NOTE IMDb
3,9/10
4,3 k
MA NOTE
Lorsqu'une éclipse solaire envoie une explosion colossale d'air super froid vers la terre, elle déclenche alors une chaîne d'événements catastrophique qui menace d'engloutir le monde.Lorsqu'une éclipse solaire envoie une explosion colossale d'air super froid vers la terre, elle déclenche alors une chaîne d'événements catastrophique qui menace d'engloutir le monde.Lorsqu'une éclipse solaire envoie une explosion colossale d'air super froid vers la terre, elle déclenche alors une chaîne d'événements catastrophique qui menace d'engloutir le monde.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Nick Falk
- Brent Durant
- (as Nicholas Falk)
Sara Ellis Holland
- Meteorologist
- (as Sara Cooper)
Avis à la une
If you were irritated by the fact that Jack & Rose's path through the Titanic couldn't possibly have happened as they went through rooms that didn't even connect and doors that weren't even there and parts of the ship that were on entirely opposite sides without having to cross through the middle, then you won't like this movie.
It's definitely a made-for-TV type of movie and it's definitely modeled after "The Day after Tomorrow" (almost character-for-character). The science is rather atrocious, also, but if you yourself -are- scientifically illiterate or if you're just used to scientific illiteracy in cinema and therefore unphased by it, then you might like this flick. I was surprised to see SG1's Michael Shanks in what seemed to all appearances to be third-rate billing, but he was in it and he played as well as he ever does.
I'd recommend this if you're really kinda' reaching for something to watch, and you're not feeling too picky and SyFy made-for-TV quality is acceptable to you (I don't think it's a SyFy flick, but it's the same general quality). If you're into serious flicks, or if you don't care to see another "Day After Tomorrow", steer clear.
It's definitely a made-for-TV type of movie and it's definitely modeled after "The Day after Tomorrow" (almost character-for-character). The science is rather atrocious, also, but if you yourself -are- scientifically illiterate or if you're just used to scientific illiteracy in cinema and therefore unphased by it, then you might like this flick. I was surprised to see SG1's Michael Shanks in what seemed to all appearances to be third-rate billing, but he was in it and he played as well as he ever does.
I'd recommend this if you're really kinda' reaching for something to watch, and you're not feeling too picky and SyFy made-for-TV quality is acceptable to you (I don't think it's a SyFy flick, but it's the same general quality). If you're into serious flicks, or if you don't care to see another "Day After Tomorrow", steer clear.
Easily one of the worst movies of all time. I'm understating it. This is the kind of bad that causes you to pause the movie so you can call your friends and tell them you are watching the worst movie in the world! Which is, of course, the very reason I loved it. I couldn't shut it off. The script is shameless, "releasing magnesium payload from high-altitude balloons..." This movie had me the whole way. You couldn't make this movie up. A killer cloud of ice, people freezing to death all over the place. A small fire that keeps the whole house from freezing and killing everybody in it. The fearless refusal to confront the obvious contradictions in the story; such as, the ability to go outside when necessary to get medicine and the ability to outrun the killer cloud by foot, when appropriate. This is a movie for the ages. Its a topical film that is all around brilliant in its ability to make you watch because you can't believe your eyes. You know its getting worse and you can't wait. If you love bad movies you need to see this movie immediately. Right now, today. Arctic Blast is easily one of the worst movies of all time. No question about it. Run out and see it today.
First of all, let me start by saying that 1 star is more generous than I'd like to be, however I'll award that one star for the comedy of errors.
Who did the research for this movie? Honestly - giving insulin to a person with low blood sugar (a dangerous thing for somebody to learn from a movie) and that complete nonsense about the mesosphere falling. I doubt if it was a school kid because they are generally more educated than this. It scored an F minus on the science.
The Australian accents were either fake or overdone. The direction was abysmal. What an embarrassment for the local emergency services to be involved in this movie.
The acting was high-school grade for the most part. They obviously had a couple of professional actors.
The special effects looked like something out of the old Batman TV series or Power Rangers.
To think that I paid money for this. It's honestly challenging the position of Santa Claus conquers the Martians as worst movie yet.
When it gets to the stage where you're laughing at how amateurish a movie is, it's just not worth it.
Who did the research for this movie? Honestly - giving insulin to a person with low blood sugar (a dangerous thing for somebody to learn from a movie) and that complete nonsense about the mesosphere falling. I doubt if it was a school kid because they are generally more educated than this. It scored an F minus on the science.
The Australian accents were either fake or overdone. The direction was abysmal. What an embarrassment for the local emergency services to be involved in this movie.
The acting was high-school grade for the most part. They obviously had a couple of professional actors.
The special effects looked like something out of the old Batman TV series or Power Rangers.
To think that I paid money for this. It's honestly challenging the position of Santa Claus conquers the Martians as worst movie yet.
When it gets to the stage where you're laughing at how amateurish a movie is, it's just not worth it.
My initial response to this film was unfairly snide, searching the lead actor's face in vain for simple change of expression. But although it took some time, I was finally able to find redeeming value in this tepid disaster film; this apparent new sub-genre of divorced dads winning back their families by saving them from natural disasters might have some worth if you take a drink every time you see someone on the phone. Of course having a character talk on the phone does not contribute any sense of urgency or suspense. In fact watching people talk on the phone in films is as annoying as watching them talk on the phone in real life - but this film is annoying enough to leave you falling down drunk. Three sips for speaker-phone, two sips for a headset, this film promises a good time.
I found this movie to be very similar to the movies Absolute Zero and The Day After Tomorrow. All three movies have a sudden deep freeze as the main theme. Of course you have the lone scientist who goes against the theories of the main stream scientists and gets ostracized for it. Then of course it turns out that he is the only one who is right and all the others are wrong. They screw things up more by trying to fix it with the wrong approach and in the end it is up to our outsider scientist hero to save the world. And of course you have to have the scientist be a dad who has to go rescue his kid. It's really nothing new, it's the same old story, just told in a slightly different way. An OK movie to watch, but too predictable.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesDue to its filming location, this is the first full length feature film to be filmed in Hobart Tasmania Australia and its surrounds.
- GaffesThe premise of the movie is incorrect. The ozone layer blocks harmful UltraViolet C light, which is a very important function to most life on this planet, since UVC destroys DNA (The higher the frequency the worse it is. UVA gives you a tan, UVB gives you melanoma, UVC kills everything), but Ozone is not a barrier preventing the cold of the mesosphere from reaching the ground ... that's mainly Air Pressure and Convection ... Warmer air rises, and air moves from high pressure to low pressure areas.
Ozone is an oxygen molecule with three single linked oxygen atoms in a triangle rather than two double linked atoms, and the photo-chemical reaction of oxygen to ozone and back is what absorbs the UVC wavelength energy. The ozone layer is between 12 and 19 miles above the earth, but if it were compressed to the atmospheric pressure at sea level, it would only be about 3 millimeters thick. The danger in a "rift" or hole in the ozone layer is rapid sunburn, possible genetic damage/mutation, or death depending on exposure level. for many years there has been a hole in the ozone layer in the southern hemisphere. it expands and contracts yearly, and most years it slowly moves around between Antarctica and the southern ocean and during other years it spans the entire Antarctic continent.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Starfilm (2017)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 5 000 000 $AU (estimé)
- Durée
- 1h 32min(92 min)
- Couleur
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant