OllieSuave-007
The action in this made-for-TV movie about the world's strongest earthquake takes place almost immediately, as it shows the collapse of the Space Needle toward the beginning. Suddenly, the entire country is in a state of panic as scientists and seismologists determine that a 10.5 earthquake followed by a series of major aftershocks and tsunamis, resulting in federal officials dealing with an influx of displaced citizens.The special effects were pretty incredible and realistic, from the collapse of the Space Needle to the crumbling of the Golden Gate Bridge onto the ocean. It's depressing, but intriguing seeing much of the country's major landmarks and cities fall to this gigantic quake, and it's suspenseful as you see the scientists scramble to find a way to counteract against the quake.It's basically non-stop disaster action and chaos from start to finish. It's pretty exciting, but the movie, unfortunately, is marred by its very sub-par and below average acting. As a result, it's not the greatest TV movie, but it's not bad for some action fun.Grade B-
edwagreen
The usual disaster movie with its host of characters with their inter-personal relationships being shown as they prepare to battle a disaster. Three earthquakes in one day in the western part of the country may be too much to take, but this is what makes for an interesting story.The governor of California is a woman who is divorced and is in night clothes as her ex-husband and daughter go off for a camping trip.Beau Bridges shows emotion as our nervous president. The FEMA guy is not at all like Michael Brown of the Bush Administration. Once he realizes what's going on, he literally throws himself into the solution which will cost him his life.The problem with the film is that the characters are terribly cliché- the doctor and FEMA director, estranged as well as a surgeon and his wife. It seems that disasters always brings out the best in people. People come together as a cohesive unit to fight off the evil elements. We've just seen so much of this before.
Willman247
I have seen this movie once, but I just don't understand how any of the things that happen in the movie are physically possible, because they probably aren't. Let's see, there is a 7.9 Earthquake in Seattle, a man happens to be able to perform stunts while riding a bike down the streets and tries to out run the Space Needle and also manages to stay on his bike and ride it like there is no shaking at all. But this is only the beginning of the unrealistic stuff you see in the film. Later in Reading, California an 8.4 Earthquake occurs and a rift opens up into the ground and you also see a train. Now instead of having the hole open up and swallow the train right there, they decide to use a even funnier method and have it exactly parallel with the tracks then eventually have gravity pull the train in, also you might probably notice that the train is going the exact same speed as the earthquake to. Later in San Francisco a 9.2 Earthquake occurs causing the Golden Gate bride to collapse and what do you see, people standing up and running. If a 8.0 earthquake occurred in real life people would be immediately thrown from the ground. But the height of the unrealistic story plot is when the 10.5 earthquake hits, and practically destroys everything in California, but everything around the state is almost completely unharmed how do you explain this. Even tough they didn't do a good job with the realism it is kind of fun to watch and the science isn't as bad as the movie science in Core.
stumpmee77
That was all that biker at the opening of this film had to do--that and get off the bike and run for his life. Staying on a less balanced object on a continuously shifting terrain just didn't make a heap of sense to me.This movie made the movie "Earthquake" in the 70's appear a classic. The primary aspect that made that earlier film so gripping by comparison is it didn't throw science into its scenario ergo it's credibility is higher. The characters were also more well-rounded; there was at least one or two I actually cared for in that. It also didn't end happily and/or contain the unbelievable strokes of luck or deplorably by the numbers characters that have been littering many of Sci-Fi channels so called "orignal films". This includes but not limited to: The Hill character with the husband that wants a family, how many times that's been in their original films as well as the Mayor's ex trying to redeem himself with the brat daughter who I wanted to slap and everything comes out hokey-dorry after some trials and tribulations?Now the Earthquake 70's film aside, it was bad on it's own merit being more predictable than usual. Nukes to end a problem came out my mouth the same time the 1st time it was said. When the quake in the near the last half hour of the film, it pops in my head, "Not the last one." And sure enough--Dang, that's the only area where I wasn't disappointed.I honestly think NBC worked in association with the Sci-Fi Channel to create this joke.
AD
