Avaliações de usuários

It is said that if you gave a thousand monkeys typewriters, eventually they will write Shakespeare... Guess what. They aren't done yet.

This movie or for those into PURE science fiction. Things that happen in this movie could only happen in a fantasy world. They should have added a laugh track and called it a comedy. I wish writers would try to write a disaster movie based on something that could really happen, but turn it up just a bit. A 10.5 earthquake sounds horrific (which it would be) but the things that they lead you to believe that could happen if there were one is just too far out there.

The only reason to watch this is to see the CGI.

This certainly was better than I expected from Filmrise, and considering it is a TV miniseries, I expected it was designed to give excitement, danger and entertainment. And that is about all it was. It is full of cliches, as if they ran down a check list of what audiences might expect. They wrap it in pseudo-science terms, and naturally have a discredited scientist as the person who is the one who can explain what is happening. There currently are major film franchises that have action as far fetched as in this series, and they make a lot of money. Even when they were supposed to be witnessing actual locations, they failed. King's Peak in Utah is nothing like they pretended to show. And they laid on the drama by having some take risks that no sane person would ever do just to keep up the excitement for the audience. They threw in a lot of shouting and screaming in the third installment for good measure. In the trapped scene in the Las Vegas casino, when it was insisted they had to go up to get out, it reminded me of a certain movie about an overturned ocean liner.

scientific credibility, you might think that the producers would have at least done a good job filming this.

Alas, no. The CGI are good for a TV film, which isn't saying much, but the ENTIRE film (virtually every scene) is filmed in that modern, irritating "zoom-o-matic" style of cinematography. In order to lend a sense of action or reality, the camera zooms in or out every few seconds. The whole film looks like Uncle Ernie trying his new 8 mm camera out at Christmas, 1978. I timed one shot of the President's daughter talking to a doctor. It was 8 seconds long and had 5 zooms in it.

A very, very dumb film made very, very poorly.

What is wrong with director John Lafia? Any chance of this film being any good was destroyed by the constant zoom in and zoom out. I have not seen many home movies filmed this bad. The constant zooming was so annoying that after an hour I had to turn it off. Of the hour I did watch the acting and dialog was unbearable. I really can't say if it got any better but the first hour was dreadful!

What is wrong with the directors in Hollywood now days? Why do they insist that all action scenes need to be filmed with a shaking camera or zooming all over the place (like MI:3)?

I liked the old days when good acting and action carried the scene not the blurred shaky camera work of today!

This is an escapist entertainment featuring a cast of good actors and some commendable production values - all rendered pointless by the director's incessant (and I do mean incessant) abuse of the zoom lens. Whose idea was that? The director? The director of photography? Who holds the blame? It became so nauseating that it effectively spoiled everybody else's hard work. The director is not a novice and yet he allows this same grievous mistake to sink this film as he did the previous 10.5 disaster TV movie. There seems to be a mistaken notion that manipulating the zoom lens equates with directorial style. Jess Franco would even be embarrassed.

The camera zooming back and forth was probably the single most irritating aspect of this disastrous disaster movie, that was even worse than the one before it. How actors with the talent of Kim Delaney and Frank Langella got roped into this pathetic film is bewildering. Scientifically it was atrocious.

The special effects were even worse, if that's possible, than the script and the direction.

I suspect that like Sharon Lawrence, who after leaving NYPD, got stuck in the equally tacky disaster flick 'Atomic Twister', Kim probably hopes that her participation in both these films will be quickly forgotten.

The part 1 was so bad it was funny, which is why we decided to watch the part 2 but part 2 didn't even manage to rise to the level of 'so bad it's funny', it was just pathetic.

This film may deserve a score of minus 1.

This film makes a tremendous amateur blunder from from the very beginning: it assumes the audience has seen (what I understand to be) the first film. (I hadn't.) There is no build-up, no dramatic lead-in, no preparing the viewer for what is about to happen... no indication there even WAS a prior film. In the first 60 seconds this drops cataclysm right into our laps with no preparation, no explanation, no warning. BAM! Here's an earthquake. BAM! Here's a tidal wave! BAM! Here's a volcano blowing its top.

Same holds true for the characters. There are no references to the prior film, no flashbacks to explain the existing story, nothing to prepare the audience for characters that pop out of nowhere and we're just supposed to magically understand their backgrounds and issues and empathize with what's going on.

The result: I paused this turkey after 15 minutes of ridiculously bad directing, came to IMDB and read the reviews, then shut it off... glad that I didn't waste three hours on what I'd already figured to be a prime example of how not to make a movie. Thanks IMDB, for helping me not turn that loser 15 minutes into a total loser evening.

Actually, I think the special effects were done fairly well, considering the scope of what they were trying to portray.

I mean it wasn't of Star Wars caliber, but it was entertaining, and most frightening.

As with most TV disaster movies you are limited to the extent you are able to take the special effects.

I felt the actors portrayed to the best of their ability the feelings that one might encounter, if facing this type of terrible disaster.

After what happened in real life to New Orleans and other southern states, and what they face each year from Hurricanes and Tornadeos alone, nothing is beyond the realm of possibility.

You know when someone learns Microsoft Powerpoint for the first time, that they have to prove their worth by including every single type of transition in the arsenal on every element, text, image, other. This movie was the same.

Zoom Zoom should be the title of this movie. I think I got up and walked away from the TV about all of 2 times, the first and the last; both times to get headache pills.

Count me out of the final half. Double yuck two thumbs down.

No

and

Thanks.

1. To call the acting sophomoric would be an insult to every sophomore out there. It's bad. Truly, unbelievably bad. Stilted. Forced. Wooden. (Dorothy Parker would revise her Hepburn comment here; many of the performers can't even run the gamut of emotions from A to B. As I've called some political commentators, "a one note symphony.") 2. I'm sure the reason for the in-out-in-out-up-down-left-right-left-right camera swings are to create a feeling of i*n*t*e*n*s*i*t*y and d*r*a*m*a. All they have done for me is create a feeling of m*o*t*i*o*n s*i*c*k*n*e*s*s. Once or twice might make for drama. Continual swings become tedious, at best. (I want the name of the lame brain that came up with this idiotic maneuver. I plan to send him or her a bill for my migraine meds.) 3. Since it's pathetically obvious that nobody on the writing staff took (let alone, passed) Basic Geology--could they have at *least* watched a half dozen National Geographic specials??? Willing suspension of disbelief is one thing; this is a whole different animal. ("Volcano" managed to keep people suckered in for a couple of hours--of course, it had the advantage of having a few people who could act.)

The best thing you can say about this waste of film is... it's a sequel that's just as good as the original from whence it sprang: LOUSY.

(And here we thought "Reunite Pangea!" was just a kicky t-shirt. Sheesh.)

Even the CGI effects...the only reason for watching this kind of crap... is bad. Some of the effects look like a badly done video game. THe destruction of Hawaii is particularly bad. The script is embarrassing. The characters are one cliché after another. The actors seem to be making no effort whatsoever..but considering how bad the script is you can't blame them. The original film was bad enough, but at least some of the effects were decent. This one lacks even that. Everyone involved with this should be ashamed foe themselves. A lot of this film is not even done on a minimum professional level. Even the infamous Sci Fi Channel original movies, bad as they are, manage that. If Uwe Boll made a TV miniseries, this is what it would look like.

I totally agree with the other commentators on this movie. The director used the Zoom lever on the camera WAY TOO MUCH! I don't think there is a single scene in which there is no zooming without a purpose. The zooming was so intense and persistent that it made my head spin. The other thing I found totally annoying was that there was just as much, if not more, commercial time than movie time.

I like sci-fi movies, so I turned in for the second half, but wow. Last time I checked, it takes time to decode, process, and display data on a computer screen. This movie seems imply that satellite data on multiple layers are viewable immediately after the event happens.

I simply can't wait for MST3K to get ahold of this one.

The only sci-fi buffs who would like this movie are...Mystery Science Theater 3000 buffs! Seriously, I should be recording all the comments I'm making while watching this. We have a local horror host here named Zomboo (who curiously is missing from the IMDb) who does a MST3k-type bit except he inserts himself into the movie, and I dearly wish the lawyers weren't so strict about copyright issues because this movie would be PERFECT for him, MST3k, or anyone else who does similar work.

