Deep Impact (1998) Poster


User Reviews

Review this title
503 Reviews
Sort by:
See This Movie.
JZeth2 June 2005
Deep Impact is a well-done and thoughtful film that powerfully delivers the human touch in its pondering of the age-old question: What if extinction was just around the corner?

Deep Impact is most often compared to its death-comet partner from the summer of '98, Armageddon. Deep Impact is a drama; Armageddon is an action film, and delivers just what we would expect from an action film, namely, over-the-top characters, a simplistic storyline, and an abundance of special effects. Deep Impact presents just the opposite: Characters that are notably human, several dovetailed story lines, and it saves the special effects (which are very good) for the movie's climax.

Armageddon did better at the box office primarily because it was much more hyped, and because it featured an A-list star (Bruce Willis) while Deep Impact did not. Its enjoyability, though, is very limited: If you are not a fan of the action genre, you will not like Armageddon. Deep Impact is the substantially better film and reaches out to the viewer to a far deeper degree.

As you certainly know, the plot revolves around the fact that a seven-mile-wide comet is on a collision course with earth, and if it makes impact it will represent an Extinction Level Event (i.e., the death of all life on the planet). Having about a year and a half's notice of this, the U.S. and Russian governments send a spacecraft, the Messiah, to destroy the comet by drilling nuclear warheads into its core and then detonating. The movie focuses on three primary story lines: 1. The young reporter Jenny Lerner (Tea Leoni) and her struggles with her career and her parents; 2. The high-school couple of Leo Biederman (who discovered the comet; Elijah Wood) and Sarah (Leelee Sobieski); 3. The crew of the Messiah.

All three story lines are done in such a way that the viewer easily sympathizes with the very believable characters. The best done of the three is the spaceship's crew, although the most time is spent with Jenny. They all suffer from the film's only notable problem: The story lines seem somewhat rushed. Considering its broad scope, Deep Impact clearly would benefit from an extra 30 minutes to develop, especially with the underdone angle with Leo and Sarah, but the directors evidently decided two hours was all they could use.

Deep Impact, as I mentioned, lacks an A-list star, but it does feature superb performances from two of the best supporting actors of our generation: Robert Duvall (Spurgeon Tanner, captain of the spaceship) and Morgan Freeman (Tom Beck, the U.S. President). Duvall is definitely the standout of the film with an A+ performance as Tanner.

As for the other actors/actresses: Tea Leoni (playing Jenny Lerner) gets the most face time in the film and delivers a believably good performance. Maximillian Schell as Jenny's father is the one notable casting mistake; I'm not sure what they were going for with him, but they could have done better. Venessa Redgrave does well as Jenny's divorcée mother.

Elijah Wood (now a star but at the time just an up-and-comer) works very well as the teenage Leo Biederman, and Leelee Sobieski as his girlfriend Sarah gives us as good a performance as we can expect, considering how woefully underdeveloped her character is. The film arguably devotes a bit too much time to Jenny and her father and not enough to Leo and Sarah.

If you haven't seen this movie yet, it should be at the top of your must-see list. The film moves at a good pace (if a bit fast), grabs your attention at the beginning and holds it throughout, and it features a truly exceptional final 20-25 minutes. What stands out most about this movie is its human touch and sensitivity. It manages to probe an impressive array of human emotions in two hours' time, and it will leave you with plenty to think about -- although it probably will not leave you with dry eyes. There are precisely three movies I have seen that caused the room to get dusty around me (if you get my drift), and this is one of them.

In conclusion: See this movie.
133 out of 186 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Fantastic and Moving
MovieGuy200713 March 2007
Having seen such films as Armageddon and The Day After Tomorrow, I really expected this film to be basically an effects demo reel. Most disaster films fit into this category: their plot is loosely tied together with some major event; humanity is threatened, a group of heroes is sent to try to save the world, and mankind prevails over nature. The rest of the film is essentially nifty visual effects that don't do much to enhance the plot.

