Ice Quake

The idea of a ice quake is a weird idea, but could have work for this stupid idea. But the movie itself is rather bland and uninteresting throughout. Most of the movie is spend of the family just wandering around the mountains and getting separate. That part isn't that interesting to watch and barely anything happen during it. There is a minor side about about a crazy scientist guy which ended pretty quickly. Even the military plotline is rather generic and isn't interesting at all. As for the disaster scenes, there not that much earthquake disaster that you see throughout the movie because it spend a lot of times on the mountains with just cracks on it. The movie does has some nice explosion in it. And the acting itself is mostly bland.

Ice Quake could have been better, but is a bland movie that wasn't that enjoyable.

Ice Quake is another SyFy Channel film so as always keep expectations low.

Two geologists (one dressed as Santa) investigate tremors on a mountain when a deep crack appears with some shimmering effects indicating some kind of gas escaping which freezes one of the geologist jumping over the crack. The mountain is releasing sub zero methane gas via earthquakes which causes avalanches placing nearby towns in danger.

Brendan Fehr is up in the mountains with his family looking for Christmas trees but ends up battling for survival as ice geysers spew and quakes occur unleashing avalanches leading him to deal with various problems. Victor Garber lends respectability as the Colonel trying to locate Fehr.

Its a rather poor film, quickly shot, below average special effects and some bad science.

Geysers of ice are erupting in Alaska near the city of Fairbanks. They seem to be moving, and if not stopped could cause great peril for the families on Christmas.

I could make lots of complaints about this film (and will shortly). But I want to say that despite all the bad things, it was still enjoyable and used far less CGI than typically seen in a SyFy film. I appreciate that they seem to know the film will be cheesy and try not to make it more than it is. I see too many films that take themselves seriously and just end up being boring (most recent example -- "Don't Let Him In"). This one is a fun movie.

That being said, it has some questionable aspects. You have a father far too young to be the parent of a teenager. You have methane gas causing people to die just by touching it. You have Alaska, on Christmas Eve, with bright green grass. Methane apparently does not dissipate after causing cracks to the surface and can be directed by explosions...

As far as preparation, Brendan Fehr explains, "We have about two weeks max and usually about a week before the whole thing gets rolling." So it is a very quick process from landing a role to filming. So you have to give a little bit of credit to Fehr and co-stars for picking up the characters quickly, knowing the lines, working against events that are not really there... and not getting paid much to do it.

I would still recommend this... to a point. It is not award-winning, it is not the best film of the year (or even the month). But it is a good party movie. This is the kind of film you can enjoy with a friend, a beer and a pizza. You do not have to pay close attention to grasp the plot. And sometimes that is okay.

Suspend your beliefs, and just enjoy a movie that hits all the cliches that a low budget movie is expect to check off. If one streams it for free, that is the appropriate price to pay. Yeti is their dog that disappears when they are going into the mountains to cut their own Christmas tree, and perhaps one of the more talented actors in this movie. It is not great, yet it does not scrape the bottom of the barrel for movies of this type. Some nice snow covered mountain scenery although having a snow cave to survive in is not suggested to have an open front. The so called science presented is absurd, then that is not the core audience the movie is intended for. Perhaps 4 is a bit generous for a rating, but at least it is a family film.

Awful, just bloody awful. It is difficult to decide what negative aspect of the movie to discuss as there were so may. In fact, I would speak of a positive aspect if I could find one.

I am a Canadian and cringe whenever I see that I am about to watch a Canadian movie as I have rarely seen one that did not leave me constantly saying "Oh, come on, really?"

What bothers me the most is that movies such as these are funded, in part, by tax revenue in the form of government film grants. We have people living on the street, children going to bed hungry at night, and the government feels it is more beneficial to put money into dismal productions like this.

I am not one who turns off a movie once I start watching one. Perhaps I am a glutton for punishment as this movie (using the word loosely) left me feeling like I threw away the portion of my life that was devoted to watching this. It is as if it was a class project done by students from a high school film class.

I honestly do not understand how it is that people can produce a work like this and feel that it is good. Spend the money needed to create something of this calibre and release it on the unsuspecting public.

I seldom write reviews, but I am so tired of seeing my tax dollars going to make such horrible movies that I had to vent. If given the opportunity to watch this movie or scrub toilets in a subway station, go for the toilets. It will surely be far more rewarding and enjoyable.