Geo-Disaster

This movie was so bad, it doesn't even warrant a review. However, I feel compelled to issue a warning. Seriously, it's bad and not bad in a way that may result in a cult classic but rather, bad in a way that you want to sue those responsible for wasting your time and money.

Bad acting, worse scripts, poor camera work, ridiculous special effects, and atrocious science (or anti-science).

Sorry, I have nothing to really say about the scenes except to say that within the first ten minutes, you will understand why I gave this a 1 rating. If your time is precious, stop after ten minutes because it doesn't improve.

There was absolutely no talent involved in the making of this movie. Even the title is stupid.

I'm giving this a wary 4 stars... rather than a typical 2 or 3 an Asylum film would ordinarily garner.

On the one hand, for an Asylum film it's not half bad. Which means it's not half good. The whole film (without spoilers) can be summed up as:

1) Something bad happens that puts the entire earth in danger 2) A couple or three local bad things happen that endanger a family and their friends 3) Nothing much else bad happens, evidently earth-wide. Birds are chirping, the catfish are jumping, let's go play some baseball.

In short, disappointing and VERY anti-climactic. The one overwhelming sensation I got from this film was surprise when the end credits started rolling. What, seriously, that was it?

I reserve 1-3 for BAD films... and this wasn't a "bad" film per se, just not very memorable. It doesn't make any point. It achieves little other than "family is important". It's like a "bad day in my life" flick... which is about all that this encompasses... one single day. One would think world-wide cataclysmic events would entail more than a single day of localized disaster. I guess the special effects team ran out of miniature volcanoes and tidal wave tubs.

It's better than most Asylum films... which is still below standard cinema standards. One just has to wonder: Is Asylum even capable of writing an actual script? Or do they just send actors out into an area with a camera crew, an on-the-scene idea-man, tell them all to wing it and then handle all the rest in the editing room? Wait, I think I just answered my own question.

Literally so bad i don't enough giving a review is wasting time or an appreciated warning to others. The acting is truly awful in so many aspects! the effects are poor in such ways it was like watching a game from an old console. Couldn't bare to watch anything more after 15m. For what is a good idea of a film.. so many aspects ruin it. If you cannot create visuals like the day after tomorrow, don't even attempt it.

Most reviewers don't get the low-budget disaster movie genre: terrible screenwriting, absurd dialogue, laughable effects and shockingly poor acting are a feature, not a bug. If you're expecting to care about any of the characters you're mistaking this for a screenplay. Of course it makes no real sense, lame stereotypical shallow characters speak at one another in wooden, poorly timed silly exposition; inexplicably emotional damp squibs that build to nothing, aparently fearful of some terrible demise from falling polystyrene and 90s CGI so bad it would make your eyes bleed.

If you're not crying with laughter at the utter bilge of it, then you're in totally the wrong mindset (maybe you're not on your 5th beer yet?) It's genuinely HARD to make dross this bad. A solid 4 out of 10 for making me laugh so much, without being a real film of course.

This movie is so ridiculous so we stayed with it for the laughs. For instance, the dad makes a little speech to the son as they're crawling up the mountain that he'd always protect the son and never let anything happen to him and at that moment the son is hit head-on in the face with a softball-size rock. Silly as all get-out.