In other words, bad effects, bad acting, a script that borders between bad and "it MUST be tongue-in-cheek!": this movie is one to tape and bring to a party where everyone is totally lit!

Mike

What did we learn from 10.5 Apocalypse? Well, some very important factors...

First, if there ever is a huge earthquake, don't worry, somehow or another there will be thousands of beauticians and make-up artists running around ensuring we all look great while the United States sinks into some hole. Yes, this series shows that whether falling from crumbling buildings, or caught in the falling debris, you can still look like Lancome's latest model.

Second, No one at the USGS has a brain. Yes, they are all so stupid they don't even know what a "rift quake" is until the beautiful doctor know-it-all comes on the scene to tell them.

Third, all rescue teams are made up of hunks. It must be that Calvin Klein is putting together these teams because they are all handsome, buffed-up, and not a fully grown, or fully shaven beard among them! Fourth, take heart - when this earthquake hits, we have one redeeming factor to look forward to. Most of Texas will be drowned. We can only hope that George W. Bush is at home for this disaster and if we get lucky, Dick Cheney might be visiting him.

This mini-series is, without a doubt, the stupidest, most idiotic, most boring presentation ever developed by man. It presumes that the viewer is a moron, and has so many lousy actors doing their absolute worst that within less than an hour, the only enjoyment one gets from this mess is thoroughly enjoying watching whining screaming idiots get killed - and the best is that every such 'tragedy' is forecast.

The filming alone is enough to make you sea-sick, with the camera zooming up the actors nose every time some 'heavy' line is to be delivered. And heavy lines? Holy moly, this series is loaded with the most clichéd lines per second, and every one of them drops with a dull thud.

Avoid this series at all costs unless you enjoy severe torture - which is what watching this dud is all about.

Cool Graphics, Cool Plot, Cool Acting, Realistically It Was Decent Except for the part where everyone is crying at the end, it was retarded you could tell everyone was faking it, and when Jordon was looking at the dam, and then realized that he should leave and the pilot is sitting there waiting for him to say something, if i were that pilot i would of kept my distance from that. all in all it was a OK, i would give a 6 out of 10. just because it was entertaining to see what could happen when the earth really decides to do what this movie shows us.

Hope This Was Helpful

For some reason 10.5 (2004) isn't available in my location. What's that about?

I watched this movie many years ago. It's so bad that it turned out to be good.

Funny in an unintended way.

Funny as in ha ha and funny as in strange.

If you watch this movie, follow the blue folder. It has a bigger part than any of the actors.

Pity I came into it a little after 9:00 p.m. I got involved in this sequel very quickly.

The characters made me forget the science gaffes; they're right up there with 1970's Earthquake as I care for all of them. A better movie this go around. Character types more broader in terms of physical appearance--and personal conflict pushed miles away.

And thank God there's more than one character possessing sense! There's 2 wonderful African-American ladies respectively working with the military and a disaster committee in continual touch with the president. Beau Bridges is back as the president and with a few tweaks to the script, his president doesn't have to ride solely on his acting. He seemed like he was straining to appear real in the 1st 10.5--not here.

Human drama is beautifully underplayed. No whining couples failing getting it together until the last half our of movie. Especially wish Langella had been in the original; he gives the film a dash pizazz the first seriously lacked.

Not to say this movie is without flaws. We have the EMT person working to save his wife--What chance in blue blazes that would happen unless one's just ready to leave for work? The sudden fast camera break-aways and good ol' 10.5 jiggly cam; but both are mild compared to good ol' Cloverfield. The technical element that's really bad is the Nuclear plant--couldn't they have built a scale down model instead of the computer generated crap? Alright last one's nitpicking and again like the camera pans and jiggly-wiggles are comparatively mild. Sad I missed the beginning hanging around to see the end.

In addition to lame plot, the director either has a problem directing the camera man or the camera itself is broken.

As previous users have noted, the plausibility of such occurrences as a result of a 10.5 quake are comedic even though this movie seems to be billed as a possible disaster.

The acting was also horrible and unconvincing, however what really gets this movie from a would-be score of 3-4 to a score of 1 is the camera work. It is CONSTANTLY zooming needlessly. At every (frequent) scene change the camera does a quick zoom which becomes incredibly annoying and could result in headaches and nausea.