Deep Impact

Both Deep Impact and Armageddon were released in the same year 1998 and both had almost same story but I enjoyed Deep Impact more.

The cast played their characters nicely. The direction was good. The running time was proper 2 hour and not like Armageddon which sas unnecessarily stretched to 2hr 30min. The pacing was also proper, you will not get bored. The logic in the story was far better than Armageddon.

It's hard to believe how did this movie grossed less than Armageddon. It's box-office collection is proof that movie is underrated. Overall, give it a try. You eill enjoy it.

It seems 1998 was the year Hollywood turned to the idea of the world being decimated by objects from outer space to fuel their disaster films. Both 'Deep Impact' and 'Armageddon' were released in that year but while I did enjoy the thrill and special effects of the latter film, I find 'Deep Impact' the superior of the two.

The film begins when a teenage amateur astronomer discover a comet on a direct collision course for the Earth. The world is then thrown into turmoil has humanity has to accept their possible extinction. While NASA sends a shuttle up with the intention to try to blow the comet to bits, the US government selects people to be saved in a cave they are building to withstand the event. Focusing on various unrelated characters, the film shows how people react differently to the destruction of all that they know.

The brilliant cast, including Morgan Freeman, Vanessa Redgrave, Robert Devall, Elijah Wood, Ron Eldard and many others, all given great depictions of their characters. It is because of their ability to bring their respective characters to life that 'Deep Impact' stands up so well as it is a very emotional and character driven story, as opposed to 'Armageddon', which relied much more on humour and special effects to sell it. Téa Leoni is the only one who doesn't shine through like her co-stars as her performance is quite bland and doesn't capture her character's turbulent emotions. However, as the rest of the cast give great performances, it's easy to overlook her. And even though there is much attention given to establishing the characters doesn't mean the film skimps when it comes to the special effects. Both the scenes in space and those on Earth when the comet hits the planet are well-handled visually. It features some of the best special effects of planetary annihilation that I've ever seen (and I'm a big fan of these disaster flicks).

What makes 'Deep Impact' rather unique in terms of disaster films is that it gives a very human side to tragedy and devastation by showing how ordinary people cope in times of crisis but it avoids the trap of being trite and overly-sentimental. It's a shame the film is so underrated then as it is a film that would appeal to sci-fi fans and those seeking an interesting story with strong characters.

Oddly enough, I always saw the 1998 movie "Deep Impact" as being somewhat of a subpar natural disaster movie, but each time I watched the movie since 1998, making it about four or five times now, I must admit that the movie had been steadily growing on me.

Why? Well, because the storyline in "Deep Impact" is more than just your run-of-the-mill action-packed natural disaster movie. Writers Bruce Joel Rubin and Michael Tolkin managed to put together a script that provides entertainment well beyond the mindless destruction of meteors crashing into Earth. This is also very much the storyline of hope, love, forgiveness and renewal, and that is what has grown on me over the years.

The acting performances in "Deep Impact" are good, and the cast ensemble is equally good. I mean, with the likes of Robert Duvall, Morgan Freeman, Téa Leoni, Elijah Wood, James Cromwell, Ron Eldard, Jon Favreau, Blair Underwood, Leelee Sobieski and Richard Schiff, then you are in quite capable hands.

The special effects in "Deep Impact" are still actually fairly good today, 26 years after it was initially made. Sure, the CGI looks a bit outdated, but it still serves its intent and purpose.

My rating of "Deep Impact", from director Mimi Leder, lands on a six out of ten stars. And it is a movie well worth watching if you enjoy natural disaster movies.

"Deep Impact" was one of two collision-related movies released in summer, 1998 (the other was "Armageddon"). Whereas the latter had no other purpose than to have Bruce Willis kick ass, the former was actually quite good. More than just an action movie, this one shows the human aspect of everything. One of the most interesting aspects is Pres. Tom Beck (Morgan Freeman). Whereas we usually expect black men in movies to be macho, this guy talks about his belief in God. I guess that the only thing of which I would have liked to see more would have been the shelters, but I guess that such an aspect would probably occupy an entire movie on its own. All in all, a really good movie.

I just saw this film again after several years. I feel that it was the best of all the disaster films made in recent years. Not too much cheese, a little heavy on sap but satisfying overall. It was much more realistic than Armageddon(which I think is one of the most overrated 'blockbusters' ever)There are no comic relief characters, no cheesy one-liners and no gorgeous movie stars(no offense to Tea Leoni). The solution to the problem was more real in Deep Impact and the time frame was much more believable. I like how the film focused more on what was happening on earth rather than in the spaceship. The end was interesting because the disaster wasn't totally averted so there was no cheerful hugging in the end with lame Aerosmith playing over it. The only thing that bothered me was that all of the nuclear missiles from the US and Russia had no effect on the comet. Wouldn't several hundred nukes do something? anything? and why wasn't the Messiah destroyed in the blast? So overall, good flick, deserves more credit.