., Jamiz Woolvett, Ed O'Ross. People must stop a computer from launching nuclear bombs.
This is like an odd blend of War Games and Navy Seals, though it works! The performances contributed here are all above par for a movie of this type. One does not typically expect realism from these American GI movies, as most often than not, the budget goes towards effects, high dollar action stars, and location shooting than script, props, or good performances. So imagine my surprise when I came across this little underdog.
Awesome action, with a little humor peppered throughout, and some awesome acts, this actioner walks you through some very suspenseful moments, high action sequences, and beautiful settings.
All in all? It is an enjoyable surprise if you like the military-type actioners. Otherwise, there is no reason to go here, as it's all about military action.
It rates a 7.1/10 from...
the Fiend :.
This is like an odd blend of War Games and Navy Seals, though it works! The performances contributed here are all above par for a movie of this type. One does not typically expect realism from these American GI movies, as most often than not, the budget goes towards effects, high dollar action stars, and location shooting than script, props, or good performances. So imagine my surprise when I came across this little underdog.
Awesome action, with a little humor peppered throughout, and some awesome acts, this actioner walks you through some very suspenseful moments, high action sequences, and beautiful settings.
All in all? It is an enjoyable surprise if you like the military-type actioners. Otherwise, there is no reason to go here, as it's all about military action.
It rates a 7.1/10 from...
the Fiend :.
The movie was obviously low budget which doesn't bode well for an action flick. However, the motivational premise of the movie surrounding Gulf War vets was unique enough to make this worth watching on a rainy afternoon (or late night). Acting by both Louis Gossett, Jr. and Sarah Chalke were notable. Good job on both parts.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesTonjha Richardson's debut.
- GaffesThe dialog has someone saying "Set the missile to detonate at 32,000 feet" - but the computer graphic on the monitor shows it set to detonate at "32.000 miles above sea level." That height (32 miles) would be too far up to cause significant damage - it is beyond most of the atmosphere. It is also more than 160,000 feet, not 32,000 feet.
- ConnexionsEdited from Predator (1987)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant