Apocalypse Earth

So you can best understand the title of this review, let me explain Thunder Levin's "Sharknado". The film features sharks that wait around for Pacific Ocean hurricanes to pick them up and deposit them in Southern California. It features a great deal of dry land shark attacks and even one shark that is able to climb a nylon rope.

Thank GOD none of that occurs in "AE: Apocalypse Earth". This movie starts with the Earth under attack by aliens and Noah's Space Ark leaving with some grouchy mercenary who just wants to get back to Earth. What no escape pod?

The effects are very poor CGI, so don't expect much there. The one- million dollar budget, must have been spent on the body spray for Bali Rodriguez. Most of the time, she is on screen makes me wonder, if they glued the bikini to her nipples. As much time as she spends in the water, they should have use water proof body paints.

The explosive crash of the ship makes you wonder how anyone survived without a scratch. There were other flaws, other than the acting, some geeky science that will make even the amateur star gazer laugh. When the crew from the two ships talk about their destinations. The first ship was heading to Alpha Centauri and they state that it has 3 star system but Alpha Centauri is a binary system with only two. The other group say they left for Barnard's Star and claim it is a binary system. Barnard's Star is a red dwarf star about six light-years away from Earth.

I caught this "Jane of the Jungle" epic on Netflix today. I guess it's not like I am out any real money. But I wouldn't expect anyone to enjoy watching this unless you are into low budget Tarzan movies.

"AE: Apocalypse Earth" is, unfortunately, a truly poor attempt at a post-apocalyptic sci-fi. The writing is severely lacking, and the acting - if one can even call it that - gives the impression that the cast was simply pulled off the street. Beyond the performances, the storyline itself is disjointed and uninspired, failing to create any compelling narrative. To make matters worse, the CGI is laughably bad, detracting significantly from any attempt at immersion.

Richard Grieco was the only actor I recognized, and while his performance was passable, the overwhelming lack of acting skill from everyone else, combined with the abysmal storyline and visual effects, ultimately dooms the movie. It's a production that fails to deliver on almost every front.

Save yourself the time and effort; do not waste your time on this one.

OK we all know Asylum doesn't stand for quality. The acting is poor (as to be expected) But the Story for once is not that bad. It all sticks together and scientifically it all adds up.

I rate it a 6/10 why? because i've seen way worse movies then this, and If I am going to give Moby Dick 2000 or something a 2 then this movie deserves a 6. It is that much better then most Asylum movies. CGI can be better but then again i've seen them way worse in other asylum movies. Acting is bad, but then again, i've seen worse acting The story on the other hand sticks, and that's why i am giving 6/10 acting = 1 out of 3 CGI = 2 out of 3 Story = 3 out of 4 together that makes 6 ;)

I will get right to the point. IMDb states that the estimated budget for this film was $350,000. If that is correct, someone stuffed most of that cash in their pocket because it sure wasn't spent on real production costs.

This film has the look, feel, and sound of a film school project. The photography, cinematography, sound, sound effects, visual effects, and acting are so below par that it is hard to take this film seriously.

I could point out specifics but that would take much too long since there is very little about this film that actually works.

Basically, start at the beginning, the script; terrible. The actors; amateurs. The photography; shaky and uninspired. The direction; film school project that got a D.

The robot was an outrageous riopff of Stng's Data. Every manerism, vocal style and behavior traight, he stole. Actor should be ashamed.