So when I saw the first half of Deep Impact, I was amazed. Apart from a brief montage of special effects in the opening sequence (a car crash that simply screams "big budget"), the movie is one of the first disaster movies I've seen that actually focuses more on the human side of the drama rather than the awesome visual effects that computers can accomplish.

Many times during the film, especially during the latter half, I felt myself touched by the realism that the actors and actresses convey. There are moments when you realize how fragile and precious life is, and that's saying something for a film of this budget.

While the visual effects are indeed impressive, there are other features that make Deep Impact a necessary film to watch. James Horner's music is strikingly similar to his previous "Titanic" and "Apollo 13" scores, but it is still hauntingly beautiful and fits the tone of the movie perfectly. Tea Leoni does a good job of portraying a newscaster attempting to cover the events surrounding her while dealing with her own personal emotions, which is undoubtedly a hard act to pull off. Elijah Wood shows his skill years before "Lord of the Rings" hit theaters. The other actors and actresses are very realistic and emotional, and the movie flows smoothly with their presence.

All in all, this movie is not one to be missed. Keep an open mind while watching this movie: don't watch it with the misconception that it's just going to be another one of those big-budget dull blockbuster films that gets churned out every summer. This one dares to avoid the seemingly standard clichés set by other films of the genre, which makes it a truly unique film to experience.

Score: 9/10
68 out of 92 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Superior to 'Armageddon'
Mel J26 August 2006
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.
103 out of 146 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
"Deep Impact" is extremely under rated!
manonfire_jer20926 March 2005
5.9!? I can't believe that. I know disaster movies are usually crap such as The Day After Tomorrow, Armageddon, Godzilla, Independence Day, etc. This however was not crap. It boasted a fine cast that did great work the standout being Morgan Freeman and Robert Duvall. The rest of the cast though also did quite well. The story was handled in a fairly realistic manner and didn't require me to roll my eyes at the many plot contrivances the way the others I listed did. The only major flaw for me was the casting of tea Leoni. The usually dependable actress was extremely bland in this film. She has done much better work in her career. Despite that flaw this is another fine movie that for some reason is really under rated.
173 out of 256 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Still good years later
lillychr1430 April 2005
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.
71 out of 101 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
One of my favorite Sci-Fi films of all time!
LebowskiT100011 October 2002
It truly saddens me to see that this film has such a low rating on IMDB! I've seen this film several times and EVERY TIME it gets me a little misty-eyed at certain points in the film.

Since the release of this film and Armageddon, I've been unsure which of the two I liked better. I have always been leaning towards Deep Impact, so today I watched the film again to be sure. I definitely believe that Deep Impact is a better film. Although, Armageddon is a fantastic movie in it's own right.

I like Deep Impact better because I feel the story is much more realistic and slightly more interesting. Also, the acting in this film is just fantastic (but again, Armageddon was well-acted as well). After viewing the film again today, I thought "ya know, there is virtually nothing in the film that I really disliked", whereas there are a number of things in Armageddon that I really disliked!

The cast in this film is absolutely superb! You've got Robert Duvall, Tea Leoni, Elijah Wood, Vanessa Redgrave, Morgan Freeman, Maximilian Schell, James Cromwell, Ron Eldard, Jon Faverau, Laura Innes, Mary McCormack, Richard Schiff, Leelee Sobieski, Blair Underwood, Dougray Scott and Kurtwood Smith. They all did a superb job in this film and I think they all deserve a great deal of credit. I really liked that all the characters in the film were likeable. There wasn't a single one that "rubbed me the wrong way", they were all very well done characters.

I have to mention the special effects as well. They are just mind-blowing! All of the scenes with the astronauts on the comet are just superb! ...And the ship that they fly looks so cool! Also, the scene where the smaller comet hits the earth is just great! The level of detail is unbelievable in some of the scenes. You should see this film for the special effects alone.

If you like science fiction films with a great story that is quite touching at times, then by all means go see it. This film is honestly one of the better movies I've seen in quite some time. I truly hope that you enjoy the film. Thanks for reading.

144 out of 227 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Very moving.
brijess-212 July 1999
I found Deep Impact to be a very good "study" on how we has humans, may react to an E.L.E. (see this movie for details on that.) The special effects were good, but the best thing about this movie was the focus on the characters. This wasn't loud and stupid as "that other asteroid movie." This film will entertain you and mostly, touch your heart. You actually feel the doom that is about to reach these people, and to me, that is good film making.

About the only thing I could pick on would be the performance of Téa Leoni. To me, she was never convincing. She seemed down and depressed all of the time, even when she was doing the news. Very odd performance.

I give this film a B+
66 out of 101 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
an excellent film. very emotional
Dan Grant26 July 1999
What would you do if the end of the world was near? How would you react if you knew that there was no way you were going to survive what was about to happen? Would you want to survive what was about to happen? Deep Impact is an excellent film that tells the story of a giant comet that is heading towards earth and unless it is stopped it will destroy everything. It contains many inter-personal relationships, and it examines how people would react if the end was near. It doesn't get as deep as "Last Night" at examining those issues, but what it does better than Last Night and even Armageddon ( another film that I loved ) is it shows a little more about relationships. It has a father and daughter trying to patch things up before the end is upon them. It shows young love, parental love and the love for a country and the world we live in. Deep Impact had a deeper impact on me and I really admire both Hollywood summer films that came out and dealt with this issue. But Deep Impact has more to say than Armageddon does.

One of the things that I admired so much about this film was how Tea Leoni was so hell bent on uncovering a story so that she could move up in the ranks of reporting, and in the process she uncovers something bigger than any political scandal could ever be. At first she is following a tip about some senator that has retired from office rather urgently. She has transcripts with him talking about a girl named Ellie. And she is determined to uncover who Ellie is so she can embarrass the senator and quicken her pursuit to greatness. She finally confronts the senator on the dock where he is laoding a boat with what looks to be enough supplies to last for a year. She tries to bully the senator into telling her the story but he refuses. She then does some research on the Internet and finds out that Ellie wasn't the name of a woman, but an acronym for the comet. E.L.E. Extinction Level Event. She is horrified. The beginning takes up a good half an hour of the movie and it is during that thirty mintues that I became hooked. My emotions were manipulated to the point where I felt like I should be at home with my family. The direness of the situation was very well executed. And the rest of the film is on the same level. It does a great job at making us ask questions about ourselves. And we examine our own lives and wonder if we would be prepared if something like this ever happened. I realize this may be getting a little sentimental and perhaps sappy, but this film really tapped into my emotions and I think it did that to a lot of people. I highly recommend htis film for all that it is. The acting is top notch, especially from Morgan Freeman. He conveys the hurt, confusion and utter regret as the president of the United States. He knows that it is impossible to save everyone but he has to do what he can to save as many as possible. He truly is a great and gifted actor. The score is also a moving orchestra and the direction by Mimi Leder is swift and appropriatly crisp and dizzying in some ways. I have never heard of her before this, but I heard that Spielberg picked her himself for this project. And he was smart to pick her. She really does a wonderful job here.

Deep Impact is more than just a movie, it is an experience, and one that should be had by all. A wonderful, wonderful film.
90 out of 145 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A great movie
Mister_Anderson30 January 2005
This is a great movie. I think the people who don't like it are (1) people expecting it to be a summer blockbuster popcorn movie with a million special effects, or (2) people upset because they think it's cheesy / has scientific errors. Let me address both points.

First of all, this is not a disaster movie in the style of Armageddon or Volcano or any of them. It's a movie about humanity's struggle to deal with an impending disaster. And in doing that, it succeeds. Most of the film is supported by strong talent, including Robert Duvall and Morgan Freeman. In smaller roles, Max Schell, Vanessa Redgrave, and Ron Eldard really shine. I was disappointed by Tea Leoni's acting. And Elijah Wood and Leelee Sobieski didn't really do much for me, although they weren't bad.

