I love this movie so much

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

great idea, great lot of things, just lousy writing and acting making it too hard to believe; the camera moves around like it was amateur and jumps back/forth to give it the low quality cheap effect. this takes 3 stars or points off the ranking, the camera that wont stay still thing that is...i didn't watch all of it, so i missed some of the plot; it will be one of those movies so bad and lousy that its got some value, but its such a waste. I figured it was written by a chick trying to make the lines for the male actors, cause men don't talk that way. i came to this site to see who was the producer/director etc. lousy flop movies have a lot in common with this movie. and Im trying to only say whats true and nice.

I will give you two reasons for watching this sci-fi potboiler about a solar burst that threatens to wipe out all life on our planet: martial artist Mark Dascascos as a disgraced scientist who figures out how to save the Earth and Lou Gossett Jr. as a black (!) U.S. president who decides to go along with Dascascos' seemingly harebrained plan. I will watch anything with Dascacos, and being a Baby Boomer, I will always give Mr. Gossett the benefit of the doubt (IRON EAGLE, anyone?). The rest of this is pure crap. Terrible special effects, terrible dialog and way too much talking and standing around. Dascascos does not get to kick much behind in this one. So if you want to see Dascascos in action, watch the French thriller BROTHERHOOD OF THE WOLF.

This is a poor remake of Irwin Allens poor disaster movie Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea. All the same ingredients but done in a totally soulless way. The acting is so wooden it would not look out of place on Gerry Andersons Thunderbirds. I thought that they stopped making rubbish like this back in the 70's. Obviously not! IMDb says I must post at least 10 lines of text in this comment, but its difficult to type anything that is just not negative about this movie.Basically I just cant be bothered its not worth it! so! Rubbish! Rubbish! Rubbish!Waste of time!

This movie as you can see by my rating, was complete drivel. Almost every plot event was coming a mile off. Satellites falling out of the sky cannot happen. There is something called "the Atmosphere" surrounding the Earth, which makes anything falling from space heat up to insanely hot. The SFX were mediocre bordering on bad, but they were brilliant compared to the acting and the plot. Blowing up the Arctic with nukes. Doesn't that just sound stupid, because that's what they did. I mean is spraying thousands of tonnes of ice into the air going to put out huge fires in the atmosphere, and then ice starts raining from the sky and everyone goes all happy-clappy. Its most redeeming feature was the unintentional humour at the actors trying to make the plot seem believable. I mean the whole atmosphere exploding due to methane. Methane can only burn at concentrations between 5 and 15%, and there are 1,745 parts per billion, which is about 0.000001745% of the total atmosphere. Just a little bit below 5%.