A massive asteroid impact on the moon begins causing storms on Earth due to the sudden changes in ocean tides. Scientists conclude the only solution is to set nuclear charges on the Moon to implode it and keep it whole.
An asteroid hits the Moon, causing fissures in its crust and sends a chunk hurtling toward Earth. Even worse is the threat that larger pieces will break off which could obliterate whole cities on impact. With the Moon out of sync, strange weather and huge tidal waves are threatening the population. Scientists conclude the only solution is to set nuclear charges on the Moon to implode it and keep it whole. The man for the job is demolitions expert, John Redding. Can he succeed in placing the charges correctly before an even larger piece threatens civilization?
The "T-scale" referred to in the film is most likely a reference to the real-life Torino scale, which is used to determine the risk of an object impacting the Earth based on its trajectory and size. See more »
When performing evasive maneuvers, the shuttle Perseus uses its main engines (at the rear), then flies as if the wings were providing lift. To move the shuttle in space in any direction other than forward is done using the thrusters located on various surfaces. See more »
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.
22 of 27 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this