Earthstorm

Wow. Where do I start? This is a really silly movie. Any knowledge of space that the writer or director may have comes from watching old "Star Trek" reruns. One ridiculous and impossible thing follows another. I laughed out loud a few times at how cheesy it was. They should have hired a scientific consultant, but I'm guessing they didn't have the budget.

I definitely wouldn't pay to see this movie, but I got it as part of my monthly movie package, so I don't mind. If you don't take it seriously, it's kinda fun.

Warning: This movie's writer also did "Solar Strike" (2005, TV), which is equally silly and scientifically sketchy. Watch it only if you feel like making fun of a bad movie.

The effects in the movie are horrible. As stated before they look like N64 type graphics. The plot seems to be ripped off from Armageddon. An asteroid hits the moon causing a fault and chunks of the moon start flying towards earth.

The one thing that was cool is that ASI is actually Mohawk College in Hamilton, Ontario, Canada dressed up. To be more specific it is the college's I-Wing, which is the Information Technology wing. And the circular room with the TV in the wall is actually there... not just for the movie.

To sum up in one word "underbudget" I wouldn't buy the movie.

Watching a movie requires viewers to suspend their disbelief, and this movie has much to disbelieve. We can talk about the unoriginal story, cookie-cutter characters, stiff acting, and phony science, but what's the point? A movie is worth your time if it entertains, and "Earthstorm" succeeds at least in doing that, so let's look at what this film gives us to enjoy.

First, the special effects are not bad. People tend to confuse the "how" with the "what" when judging special effects so that the effects often get the blame for low plausibility. In this film, though, "how" they show is credible even if "what" they show is not.

Second, the music is quite good. It sustains tension throughout the film and adds emotional content at key points--exactly what it a movie score supposed to do.

Third, the acting is adequate. This isn't a film by Cameron, Kubrick, or Crichton, so let's cut the cast some slack. I've never met any demolition experts, but I bet they're more like Stephen Baldwin in "Earthstorm" than like Bruce Willis in "Armageddon". And seeing Dirk Benedict ("Faceman" from the 1980s TV series "The A-Team") as the smug, self-important science advisor to The White House is a treat.

Best of all is the film's message. More-realistic sci-fi movies such as "Alien", "Europa Report", "Gravity", and "The Martian" tell us that space exploration is dangerous and largely unnecessary as if filmmakers want us to stay on our home planet. "Earthstorm" has a positive message: The more we know about space, the better prepared we are to protect life on earth.

Sci-fi has come a long way from the 1950s, but anyone who admires "The Day the Earth Stood Still" has no excuse for disliking this movie.

Alright, if you are at all thinking about seeing this movie, you already know that it is going to be terrible, but the question is will it be terrible in a fun way. For me it was.

Looking at the list of actors, the only recognizable names were Dirk Bennedict and Stephen Baldwin. Of the two I would give Dirk a very slight edge. The actresses do a good to passable job in their roles (in sci-fi channel movies, all the actresses are inevitably very pretty and much better at acting than the men. Of course they are usually confined to sex appeal roles such as in Earthstorm where the assistant is wearing shorts in the opening scene where everyone else is wearing jackets... Aside over), even if they don't have much to work with.

The science in this movie is just terrible. This might have been excusable in the 1950's, but not anymore. Although much of the terrible science is due to bad movie cliché than attempts at actual science. Take the shuttle flying as if there was air in space. Most people aren't ready to have the shuttle flying around with the engines off, or pointed the "wrong way" (since really the shuttle would be spinning like mad to orient the main engines to thrust generally perpendicular to the direction of travel). Then there is the whole gravity on the shuttle thing. This is a cheap movie, no budget to fake zero-G. At least they didn't make believe that there is an artificial gravity, they just ignored that little problem. Oh, and ducking into a tent, that's right a tent, to escape the debris from a collapsing building. Too funny.

Oh, and the clichés! They run rampant. Renegade scientist whose theory ends up saving the day. Child who rebelled against her father, who conveniently died before the movie starts, acts to honor him. The master crackpot scientist who is in charge of creating every do-dad needed in the movie, says it can't be done then does it in twenty minutes. Oh, and let's not forget the evil scientist/politician who constantly stands in the way of the real scientist. It would be hard to put more clichés in this movie.

The funniest part, to me at least, was that they were afraid or perhaps banned, from using NASA in the movie. Unfortunately they couldn't seem to decide if "ASI" stood for American Science Institute or American Space Institute. They also had to make up a science university in Boston, the Plymouth Institute of Technology. Ha ha ha.

Really, if you go into this with a sense of humor, you might get some enjoyment out of it.

This is a 10$ version of Armageddon and other comet/asteroid movies. Someone needs to explain the laws of gravity in space to the producers. ;-) worth a good laugh though and I thought that was Starbuck from BS in the movie, he has aged well. Anyhow if you really do not have anything better to do to waste your time on a non school night or whatever or are really really bored so ahead and watch it. People cannot walk around in space on a space shuttle unless it is spinning really fast to create some artificial gravity Acting was okay although the woman actress could probably use a few more lessons.

funstuf