NOTE IMDb
3,8/10
1,5 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA historic space launch triggers a solar-storm event that could have cataclysmic repercussions for the planet if it isn't stopped in time - and time is running out.A historic space launch triggers a solar-storm event that could have cataclysmic repercussions for the planet if it isn't stopped in time - and time is running out.A historic space launch triggers a solar-storm event that could have cataclysmic repercussions for the planet if it isn't stopped in time - and time is running out.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Alex Weiner
- Reggie Walker
- (as Alexandre Weiner)
Mylène Dinh-Robic
- Denise Balaban
- (as Mylène Dinh Robic)
Marcela Pizarro
- Gloria
- (as Marcela Pizarro Minela)
Avis à la une
Firstly I should like to say that I genuinely believe that were I to watch this in glorious 3D the characters would still stubbornly remain wholly 2 dimensional. A cast of characters and a global population all in direst peril yet not one managed to elicit the smallest shred of sympathy. Logically I should next discuss the plot but that would require the existence of one. And last and least the science, sorry 'science', is unfathomable. How is it possible that anyone tasked with creating a script could so utterly fail to grasp even the tiniest shred of the laws of physics.
All in all quite the most preposterous slice of pseudo-science I think I've ever had the misfortune to come across.
Just an aside but am saddened to see that the prior comment by welsh_dragon_roar was so poorly received. I mean come on. It's irony folks.
All in all quite the most preposterous slice of pseudo-science I think I've ever had the misfortune to come across.
Just an aside but am saddened to see that the prior comment by welsh_dragon_roar was so poorly received. I mean come on. It's irony folks.
Why can't the casting director (if this nonsense had one) pick the lead actors that can speak clearly, or at least don't have any speech impediments? I'm talking about Anthony Lemke. I don't know why his bottom lip sticks out, or his jaw, or why his tongue doesn't work. But I would have thought that the director would request another take when this guy mumbles his lines.
Perhaps he - Lemke - thinks it is "Brando-esque" to mumble, to be incoherent, but I don't. It is a pain.
So for those of you who actually want to understand the mumblings of this lead actor... get the subtitles!
Perhaps he - Lemke - thinks it is "Brando-esque" to mumble, to be incoherent, but I don't. It is a pain.
So for those of you who actually want to understand the mumblings of this lead actor... get the subtitles!
No spoiler. No hyperbole. Just a really poorly acted and poorly written work. In fairness, the lack of any reasonable budget is palpable throughout, with underwhelming sets and obvious inability to spend even modest money on scientific fact-checking.
Any positive reviews are clearly either family or Canadian members of the industry because there is simply nothing redeeming about this.
Acting - like a CBC drama series - wooden, two dimensional and forced throughout.
Writing - hackneyed and confused. The conflict between the two male leads is based on a simplistic less-than-made-for-TV concept, which only gets worse as their conflict continues.
As stated, the set design is cheap and the shuttle looks like something from Lost-in-Space - I kept waiting for someone to exclaim "Danger Will Robinson" (which, actually would have added an element of camp humour to an exceedingly dull and vapid film).
So - terrible in every sense. Nothing - and I mean nothing - to redeem it.
Any positive reviews are clearly either family or Canadian members of the industry because there is simply nothing redeeming about this.
Acting - like a CBC drama series - wooden, two dimensional and forced throughout.
Writing - hackneyed and confused. The conflict between the two male leads is based on a simplistic less-than-made-for-TV concept, which only gets worse as their conflict continues.
As stated, the set design is cheap and the shuttle looks like something from Lost-in-Space - I kept waiting for someone to exclaim "Danger Will Robinson" (which, actually would have added an element of camp humour to an exceedingly dull and vapid film).
So - terrible in every sense. Nothing - and I mean nothing - to redeem it.
If anyone watches a TV disaster flick and expects anything but entertaining schlock, they need a reality check. Such movies are designed for two nights of brainless entertainment, not scientific accuracy and logic. If the viewer expects the writers and directors to adhere to strict science at the expense of excitement and suspense, seriously... do you realize what this is? It's not like anyone forced you to watch yet another disaster film.