Second, while the movie is not standard Hollywood flair, it doesn't altogether escape the Hollywood curse. There are a few fairly ridiculous moments and plot points. HOWEVER, compared to disaster movies, I have to say this are extremely minor. To counter this, there are some very touching scenes. I don't want to give anything away here, but most of them occur near the end of the film.

This is not the best movie ever by any means, but it comes as close as a mainstream Hollywood movie dealing with the end of the world is going to get. Also, James Horner's score was terrific.

Definitely worth a watch.
63 out of 101 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
The title is a lie
platypus221 January 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I recently re-watched Deep Impact, for the first time since its release. I remembered enjoying it the first time quite a lot and wanted to see how it held up after all those years. Verdict? I honestly can't imagine what I was thinking that first time and how I could ever call this film quality entertainment. Most likely my teenage brain stopped at "giant asteroid destroying Earth - sooooo cool!", because this film does not have much to offer beyond that.

With a global disaster movie you can go one of three basic ways. One, you can get serious and make it all about the big picture - realistic what-ifs, governments' reactions, impact on society, scientific background. Two, you can make it all about the characters - focus on a small group, real and interesting enough to make the audience genuinely care about them. Three, go for pure popcorn entertainment, with great production values and a huge spectacle that never takes itself too seriously. Combinations are possible too - my favorite example is World War Z (the book, not the film), which skillfully combines the first two approaches.

Deep Impact is a complete failure, no matter which template you compare it to.

The big picture part is unbelievably stupid, as if the writers had a single afternoon to come up with reasonably realistic ways this scenario might play out, and on top of that never bothered to talk to anyone who deals with actual real world disasters. The idea of everyone just going about their daily lives up to the last moment instead of putting a sizable portion of the nation's resources into preparing the majority of the population for the aftermath is too dumb for words. The idea of millions of people dying in the first impact because despite knowing months in advance about it, no one thought to evacuate the coast may be even worse.

The characters are equally awful. First of all, there are too many of them. There's only time for a brief introduction and as a result no one goes beyond a cardboard cutout with a couple of ham-handedly presented personality traits. The ones we're supposed to care about - Jenny and Leo with their families - are merely devices for generating artificial drama. Their idiotic actions are supposed to make the audience sympathize with them and feel their emotions. In my case they made me wish the tsunami would hurry up and wash them away already (with the sole exception of Jenny's mother, who I thought was rather interesting and well played).

Finally, Deep Impact is too cheap, too serious and too boring to be successful in the last category - pure, silly fun. The special effects are third rate, the humor non-existent and the plot slowly stumbles towards one of the least satisfying endings in the history of the disaster film genre. The climax should either tie up all the parts of the plot into a nice, satisfying package, or leave us wondering about what happens next - on the big, planetary scale, as well as with the characters we've come to care about. In Deep Impact the character are either killed by their unfathomable stupidity pretending to be deep sentiment and romantic natures, or they simply disappear, their future fate unknown and unimportant (though I imagine quite a lot of regrets in their future, concerning the needless deaths of their loved ones). The big picture is narrowed down to an optimistic speech and the image of reconstruction of a single part of a single country (which seems to stand for the entirety of human race in this case).

Ultimately the film that features one of the greatest natural disasters imaginable ends not with a bang, but with a disinterested whimper. Which could be considered quite an achievement, but not the kind I would give any stars for.
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
better of the two
jllb1711 August 1998
"Deep Impact" certainly ranks as the better of the two comet/asteroid disaster movies this summer. Unlike in "Armageddon," here you actually care about the characters, and I didn't find myself looking at my watch to see when the movie would be over. If there was one way to improve this movie, it would have been to show more scenes of Morgan Freeman (the best movie president in a while) and focus less on the plotline of the reporter and her father. Overall, though, a very entertaining film, which cannot be said for "Armageddon."
70 out of 128 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
People were really dumb in 1998
Devin Crim18 January 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I was 5 years old when this movie came out in 1998, and vaguely remember it being a big deal, along with Armageddon. Lo and behold, 17 years later I find this "classic" on Netflix. Its Tuesday night and I don't want to start on my homework yet, so I thought I would give this "classic" a view.

