Sorry, this movie sucks

If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Sunami's are not that huge in the middle of the ocean, they travel just above the surface till they get close to land. It started off the California coast traveling west. It hit Hawaii on the west side traveling east, I guess they just wanted to hit Waikiki for the camera. The ship did not turn into the wave as all ships would when face with big waves. A few other events were similar. Other than that it was a pretty good story and good movie. The acting was good and scenes were good. There was no mention of the huge volcano located under Yellowstone Park, when trying to talk of the history of the continent, they should have included that.

as the movie goes, it was you're tradional disaster flick,, the problem i have with these kinds of movies though is that they are too cozy,, too schmoozy, but the action is decent i must say, the plot, fairly average. the ending i really liked, beau bridges did an adequate job in his role as the Prez. Kim Delaney, i thought she did a better job in the first one,, but hey she's hot and i like her. i wouldn't go so far as to call this movie great. but then again on the other hand it is not a stinker by any means.. i don't think they should make 11.0 . i think they really should have stopped with the first one,, only because some of what they suggest could happen , is so far fetched.. others, fairly plausible.

Just to add to the other comments, what happens to Amy's Secret Service men? One minute they're talking into their watches, next minute nowhere to be seen. And why on earth do both Dr Hills have to fly to the site of the explosion and give instructions to Army munitions guys about where to place the explosives? And, talking of Earth, where is the rest of it? If Accelerated Plate Movement is happening in the US, presumably it's happening around the world - but there's no mention at all - not even that the rift is also heading north to Canada - did anyone tell the Canadians? And, if the rest of the world isn't affected, surely the President would be receiving offers of help from somebody. To sum up, this film is far too long to enjoy as a disaster movie and it doesn't have anything else going for it. Too many plot lines (isn't anybody an orphan any more?), cheesy dialogue and the pseudo-artistic camera work. Kim Delaney is good value, as is Frank Langella, but I would have liked to have seen Randy Quaid in there somewhere and David Cubitt was killed off way too early (but that's just a personal preference on my part).

There's no pleasing some people, I suppose. Everyone seems to agree that 'The Day After Tomorrow' is a good film (despite an unimaginative script, stock-standard characters and a dull story) but '10.5 Apocalypse' is rated below 'Epicenter'. 'Epicenter'!!! '10.5 Apocalypse' is, in some ways, better than the original '10.5'. There's a little more action, some of the special effects work is better and the camera work isn't as distracting. It's an enjoyable film and has characters we can actually care about. There's a little less drama and a little more action. The set pieces are good. Some of the special effects (most notably the dam scenes) are top notch to boot.The biggest problem people seem to have with '10.5 Apocalypse' are the technical inaccuracies. Unless you're an earthquake expert (let's be honest here, very few people are) you probably won't even notice. It's all about the suspension of belief anyways.Am I to believe there are millions of people watching this film and thinking, "Wait on a minute, that building didn't REALLY collapse!" Am I to believe that I'm the only person that expects a TV disaster movie to be anything BUT hugely accurate? It's entertainment, that's all. A little human drama, a little tragedy, a little mass destruction to spice up your Friday night. There's no disclaimer at the start that says, "WHAT FOLLOWS IS ACTUALLY POSSIBLE." It's not a documentary and it's not based on any actual events. So what's the problem? I think this film's rating of 3.6 is hugely unfair. It deserves better than this. It's not the next big budget disaster film but it's better than 'Epicenter'. This film deserves at LEAST a 4.0. Maybe even more.If it were a documentary, I'd agree that this film is bad for being inaccurate. But the acting is better than half the TV dramas I've seen, the script is easy to chew and the special effects are better than average. See this film, and judge for yourself.