Stonehenge Apocalypse

I liked this movie, OK it is absurd but somehow it managed to keep my interest alive. The scene in which the temple rises out of the earth is simply superb. The characters are believable and the acting is reasonably good. I don't expect George Lucas, Stanley Kubrick or even Wes Craven on most SyFy Saturday night movies, I wanted a movie that wasn't completely stupid (OK, not completely SERIOUSLY stupid, it was absurd & knew it, & had fun with it) and with a nice interesting pace, & this movie was surely it. Of course I wouldn't dream of spending money to see it! Overall, better than most cheapo sci-fi movies, fair to good acting (I think the lead character plays Castiel on Supernatural).

I was moved so much by this film to register at IMDb just so i could warn anybody who has not yet watched this film to save them from what must be described as cringe worthy agony.

The acting was dire, the sets i think where built by the pupils of the primary school that they had taken over. The pyramid in Maine was superb.

I was amazed to see the terraform had already started with the mountain ranges surrounding Stonehenge on Salisbury PLAIN !! noun: a large area of flat land with few trees. Compare with prairie.

It was only redeemed by the fact that it was so bad i wanted to watch more of it to see what else they could get wrong.

If you like that sort of pain then this ones for you..

I found Stonehenge Apocalypse to be quite entertaining. To put it into perspective, this was a low budget movie and so the viewers expectations should not be 'Star Wars'. But even with that, I believe the story line was good and the actors did an excellent job. There were some loose moments, but having seen enough science fiction movies (even the bad ones), I can assure you that this was a good and entertaining movie.

I read some of the previous reviews and found them quite negative. There was one review (seems from a SciFi fan) that seemed to be closer to what I had experienced (I am also a hardcore SciFi fan).

Don't expect 'Star Wars' from this and you will be quite entertained. People who consider themselves SciFi fans should definitely check this movie out.

In amongst all this mess is actually quite a good story. If it had been written by Clive Cussler or Michael Crichton it could have been a very good book.

As it is though its not a good film. The acting is poor as is the way the story is told.

The first half is set in the UK but clearly filmed in the US. Special effects are just what you would expect.

The science involved is truly laughable and its clear nobody did any research whatsoever.

Even though the bad things about this film massively outweigh the good it still put a smile on my face and it made me want to watch to the end to see what happened.

So, the world is ending. That's a plot device you'll see a lot of in the next two years. We've already seen it in "2012" and now SyFy has taken a crack at it, somehow trying to connect Stonehenge to the pyramids and electromagnetic energy.

We can already say the budget and effects are bad because it's a SyFy film, and I think everyone knows what they're getting into regarding that. But what is up with the plot. Some have tried to defend the film, saying it has more plot than "2012" and maybe they're right. But it is still a plot that makes no sense.

There is no connection between the pyramids and Stonehenge. There is no way that ancient peoples knew about electromagnetism. The only way to try to make these ideas work is to throw in aliens or something, and that's just ridiculous. If you're going to end the world in a movie, make it something at leas based roughly on real science.

And please, please, please case an actress who can pronounce "Stonehenge". I know Britons say "WeekEND" instead of "WEEKend", but here the emphasis is on STONE, not HENGE. There are other kinds of henges, thus the need to clarify it's a stone one. Thank you.