Now, I'm not an astronomy major, but I'm pretty sure an Earth killing comet would be spotted by someone other than a group of snotty nose kids in a field, since, yanno, people look for comets all of the time. Furthermore, there is no way the Government, which can't even keep itself funded half of the time could keep the news secret, since eventually you would be able to SEE the comet with your naked eye. Also, blowing a comet up only creates more chucks of ice, that basically equals the mass of the entire comet. Therefore, you would not only still have to deal with the full effects of the impact, but debris would hit more places around the globe.

The science in this movie is bad, but considering this was probably a summer blockbuster aimed at basically stealing 7 bucks from dumb Americans its OK.

What is NOT OK is the acting, and the actions several characters take. There are several characters that behaved so stupidly and unnaturally I couldn't list them all if I tried, so I'll focus on the dumbest. 12 year old Leo, the kid that found the comet gets married (lol) to his 12 year old girlfriend. They are offered a spot underground and will survive the Comet. Leo's girlfriend decides she wants to DIE with her mom and dad. Young Leo can't accept this, and turns away to go get his girlfriend, AFTER YOUNG LEO AND HIS PARENTS HAVE ALREADY TRAVELED TO THE OZART MOUNTAINS IN MISSOURI, THOUSANDS OF MILES FROM THEIR VIRGINIA HOMES. Young Leo's parents say "aww, OK, here is a WATCH SO YOU CAN TRADE WITH PEOPLE ON YOUR WAY 3000 MILES BACK TO OUR OLD HOUSE, BE SAFE SON". What parents in their right minds would allow this. You're sending your 12 year old son out into a world that will be on FIRE I 20 minutes with no realistic way of evening getting out of the parking lot before impact. Also, remember, this girl CHOSE to STAY with her parent and DIE in a tidal wave, rather than be with Leo. I used to be 12 years old, and every girl I meet was the "one". I would never leave a secure location to go be with a girl that would literally rather DIE IN A TIDAL WAVE than LIVE with me.

Anyway, Leo somehow makes it across the country, back to his Virginia house in less than 10 minutes with no means of transportation, and finds his lover in traffic. This time, she RELUCTANTLY agrees to go with him, 10 minutes before the comet slams into the ocean. Young Leo outruns a tidal wave moving 1100 MPH on a scooter. Let me say that again. Young Leo outruns a tidal wave moving at 1100 MPH on a scooter. I guess that makes sense considering he got from the Ozark Mountains in Missouri to Virginia in 10 minutes walking. Maybe HE should have been tasked with blowing up the comet.

Oh, I almost forgot about the ending. The idiots in space nuke the 2nd chuck of comet, "saving" the planet. Like I said before, the energy released from the comet would have the same effect regardless if its a solid body or broken up into chucks. Would you rather have 1000 nuclear bombs explode in one place, or 1000 places? Just Stupid.

I can't believe this movie turned a profit and I can't believe its considered a "classic". Morgan Freeman should demand his name by deleted from the credits. Just imagine watching a bad soap opera, music and all, wrapped in a disaster movie. I didn't even discuss the reporter. Awful. This is what I get for procrastinating on homework.
14 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Utter Crap
tmsdr21 October 2008
Total utter crap! It isn't even unintentionally funny, like Independence Day. Only good thing is the special-effects in the end when the meteor strikes. Unfortunately that constitutes only about 3 minutes of the movie. The rest is just an seemingly endless stream of over-emotional "farewell, i love you"-scenes. One big tedious, cheesy soap opera about how heroic and unselfish (american) people are when facing certain annihilation. All accompanied by a never-ending symphonic orchestra. This is one of the most surprisingly crappy movies i have seen i my life. A good example on how you can't trust the ratings on this site
40 out of 74 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Poor Man's Armageddon
ratchet12328 July 2015
This movie could have been a lot better, it's premise is great (asteroid on course to strike earth, mission sent to destroy asteroid fails, only very few people on Earth are selected to live on after the asteroid hits, leaving the rest to die a horrible death BUT they have many months before this happens so they must all still live together and wait for the inevitable) but what was needed to make it fulfil it's potential is completely missing.