Comparatively, this movie is considerably better than anything produced by Asylum. The characters were cliche but at least held true to their nature. The writing wasn't awful (we've seen awful writing, yes?). Okay, so the science isn't spot on (or even close). The purpose here is to keep the average viewer entertained and face it, the average viewer has very little knowledge of actual science.
The questions here are: was the story entertaining, was the filming and acting okay, was it boring or exciting? Expecting a disaster film to be cerebral is like watching a Saturday morning cartoon and giving it 2 stars for being childish. Let's not be goofy.
I enjoyed the film, despite the scientific inaccuracy, despite the illogical presentation, because I didn't go in with a, "I'm going to be as critical as I can be" attitude. I went in to watch a television disaster film, knowing exactly what this genre usually produces. I wasn't disappointed. It held its own, according to what is expected from such films. Perhaps some of these reviews themselves need a 1-star rating for "Excessively unrealistic expectations". I mean geeminy, what were you expecting when you started watching this? ;D
Comparatively, this movie is considerably better than anything produced by Asylum. The characters were cliche but at least held true to their nature. The writing wasn't awful (we've seen awful writing, yes?). Okay, so the science isn't spot on (or even close). The purpose here is to keep the average viewer entertained and face it, the average viewer has very little knowledge of actual science.
The questions here are: was the story entertaining, was the filming and acting okay, was it boring or exciting? Expecting a disaster film to be cerebral is like watching a Saturday morning cartoon and giving it 2 stars for being childish. Let's not be goofy.
I enjoyed the film, despite the scientific inaccuracy, despite the illogical presentation, because I didn't go in with a, "I'm going to be as critical as I can be" attitude. I went in to watch a television disaster film, knowing exactly what this genre usually produces. I wasn't disappointed. It held its own, according to what is expected from such films. Perhaps some of these reviews themselves need a 1-star rating for "Excessively unrealistic expectations". I mean geeminy, what were you expecting when you started watching this? ;D
It's a C movie with a script seemingly developed by a small team of 13 year old boys, boys of average intelligence who enjoy sport more than science.
Every scene has some element of mind-numbing stupidity, be it dialog, acting, set (apparently Afghanistan exists in a Canadian quarry and is populated by a mix of Pakistanis and Palestinians, we know it's a hot country because there's about 3mm of sand on the floor)... so in every scene there's something to laugh about, shout "nooo!" or point at smiling.
The plot is incoherent, as are the motivations and actions of all the characters involved... it's a parade of poorly sketched fools.
I'm a fan of bad movies, Birdemic, Sharknado etc... this doesn't quite have the style or entertainment value of either of those two but I still found it funny.
If you choose to spend 3 hours of your life gaining pleasure from ripping apart a movie then you may enjoy this, otherwise stay well away my friends!
Every scene has some element of mind-numbing stupidity, be it dialog, acting, set (apparently Afghanistan exists in a Canadian quarry and is populated by a mix of Pakistanis and Palestinians, we know it's a hot country because there's about 3mm of sand on the floor)... so in every scene there's something to laugh about, shout "nooo!" or point at smiling.
The plot is incoherent, as are the motivations and actions of all the characters involved... it's a parade of poorly sketched fools.
I'm a fan of bad movies, Birdemic, Sharknado etc... this doesn't quite have the style or entertainment value of either of those two but I still found it funny.
If you choose to spend 3 hours of your life gaining pleasure from ripping apart a movie then you may enjoy this, otherwise stay well away my friends!
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesDavid James Elliott plays an Air Force pilot. For 10 seasons from 1995-2005, he played Navy pilot turned lawyer in JAG (1995).
- GaffesThe control trailer for communications has a satellite receiver placed on its roof. However, this would be of little use, since the trailer remains inside a hanger and would not be able to pick up any satellite data.
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