Menace arctique

Half way through this film i hoped that the "Arctic Blast" would consume me and put me out of my misery! I watched this movie for amusement entertainment value only! it truly was appalling! the effects and the cast were indeed the worst i have ever seen, I would rate this as a J-K rather than a B movie!!!! I especially loved it around 36 minutes in when the cold front attacks the beach and the lead characters! there is a "fogs eye" view which is sceeearrreeeyyy!!! OK its not but again this film just makes me laugh, laugh, laugh! I would highly recommend it to groups staying in for a slumber party as it would at least encourage you to get drunk to cope!

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.

Solar eclipses are effecting the atmospheric layer causing a gigantic drop in temperatures. Jack Tate (Michael Shanks) leads a climate science team based in Hobart, Australia. Unbeknownst to them, their research ship gets flash frozen when a jet of cold air blast through the atmosphere. Jack is facing a divorce from his wife Emma and his daughter Namoi is not happy. He is shocked to see their ship run aground. Institute head Walter Winslaw (Bruce Davison) is reluctant to alarm the public. Jack can't get a warning out and he has to rescue his kid.

This is pulling from similar junk-science as "The Day After Tomorrow". The difference is that nobody cared about the science in that movie. It was just an excuse to see NYC get CGI destroyed by a tidal wave. There is no such fun in this movie. The CGI in this one is pretty weak. The other problem is the way the situation is solved. It is basically a lot of computer modeling. I do have to say that this is some of the best fake computer modeling around. :) The action is mostly badly conceived. When Jack gets to the beach, he should grab her kid and yell "RUN!" Instead, he spends time to explain science to the kids and stand around waiting for them. It's an opportunity to amp up the tension. He should be raving mad which would inject some excitement. Worst of all, Jack takes off in the middle of a world wide catastrophe to go to the drug store. It's a pretty bad TV movie.

I was extremely disappointed with this movie. Basic common denominators were forgotten when making this film. ie. A vehicle will not start at - 100 especially if you live in a country where gasoline isn't treated to endure freezing temperatures. Also you could not brush the ice off a windshield.... You would be scraping a very long time; when it's cold you would see your breath; these are some basic but important realities that were totally overlooked in this film. I'm guessing the makers of this movie have never actually experienced living in a cold climate and understanding the reality of it. This movie was much too unrealistic and anyone thinking about watching it think again.

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.