Very well executed

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

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.

Disaster movie: The Earth is threatened by a coming apocalypse foretold by the signs of the Zodiac.. or something.Starting with something good, the flow of the movie is good, and the cameramen avoid many of the mistakes that many other B-movies commit. The scenery of is also very pretty.Now for the far worse: Since it's a disaster movie, it relies on special effects, as most of this stripe do. Most of these effects are poor to a degree where special effects of mediocre 80's movies are on part with them. Once I burst out laughing because it was so bad.It's likewise clear that the movie was shot largely in the same spot, giving the impression of someone trying to do an action movie in their back garden. I addition to this, some of the transitions from one location to another are so marked, that they defy belief. Silly! The only significant plus in the grade book of this movie is that the acting performances are good. These actors' delivery is however let down by poor scriptwriting and poor directing; in several scenes the director should have done things markedly different, which would have improved both flow and feel of the movie.What drags the movie down additionally is the lack of additional cast and stand-ins, which hampers the movie's feel SEVERELY. Its hard to believe that they went ahead and got this movie written, picked locations, filmed and fx'd up, and they didn't spend a bit more and more people in the various locations where it was shot.I'm guessing that the production budget came from the product placement funds. Such a pity, with a bit more money thrown at it, and more attention to detail, it could have been significantly better. This is not a turkey, but had the acting been worse, it certainly would have been! Oh and lastly, MARTY! Where are we going to get 1.21 Jiggawatts??!

Easily one of the worst films I've ever seen. It starts you out absolutely hating all of the characters because the acting is so poor, the characters are all familiar, cookie-cutter ones we've all seen before and their dialogue is predictable, uninspired and rehashed from so many other apocalypse films you've seen again and again. The writing is so very poor that it makes the viewer sad that someone else was paid huge volumes of money for the script when anyone sitting in the theater could probably have done a far better job. There was no discernible point in making this film from an artistic standpoint because no new ground is covered and no remotely plausible concepts or themes are explored. Entirely ludicrous situations are the norm, where any child would be screaming at the screen 'don't do that you idiot!'. This will insult your intelligence and make you weep, not for the future of mankind but for the demise of any semblance of creativity and innovation coming out of Hollywood.I love apocalypse, end-of-days, sci-fi, all that stuff, but was thoroughly annoyed by this waste of electricity. Don't waste your time; pick a different film to see.

Considering that he is the most well-known and most experienced actor in the cast by some distance you'd think he would be. Lloyd really gives his all and the eccentric kind of character is one that would have suited him perfectly. Unfortunately Lloyd's screen time is far too limited to save the movie and while he is fun in places- more than his trashy material deserved- he badly over-compensates in others, which really sticks out like a sore thumb. The best performance In Zodiac: Signs of the Apocalypse actually comes from Joel Gretsch, he is a commanding lead and certainly doesn't look at any time look like he's confused or in pain. And Ben Cotton is pretty endearing and makes a real effort to make Marty likable; in fact Marty is like the bright spot when it comes to the characters. Unlike the rest of the cast they actually try to act.That's very much it for things that redeemed Zodiac: Signs of the Apocalypse a little. Gretsch and Cotton are good and Lloyd tries but the movie on the whole is very badly acted- Emily Holmes attempts at being frightened or emotional came over as forced, Andrea Brooks is so annoying to the extent you want to reach into the TV and slap her and Aaron Douglas doesn't even try to act as the very stereotypical and painfully forgettable villain. Everybody else looked stiff and bored. The cardboard cut-outs passing for characters are as thin as paper, with only Marty showing glimpses of colour, and the actors are further disadvantaged by a clunky script, with a number of lines so cheesy that it makes the cheesiest cheeseburger seem tasteless, that gives off the sense of parody without the humour(got a laugh out of Sophie's line about her homework but that was not in a good way). As well as a story that is filled to the brim with so many clichés(with nothing fresh done with them, characters and situations) that the intense predictability severely dilutes the suspense and fun, also the further the movie wears on the sillier and more tedious it gets.Production values are not much better at all, in fact one of the worst things here was the special effects which were half-baked at best and laughably amateurish at worst, the disaster scenes are ruined by how cheap they look and how much unintentional humour they cause. It was abundantly clear that more effort went into the making of the promising DVD cover than to the special effects, the DVD cover at least showed some professionalism whereas the effects were borderline hack-job. The colourless and one-dimensional camera work and lacking-in-crispness editing don't fare quite as badly but they don't improve things either, while the whole movie whether in the un-thrilling disaster scenes or the heavy-handed drama suffered from some rather characterless under-directing. The sound effects have a booming sensation but not in a way that thrills, in fact some of it's headache-inducing, while the score is over-bearingly melodramatic and monotonous. Overall, Zodiac: Signs of the Apocalypse is nowhere near the worst SyFy has done, but aside from two performances and the efforts from Lloyd it just doesn't work. 3/10 Bethany Cox

It is difficult to tell what is the worst thing about this movie. The acting, CGI and script are all shocking. It was so bad that I created my IMDb account for the sole purpose of reviewing this movie and as soon as I'm through, I'm going to watch the last 15 minutes of it that remains. That's right - I'm reviewing an incomplete movie.There is a scene very early in the movie where explosions take place in the sky and people are sitting down in the grass watching with interest, instead of running for cover. Obviously, covering your face with your hands is as good a method as any other when your life is in danger.No spoilers from me - the film-makers did that already. Suffice it to say that this movie is so very bad that I couldn't keep myself away. Not even gratuitous nudity would help it - and that says it all, I think. Two stars for being so bad that I have to see how it ends.