The aim of this movie is to make you care about the characters and make almost every scene in the second half either a tearjerker or a philosophical eye opener. Now, if this had have been achieved then this would be a very good movie, cheesy but still a good movie. But it fails rather miserably to do any of these things because it is killed by three main factors; terrible pacing, complete lack of character development and a pretty awful, cliché dependent script not to mention the below par acting by many of the actors. As a result of all this, I felt absolutely zero emotional attachment to any of the characters which in a movie so heavy with sentiment, is a huge failure in itself. Also, I never felt excited or gripped by any of the action or suspenseful scenes because they would always be ruined by the never ending cheesy lines of dialogue or the shoddy special effects and I almost lost all interest near the end.

The sad thing is, even with a little better character development, this could have been a far better movie if it didn't feel like I was being forced to care about the under developed romance of the two teenagers who have a combined screen time of about 20 minutes or the irritating reporter with the personality of a spoon.

Now, compare this to it's unintentional but obvious counterpart, Armageddon, which may just be a big dumb blockbuster as well but it still makes me well up, get goosebumps, laugh and smile with joy in so many memorable scenes because of it's likable protagonists, satisfactory character development & plot, great pacing and fantastic cinematography, music & special effects. That's what makes a good blockbuster, Deep Impact, on the other hand made me feel none of this and really pales in comparison in my opinion.

I give it a generous 3 out of 10.
4 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Flawed But Better Than That Comet Movie With Bruce Willis
Theo Robertson29 May 2004
Why is it that everytime someone had an idea for a movie in the late 1990s someone at another studio decided to bring out a similar movie ? DANTE'S PEAK and VOLCANO both came out at the same and both featured volcanoes suddenly exploding into life , and there's several other examples of this unimaginative " let's makes a movie similar to a studio rival " movie pitch from the 1990s . Perhaps the best example is DEEP IMPACT and Armageddon which feature a giant comet going to collide with planet Earth . I should point out though that both movies were pitched to different audiences . Armageddon is marketed to the unthinking macho American audience . It stars Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck , is directed by Michael Bay and is produced by Jerry Bruckheimer so unsurprisingly it's a pile of expensive effects laden bubblegum . DEEP IMPACT came out a couple of months previously and is by far the better movie . However it is flawed

I think the problem with DEEP IMPACT is that it's probably produced to appeal to women . The main protagonist is female and there's several sub plots involving family issues ( " Gee Mom I hope the end of the world doesn't ruin my weekend " ) , oh and a bit of romance too . This doesn't ruin the movie but I did find the heroine's trembling lip and tears in her eyes in every emotional scene grating and the movie does lapse into terrible mawkishness several times . I also found the concept of a " lottery draw " to send people into deep bunkers where they have a chance of surviving the apocalypse unconvincing . Yeah right I sure the American president is going to give trailer trash and red necks to chance to come live with him . America might be a classless society but it's not that classless and considering Bill Clinton ( Often described as " America's first black president ) was in the White House at the time do we think that either men or ugly women would have a chance of being selected ? About as much chance as Bill inviting Hilary into the bunker I imagine

There are a few good points about the movie that stops it becoming an overproduced disease of the week movie . One thing is the cast , Armageddon had Bruce Willis and Ben Affleck while DEEP IMPACT has Morgan Freeman and Robert Duvall . Do I have to spell out what movie has the better cast ? Okay DEEP IMPACT isn't a career highpoint for either actor but they do bring serious class to the production and there's lots of familiar faces on screen like Frodo Baggins and the bad guy from MISSION IMPOSSIBLE 2 . The special effects are very good and there is one absolutely superb scene on a highway where thousands of bickering people are in gridlock , they slowly stop arguing and fighting amongst themselves as they look up and see the meteor pass overhead . On paper this scene might have seemed ineffective but on screen it's breath taking with a deep emotional impact

So in my humble opinion DEEP IMPACT is the better of the two movies and is probably the best comet/meteor movie ever made . It is flawed and could have been better especially if the producers cut out of the chick flick stuff but a good cast and some good scenes stop it from being worse than it could have been
13 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Thoughtful, character-driven disaster movie
Libretio11 February 2005
Warning: Spoilers

Aspect ratio: 2.39:1

Sound formats: Dolby Digital / DTS / SDDS

Mankind is threatened by a huge asteroid on a collision course with Earth.

