Eve of Destruction
Eve of Destruction
TV-14 | 15 April 2013 (USA)
SEASON & EPISODES
  • 1
  • Reviews
    GamerTab

    That was an excellent one.

    ... View More
    Nessieldwi

    Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

    ... View More
    Arianna Moses

    Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

    ... View More
    Cody

    One of the best movies of the year! Incredible from the beginning to the end.

    ... View More
    Chad Vieth

    My eyes! the goggles do nothing! Just watched this on Netflix, well finished it. I wonder why, because normally I love destruction-porn, but this was just bad. With the actors, I have to say I have enjoyed them in the past, but this is just horrid. I am tired of these end of the world BS movies, which we sudden fix in the last 5 minutes, and move on. No, depth, no character building. I felt I caught something 3 episodes after the character defining arc. The daughter was predictable, actually all of them were predictable. Avoid this turd like the plague. It might be Syfy, if not good god, someone stop crap like this.

    ... View More
    Gin-ster

    I see a lot of criticism here of the irrationality of the plot and its anti-science tone. I agree that the plot was irrational, and also, that the scientists didn't behave like real ones. Yet I don't mind the nonsensical nature of the threat - after all, isn't that always the case when disaster on a global scale is the threat? (i.e. mega-volcanoes, shift in earth's magnetic field, alien invasions, zombies, etc.?)It's always necessary to suspend disbelief or it's impossible to watch anything of this genre. As to showing scientists negatively, I didn't get that sense as much as showing an attack on the real villain here, "corporate greed." The driving force behind all the "wrong-headedness" was the corporate head of the project, played with scenery-chewing glee by Treat Williams. If I have any complaints about its political correctness, I'd say it also threw a barb at "occupy Wall Street" and Greenpeace, and the symbol of greed (i.e. Williams' role) had a Jewish name, which was admittedly something I had to keep overlooking.Why my relatively high rating? First, the surprisingly affecting back-story of the Russian lineman, along with good unusually good acting for this level of movie, by the Russian character, his wife, the lead scientist and the main protagonist, played by Steven Weber. His eye-rolling teen daughter was fairly well played too, given the clichéd nature of this role (you could interchange her with the daughter in "Under the Dome.") Also, and here is the real spoiler: did the world come to an end? Well, not entirely, but the lack of clarity on that was in itself unique (we only know that Denver, Paris, London and the Pyramids took direct hits) - so the lack of "finality" is unusual for this type of film. And on a related note, from the first 10 minutes I had been expecting the real villain, the corporate CEO played by Treat Williams, and the scientist who prostituted herself to him, to be zapped into smithereens by "dark energy," by the end of the film, as a sort of divine justice for their blindly going ahead with the project they knew to be destructive. So ... SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER big surprise, NOTHING happens to them. This is the long way of saying that despite a lot of apparent clichés, in the end, this was not your typical "B" sci fi movie - it was not all that predictable - and that is what accounts for my relatively higher ratings, along with surprisingly nuanced performances by some case members (i.e. Steven Weber) amidst some stock-villain types.

    ... View More
    ThomasJeff

    I love Christina Cox, her performances are always amazing and she's clearly the star of this show. However, the plot is nonsensical and irrational. The scenes are nice and special effects are not bad.But the biggest problem with this series is the PLOT and MESSAGE being sent to people that is completely the wrong message to send to people. Your typical UNORIGINAL Frankenstein message "Stop playing God, scientists!" This is by far the dumbest, anti-intellectual message movies/films have spread throughout the decades.Without spoiling anything... Scientists discover a source of energy but certain things happen that cause disasters and it simply logically doesn't follow why they would happen in other random areas. It also doesn't make sense that they can't just pull the plug. It further doesn't make sense why an evil CEO would risk jail time and possible catastrophic results just to not have a "bad quarterly review." A lot of plot holes are included in the movie, such as the Russian-sub-plot as to how something could be kept under wraps.Essentially the conclusion the filmmakers want you to draw is: Science is crazy, magical, and accidents "might" happen. Which is simply the antithesis of what science is about and accidents such as this never happen on this scale in scientific experiments by scientists. There's a reason they do pre-tests to pre-tests to tests, and in this film, they act like even those pre-tests can go wrong.The worst "energy-related disaster" in our REAL world, such as chernobyl, was because of engineers who didn't know what they were doing. It was because of lack of safety protocols, lack of computer automated systems, and outdated equipment that was UNDERFUNDED. That is the lesson to learn from Chernobyl, when you don't invest in a technology for increasing its safety standards.So if anyone thinks that they should draw the lesson of: "We shouldn't fund such experiments, we don't fully understand!" -- That is the incorrect lesson. The mere act of not-funding-something, is the lesson to be drawn from real life events like Chernobyl, because machines and systems get too old; protocols become outdated; and these technologies never improve and become safer.As for the "Don't play God" nonsense, why would God give humans the ability to do these things if he didn't want you to discover them? Or why would he allow millions of people to die, in such a "failed experiment" just to teach a simple lesson about that? It makes no sense logically or philosophically, and filmmakers should stop trying to create conclusions for their audience that they probably never even asked a philosopher about.

    ... View More
    cbmuzik3000

    This movie was actually a lot better than I imagined it would be. I am extremely critical of films, but for some odd reason, this one had a bit of this, a bit of that, and just enough something to make me watch watch it all the way through. This was no better than a good B movie and far better than some network television shows people think are so awesome. Some actors were good, others need to go back to acting school...but Steve Weber anchored this movie just enough to make it watchable. Treat Williams also made it OK to watch as well. I was actually looking for it to be a bit longer. The storyline could have been developed a bit more, but other than that, sci-fi buffs can sit through this one. This movie has the making of a much longer mini-series, imo. Come on, who doesn't want to see Ms Cox run around om film?

    ... View More