Mimi Leder's thoughtful drama arrived in theaters shortly before the release of Michael Bay's "Armageddon" (1998) - a flashier, trashier riff on the same subject - and appeared to suffer in comparison with its outrageous counterpart, due to a script (by Bruce Joel Rubin and Michael Tolkin) which emphasized human drama over extravagant pyrotechnics. But DEEP IMPACT is enriched tenfold by this deliberate shift of emphasis, even though the film adheres to a routine formula established years earlier in such disaster pics as EARTHQUAKE and THE TOWERING INFERNO (both 1974). Here, the contrived melodrama of those older movies is replaced by a sincere contemplation of unimaginable catastrophe and the subsequent effect on mankind, highlighted by Morgan Freeman's authoritative presence as the beleaguered US president, who commissions a group of astronauts (led by Robert Duvall) to land a spacecraft on the comet and attach a series of nuclear devices to the surface.

Proceedings are hindered slightly by Téa Leoni's blank-faced performance as the TV journalist who stumbles onto the impending cataclysm whilst researching an apparently unrelated story about a 'philandering' senator (James Cromwell). Thankfully, the film is redeemed by its tremendous supporting cast, including Vanessa Redgrave as Leoni's proud mother, struggling to cope following her divorce from estranged husband Maximilian Schell, and a pre-hobbit Elijah Wood, playing the juvenile lead. It's to the filmmakers' credit that all these characters (and more besides) play vital roles within the overall structure, adding depth and resonance to an otherwise crowd-pleasing commercial enterprise.

The climactic scenes of destruction - involving a huge tidal wave striking New York - are brief but potent, precisely because of the human dimension stressed by Leder's intuitive direction. True, the outcome is fairly predictable, and there's a slight lurch into artificial sentimentality towards the end of the movie, but these are minor drawbacks in an otherwise worthy production. Fine music score by James Horner.
12 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
This film is a disaster!
ffwcsec13 June 2000
There is not one single part of this movie that is believable in any way. The characters are cliches, the plot is so contrived as to be unintelligible, and even the special effects are cheesy. I tried really hard to find something to like about this movie since I am a fan of Morgan Freeman, but the final scene where the kid outruns the tidal wave on a motorcycle was the last straw. I want my two hours back!
12 out of 22 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
There might be some SPOLIERS here, but the movie is bad anyway.
Neonsamurai10 October 2002
A comet thunders towards the earth on a cataclysmic collision course, and is spotted by a young lad who is able to warn the US government of impending doom. In order to stop the comet, NASA plans a space mission so flawed that my science teacher would have thrown it back and given them detention for a week!

What worries me is that should such an event happen (or any other Extinction Level Event), that some people might turn to Deep Impact as a rough guide on what do. I hope that they read these words before such a thing happens:

1) If a massive tidal wave is sweeping towards you at 100 mph, then running away won't do much good, or at least you should have thought about doing that much sooner.

2) If everyone not hidden in the underground shelter is going to die, then giving your son an expensive watch to use as a bargaining tool might not be very useful.

3) If your newlywed wife would rather get smashed to pieces by a massive tidal wave, than spend the rest of her life with you, then things aren't working out, and maybe you should spend some time apart.

4) If your daughter would rather stay with you and die horribly under a massive tidal wave, rather than spending the rest of her life with the nice young man she just married, then for heavens sake, speak up!

5) If you are the head of NASA and have to produce a mission plan to save the world, try not to include such points as; flying through the comets tail, giving the astronauts less time than a commercial break to complete their mission, giving them bombs that don't work properly or having a crew who suffer from ageism.

However, in the slew of meteor films (we'll, 2) that came at us in 1998, Deep Impact had one major advantage over Armageddon, it had an accurate title. There was an impact and I imagine that it must have been quite deep, but Armageddon… well… I felt a little cheated.

So in summary, by all means watch the film, but please don't copy anything you see. Especially you fellows at NASA.
15 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Vastly underrated film *spoilers within*
GrtOne4112 June 2003
Warning: Spoilers
Forget the unbelievable, undramatic fluff of Armageddon, this movie puts it to complete shame. This was not one of your 'everything's going to be OK in the end' movies. When I first watched it, I was actually surprised when Biederman struck Earth. I was thinking it would be one of those down to the last minute but in the end all is well type things. The striking scene and the ones that followed of the devastation were breathtaking. Rather than disregard scientific laws and reasoning, Deep Impact embraces it and includes it in the film.

What I liked most about this movie was that it provided what could have been a real picture into what would happen should a comet be on course for Earth. The panic, widespread fear, and the tough decision to move only so many people into 'The Arc' made this a surprisingly moving film.

The acting is mostly superb as well. Morgan Freeman puts out an amazing performance as the President, and Robert Duvall is first class, as is Maximilliam Schell. The only performance that brought this movie down was that of Tea Leoni. I like Tea as an actress, just not in this role. She was the only one who seemed out of place in an otherwise well-casted movie. Her dark, pessimistic broodings did not go over well. She was just too stiff and rigid to play a character like Jenny Lerner.

Deep Impact works on many levels because of the humanistic underlying tones. Humanity has never faced such a crisis before, and God forbid we never have to, however if it were to come to pass, I believe that this movie provides the best window into a catastrophic future. By far the most complete, through, moving disaster movie made. Well worth watching, especially the comet striking sequence. You'll be moved, I guarantee it.
12 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A Deep Impact
moviewizguy3 March 2007
A comet is on a course to collide with Earth, and people must cope with the fact that they will die. The President has devised a plan to keep as many humans alive as possible. Scientists have built giant caves big enough to hold a million people, and the government is going to have a lottery to pick 800,000 people to live in the caves along with 200,000 scientists, artists and doctors.

This film is very similar to Armageddon but also, they are completely different. Paradox? Yes. True? Yes. Both films have the an almost similar plot outline in which a comet is headed towards earth yet the films are completely different on the tone of the two films, the characters, and the action.

Deep Impact is a drama and Armageddon is an action film but I must say that Deep Impact is a better film than Armageddon. Deep Impact is a perfect title of the film. Not only does it mean that the comet will collide to the earth but it is also a metaphor of how emotionally driven the characters are in the film.

There's not as much action as Armageddon. In fact, the action is saved at the end with the great special effects in the film. There are very good acting by Robert Duvall, Téa Leoni, Elijah Wood, and Morgan Freeman.

If you want to see a film filled with action and special effects, I rather you see Armageddon. If you don't, watch this film. It is much better and more emotionally involved. This is a terrific film!
7 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
A 'Disaster' Sums It Up!
ccthemovieman-12 May 2006
This "disaster" flick was just that: a disaster. It features too much talk and not enough actual "disaster" footage and too much profanity for a family to watch an action film. This reminded me of the old "Airport" films in which the life stories of the people took up most of the movie, not the airplane crash or near-crash. In this movie, it takes an hour and 45 minutes before the dreaded comet hits Earth. When it does, however, there are some awesome sights. The sound was great on the DVD and the picture very sharp.

Tea Leoni, the main character, an MSNBC reporter (this network must have funded the movie with all the publicity it got in here), is flat in her delivery. She speaks in a monotone most of the time. Pretty pathetic to have her in the lead when you also have actors the caliber of Morgan Freeman and Robert Duvall. Both of them are fine, as always. Also in the cast worth noting are pre-Lord Of The Rings star Elijah Wood and veterans Maximlian Schell and Vanessa Redgrave.
14 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews