Collision Earth (2011 TV Movie) User Reviews

Unintentionally hilarious Canadian disaster movie

[Leofwine_draca · 4/10 · 29 April 2015]

Here we have another low rent disaster flick produced by the SyFy Channel. This one has to be seen to be believed as the writers craft a scenario that would only ever have been halfway believable on a massive budget. As it stands this Canadian production only had about $10 to play with so the result is less than effective, shall we say.

Still, I found this one to be a neat slice of so-bad-it's-good entertainment, and much of it is a right laugh. The story sees Mercury somehow going out of orbit and heading towards earth, so a renegade scientist has to do his best to figure out how to stop a whole planet approaching the earth. Meanwhile there's a lot of 'magnetic' disaster going on, in which cars are pulled up into the air before being dumped unceremoniously back down to Earth.

Lead actor Kirk Acevedo (THE WALKING DEAD) is a real hoot in this one. He starts out looking mildly concerned and his single expression gradually deepens to all-out worry as the story progresses. I've never seen an actor look so worried in a film, he must have added about a hundred frown lines to his face just from acting in this. The CGI effects of floating cars are absolutely laughable and cracked me up every time they were on screen; my favourite bit is the tractor scene which I had to rewind just to check out how rubbish it was.

don't forget the Earth Rotates

[davemanser · 3/10 · 7 February 2015]

The action took place over a whole day and night until the following morning (I guess). The meteorites were still landing in the same place although the earth's rotation would have put Oregon round the other side of the Earth facing away from the wayward Mercury. Also the radio would not work as the Earth would be in the way. If the car that killed the aircraft-mechanic was sucked up and dumped why wasn't his rifle sucked up? It's a lot lighter than a car. What a hoot. Although quite enjoyable for the action - I love the special effects, particularly the object dropping out of the sky, some bits are a bit cliché with far too many obstacles in the way. When the student was trying to get into the secret facility why didn't he call the spaceship and let the security guard speak to the spaceship?

Impossibly Imbecilic

[LeonLouisRicci · 3/10 · 16 March 2013]

There isn't one bit of remote possibility to this Science-Fiction and that automatically takes it to that arena of the absurd and lands it in a place called Hooterville. Almost every scene has a defiance of known Physics. So don't check your brain at the door, pull it from your skull and throw it on the floor and stomp it into mush.

OK, now you may be able to enjoy this Apocalyptic story that is nothing if not full of one crazy concept after another. People die horribly but no one seems to care, there are bigger fish frying, namely our planet. This badly acted Made-for-TV Movie cannot be faulted for trying to be exciting for it has many cliffhangers. It is all done with TV style CGI that is colorful, but shoddy.

You may find yourself actually rooting for more deaths and perhaps even an atypical ending of the title coming true. But it seems the wrong ones die and Earth is not one of them. This would have been so much better if it did and might have made this worth a view. If you like them bombastically BAD you're gonna love this one.

2011: Collission of the Human Intelligence

[TheLittleSongbird · 1/10 · 23 March 2012]

I usually make an effort to be fair with ratings, review writing and summaries, but I make exceptions that are so bad they make me angry instead of laughing about how awful it is. Collission Earth isn't perhaps the very worst of SyFy's movies, but I do think it is down there as one of their worst. Some of their awful movies, and in all honesty it's too many to count, do have some novelty value, but Collission Earth doesn't even have that.

Visuals: Not the worst asset, but that doesn't mean they're good. The scenery is shot in a dull look, and the editing is haphazard in alternative to slick and efficient. The special effects are simply put, bad, fake rather than realistic and cheap rather than lavish. Again like I have said a few times, I get that it's low budget, but that still doesn't excuse not putting enough effort(or I don't think so anyway) into them.

Music: Nothing special. Forgettable and sometimes overbearing, with tempos and rhythms that actually feel as though they alone are slowing the film down.

Script: Quite possibly the worst asset. So much cheese in the dialogue that even the biggest burger bap wouldn't cover it, and aimless exposition that not just slows the film down but has you reaching for the remote. That's not all. Like Earth's Final Hours and SyFy movies with numbers in front(2012: Supernova), Collission Earth is full of scientific errors. Scientific errors so vast and so inexcusable(detailed brilliantly in one of the previous reviews) that even the worst scientist in the world would fall into a coma thinking about them.

Story: Almost as bad. Sluggishly paced, full of clichéd situations and hopelessly predictable in that you do have a pretty good idea what is going to happen next.

Characters: So bland that by halfway through I still didn't care a tuppence about them. Also not that much different than the typical stereotype that litter and in most instances plague SyFy's resume.

Acting: Nobody seems to be really involved. Even when somebody tries to bring some life(and you'd be lucky to find even that), it feels overdone and unnatural.

Overall, a terrible movie and intelligence- insulting. 0.5-1/10 Bethany Cox

One of the Most Ludicrous Stories From SyFy

[gavin6942 · 5/10 · 27 November 2012]

When the sun converts to a magnetar for a short time, the planet Mercury is thrown out of orbit (along with a spaceship exploring it) and set on a collision course for Earth.

I am officially declaring Paul Ziller the king of the 21st Century B-Movie Directors, taking the crown away from Fred Olen Ray and Jim Wynorski (who shared it). His output of "Ice Quake" and "Stonehenge Apocalypse", among others, suggests he has mastered the end-of-the-world science fiction film.

This film goes above and beyond the sheer level of scientific nonsense previously seen in the movies. The Sun being turned into a magnetar? A space shuttle exploring Mercury (apparently today, not in the future)? A pirate radio reaching a space craft when no one else can?

And then you have the special effects, which rank among the other SyFy films for the worst (though I caught hints that maybe they are getting better). Throw in multiple action scenes with guns and knives (who knew that being an astronomer was so exciting?) and you have a Ziller masterpiece.

Another Brain Rotter from SyFy

[wackyfamily · 1/10 · 16 January 2012]

I decided to force myself to watch this movie, since the Patriots were spanking the Broncos, because I had a feeling it was going to be another one worth writing, and warning, about. It did not disappoint me in that aspect! It was called 'Collision Earth'(CE) and while it was not quite, relatively speaking, as rotten as the other movie I recently reviewed, 'Earth's Final Hours' (EFH), this movie still had every single one of those clichéd plot devices that make up a very crappy science fiction movie. Again, during the movie, our heroes get saved by things related to the impending collision of the planet Mercury with Earth. The car plopping right on top of the airport guy who was just about to put a few holes in our heroes with a rifle was a hoot. I just had to shake my head in disbelief as it was so reminiscent of EFH's bad moments when it comes to the bad guys getting it. To keep this brief, Somehow planet Mercury gets blown off course, and becomes magnetized, by the sun when the sun has a serious fit. Second, we somehow had a manned spaceship around Mercury at the exact time of this fit. Third, somehow we had an asteroid, named Project Seven (PS), that we had orbiting the Earth fitted with a deflector system that could save the day but was mothballed because it had a couple of, now obviously easily fixable, software bugs in it. Fourth, again the head government moron did not want to use this device even though the scientist who created it said he had all of the bugs fixed and only had to upload them but, of course, the head moron would not allow the creator to up-link to PS to upload the fixes or the movie would have been thankfully shortened to about thirty minutes. The head moron wanted to deflect the over 3,000 mile wide planet Mercury with a few missiles(why is it always missiles??). Fifth, even though the spaceship around Mercury took a savage beating during the sun's fit, how it wasn't just plain vaporized is beyond me, the one remaining astronaut out of three, one got fried immediately and the other died soon after even though he looked and acted just fine while he was still breathing but the lame script said he had to die so he died, AND the remaining astronaut, who just happens to be the creator of PS's wife, manages to fix the communications enough to be able to communicate with Earth only to a couple of kids with a portable radio. OY!! Sixth, This lone astronaut fixed up the ship enough to get it away from Mercury, but it turns out that the one bug that could not be fixed by the creator of 'PS' could be taken care of by hooking her ship's navigation system to it, how convenient. So, the ship heads to the PS asteroid and docks with it just in the nick of time, starts PS's engines, and heads back to Mercury. With seconds to spare the creator manages to get to the backup government site, where for some reason there are no security goons this time to beat him again, gets an up-link with PS and uploads the software fixes which engages the deflector screen thus saving the Earth. The ship manages to disengage itself from PS milliseconds before it collides with Mercury destroying it and creating a ring around Earth not unlike Saturn's. Oy, I could waste more time writing about the crappy sci fi clichés in CE but, seeing is believing. This one won't rot your brain as much as EFH but it will put a serious dent in it. There is so much good science fiction out there but they keep coming out with this unbelievably mindless garbage. A good sci-fi movie uses science as its friend but not this movie or Earth's Final Hours. I enjoy a good sci-fi movie but lately SyFy has not delivered. I am required to advise of spoilers when I submit my review but I wish I didn't have to because if I spoiled this movie for you I would have been doing you a tremendous favor.

Terrible

[david-3828 · 1/10 · 21 March 2012]

I admit my bar wasn't that high. After all it is a made for TV, low budget, SyFy movie. I am willing to forgive mediocre FX and CGI - after all our expectations for those things has been raised to high art thanks to all the big budget flicks out there. I am willing to suspend disbelief in order to enjoy a decent action or science fiction story. I don't mind chuckling at cliché plot devices when they're tongue-in-cheek. I happily do these all these things when a film is so unbelievably bad that it becomes an unintentional comedy. This movie does none of these things for me. For a science-based plot the writing can't pass even a cursory understanding of a grade 9 curriculum. Not in one instance or two but over and over and over again. The effect was akin to being grabbed by the cranium and shaken violently out of the story so that you are left staring at all the other otherwise forgivable weaknesses and amateurish plot devices. I have seen worse movies, though only a few, and I now add this to the list of bad movies that make the mediocre ones much more enjoyable by comparison.

So Bad It Is Not Even Funny Bad

[bob-917-126264 · 1/10 · 3 May 2014]

How do you describe this film? Agony. Stupid. Dumb. Amateurish.

First, it takes place in a time when we have a space ship exploring Mercury. And we have a gigantic ship in orbit capable of creating a giant magnetic pulse. Yet is is set in the present, with flip cell phones and old cars. There was no attempt to set this in the future. Why? I guess it would have been too expensive.

Second, the story is just dumb. Mercury has been thrown out of orbit and it is heading towards Earth. Some former scientist who has been fired by the government, who's wife just happens to be on the ship around Mercury, has to save the planet, even though he is being hunted by the government.

Third, the special effects are not even as good as in the 1950's B films. Green screen shots that are so obvious that a third grader could do better.

And finally, the acting that is, well, again, a third grader in a school play would be better.

Enough. I am angry that I wasted the 90 minutes watching this thing and the 10 minutes writing this review. Save yourself. Turn your TV off and just stare at the blank screen for 90 minutes. You will enjoy that more.

Disgraced scientist, "Seattle" devastated...must be a SyFy movie!

[mcguin71 · 4/10 · 3 May 2015]

Because its a made for TV movie on a much smaller budget than the usual Hollywood fare I always try to look for the small positives than pick out the disappointing negatives...but this was a difficult one to judge.

The plot is pretty thin and most definitely not based on any science or engineering that comes close to real world truths. At best it can be described as 'fanciful', though its often closer to ludicrous as Mercury somehow gets forced out its orbit on a collision course with earth - a variation on the old asteroid theme I suppose so nice to think the writers at least tried even if the final result was less than perfect.

What didn't ring so well was the old cliché of the disgraced/renegade scientist being the anti-hero of the plot. Even the squeezing in of his Astronaut wife who by pure coincidence is on a spaceship journeying to the doomed Mercury isn't enough to distract from this oldest and most annoying of SyFy/Disaster characters.

Talking of the actors its a fair lineup of B/TV-stars but even this isn't enough to save them from over/underacting and the terrible screenplay and script. As the primary lead Kirk Acevedo ensures that the term Wooden Expression will continue in acting circles, whilst Dianne Farr as his Astronaut wife is entirely wasted in ridiculous space drama segments.

After the space drama the more earth based effects of the floating/falling cars are absolutely laughable and definitely second rate CGI, especially when it appears nothing else is magnetic in 'Seattle' it seems.

This was pretty poor even considering the less than good competition. It wasn't so much a major point of failure that affects the rating but rather a massive dose of boredom as I completely failed to get excited by what was altogether a rather by-the-numbers movie. .... +A different premise +Decent cast (but wasted!) -Bored and wooden acting -Poor effects -Very,very Clichéd

So that's 2+, 3-

Watchable, laughable, forgettable -4/10

Is there any rating below 1 star? Another Cinetel piece of garbage.

[filmboom · 1/10 · 5 March 2013]

If you want bad script, bad production value, bad acting and altogether a waste of 90 minutes you'll never get back, then watch any of Cinetel Productions' movies. Lisa Hansen is famous in Hollywood for putting out C-pictures...not even B-minus. She finds crap, puts it on the screen and pockets the meager profits she makes on foreign distribution.

Lisa Hansen is also known for questionable financial practices when she lands her production team in some unsuspecting city where she sets her films. But then, you might expect that given the sleazy, slippery, conniving producing she's known for.

Collision Earth shows that you'll never go broke underestimating the taste of a bad producer.

One of the best movies I've ever seen

[Trump2024 · 10/10 · 2 April 2021]

Non stop action, the acting was spot on, and it just looked and sounded really awesome. At the end I was soaked in sweat and couldn't stop crying. So happy to see all those involved have been busy since this came out, they deserve it. Well done !!

Better than expected

[jasctweddle · 7/10 · 3 July 2013]

This movie is heavily underrated here imo. If anyone ever watches Sci-Fi and expects it to be believable, then they're delusional. This was as believable as Star Trek. The acting was good. The script was somewhat unique although space/earth collision stories are becoming more prevalent. The setting was pleasing and the special effects were good. The suspense was created by extreme circumstances in space with respect to magnetism and the conflict over how to deal with it. I found it entertaining, as much as a disaster movie can be. Not everyone survived, but at least Earth was saved in the end. The heroes - a female astronaut and her scientist hubby - equally credited for their roles in the event - awesome!!!

Not bad for a B-flick

[Joel-942-144075 · 5/10 · 19 March 2012]

This is not brain science folks! Obviously this is less then great. If it was an academy award winner I'd be tearing it apart too, but it is what it is - a made for SyFy movie!

Of course there are a lot of problems with this movie from bad CGI to scientific errors (in a science based film!). Depite all of that, the story was original, and the drama kept the movie going.

If your looking for a good movie to watch choose "Armageddon" (1998) or "2012" (2009). If you just like watching an OK flick, this one will do.

-- They want -- 10 lines of text -- for a complete review.. ? -- No wonder why there are so many 'books' written here. -- OK that should be enough for them ;o)

Could be so much better

[Temac · 3/10 · 16 June 2012]

Normally I'm super critical of this type of film. In this case, however, there are some redeeming qualities that drew me in (partially anyway). Sure, the script needs tidying up and the scientific errors are a little distracting. But the acting is basically sound and believable with some good character development (Matthew in particular). Special effects are largely very nice.

I would say, as it stands, it could hold its own with most episodes in the Stargate franchise. With not too much work, there is the makings of a decent film here.

The question is, who approved it in its present state and why? It could have been so much better with so little work.

This is Really Bad

[Dick-Dasterdly · 1/10 · 24 May 2014]

I couldn't believe that they didn't have Bruce Willis in it to save the planet. and as for the lead actors fantastic rubber faced expressions 10 out of 10 but the film was pretty awful. I think I could write a better script than that. Is the Director serious? I actually thought the cars were a bit old for the modern devices that are in outer space. and I didn't know that you could repair an integrated circuit with a bog standard soldering iron bought out of a Tandy/Maplins store amazing, I'll have to try that one. The Music was pretty bad too. Hey Ho I couldn't believe that Penelope Pitstop didn't have a cameo appearance in this seeming take off of wacky races. They also changed the Title to "Collision Earth (2012)" for the UK viewers what is so special about 2012 that this couldn't be done in 2011.

MY WIFE SHOULD BE WALKING ON MERCURY RIGHT NOW

[nogodnomasters · 3/10 · 3 March 2019]

Science Fiction typically creates an improbable scenario then uses some new invention to counteract it. In this film, the planet Mercury is knocked out of orbit and is headed toward earth. We have a device in space which uses a force field to repel objects, but alas due to budget cuts, it is not operational. It seems only James (Kirk Acevedo) can save the planet, but not the film.

The science was horrific and inconsistent. In a space ship they turn off the artificial gravity device (whatever that is) as things float around, yet after a disaster, they have gravity as the woman works to restore oxygen. She is not wearing an oxygen mask, while her fellow crewman next to her needs one. The special effects and science reminded me of another sci-fi disaster film, "Metal Storm."

If the planet Mercury was knocked out of orbit, this is not something our government could keep secret as any amateur astronomer knows. The whole world would almost instantly know about it. And why would a conspiracy theorist broadcast this on a pirate radio in the middle of no where, where no one will hear it rather than just post it on line? When was this screenplay written? 1950?

The film overestimates the power of magnetism over gravity, something Velikovsky did about 60 years ago. The magnetar which caused Mercury to become magnetic originates in neutron stars, which our sun is not. It also emits high levels of gamma radiation which would have fried all members of the spaceship, even with their radiation shields which would have been manufactured for proton radiation and not gamma.

Enough with the geek science stuff. It is PG so the kids might like it. Not any better than the free movies on SyFy. You've been warned.

Almost the worst SyFy flick ever

[redjennger · 1/10 · 15 January 2012]

Here is the biggest problem to this movie - an unheroic hero. Acevedo spent a lot of time cringing from bad guys,hardly seemed to care when significant characters dies, and was generally boring to watch. I usually love SyFy Original cheese but it is usually tongue in cheek to some degree or so awful it is delicious. This was a congealed, soured Limburger cheese of a movie. Blah.

SPOILERS>>>>>>

******** ******** ********

Acevedo's partner in the escapade is killed and he seems to care less. No expression of concern. When the girl who whacked a bad guy in the head with a tire iron to save him died, again, no reaction.

Mercury Rising

[wes-connors · 4/10 · 1 May 2014]

A very strong "electromagnetic radiation spike" rocks a small space crew from Earth as they fly around Mercury and the Sun. This event, which isn't at all clear until later in the running time, appears to morph into a video screen in the classroom of professorial Kirk Acevedo (as James Preston). He lectures about an asteroid potentially causing devastation and destruction on Earth. In the sparsely attended lecture hall, his students appear bored. Note, the mysterious opening event appears to be a tape Mr. Acevedo screens; it is not, the incident really happened. This incident causes Mercury to leave orbit and head toward Earth. Moreover, the incoming planet is magnetized, causing objects to fly into the sky. Acevedo would like to stop the collision, but his "Project 7" has been defunded...

Acevedo's wife Diane Farr (as Victoria "Vic" Preston) is on board the opening space ship. His bespectacled sidekick Adam Greydon Reid (as Matthew Keyes) makes a good impression. Helping are tech-savvy student Chad Krowchuk (as Christopher "Chad" Weaver) and cute companion Jessica Parker Kennedy (as Brooke Adamson). Ryan Landels' story kindly avoids the overused asteroid hit and hearkens back to a 1950s "worlds collide" plot, with magnetism added. Alas, the budget and schedule don't allow for much adherence to what might really happen. The scenes at a government facility are director Paul Ziller's highlights, with those transparent columns we see moving across the screen. The man special effect is the dependable but lamentable "shaky camera" technique.

**** Collision Earth (3/26/11) Paul Ziller ~ Kirk Acevedo, Chad Krowchuk, Diane Farr, Adam Greydon Reid

OK, could of been better

[thomas-beeston · 4/10 · 16 June 2012]

Just a quick review on this for you. First of all the storyline isn't great, but still watchable. There are many scientific errors and anyone with half a brain will find these really annoying or just plain funny. The special effects could be better but since its a low budget ill let them off with that one. The acting is probably the best part of this film, I actually think it wasn't that bad and I think people are quick to blame the acting as part of a films failure when a terrible storyline or sub par special effects are the main culprits. In conclusion it could of been soo much better with a revised plot and the obvious errors removed.

Bad attitude towards main characters

[zzzz_zzzz · 3/10 · 4 August 2015]

I think that for sci-fi film the story is good enough, but there should be more appropriate ending, not just plain cutoff after the main event in whole film. Some animations were little unrealistic, but I'm used to it because it's similar in so many other films.

But I was constantly annoyed by the arrogance of side roles (supporting? roles ... whatever, everybody else but main roles) towards main characters. And that's so much that I totally forgot about all the action thing in the movie.

Actors for main characters were good. But some actors for side roles were quite bad. In some moments they didn't have right feelings and emotions for the scene, little alienated too.

Not so bad

[gipal2002 · 6/10 · 28 December 2020]

I am convinced that most of the guys who put negative reviews do not even see the whole film. in any case they are hypotheses it is a possible danger to the earth, new to this kind of film. and this is already a merit.

I feel violated

[Faktanett · 1/10 · 9 July 2013]

Now, usually I am a sucker for cheesy science-fiction B-films, but man oh man... After enduring this film I feel violated.

In the end I have concluded that pretty much everyone involved in this film has spent a bunch of money and time simply to troll the audience. There is no other explanation for why anyone would want to have their name tied to this steaming pile of droppings.

The CGI is a joke, come on, even Babylon 5 had better CGI than this, an that's saying something...

The Actors seem to be trying their very best, to be as bad as humanly possible, especially Kirk Acevedo. While I personally found him decent enough in both Oz and Band of Brothers he was absolutely appalling in this.

Very Predictable

[Theo Robertson · 4/10 · 17 March 2014]

Mercury falls out of orbit and speeds towards Earth leading a group of scientists to fight against time to stop a collision between the two planets There's only two possible scenarios of this outcome

1 ) The scientists fail and Earth is destroyed

2 ) The scientists succeed and Earth survives

Actually option one is something of a non starter so that just leaves option two and it's a bit like a magic trick . You know there's no such thing as magic and you have to work out how the trick was done . The problem with this film is that it'd be a little bit too simplistic having a team of scientists stuck in a lab somewhere pulling their hair out and gnashing their teeth squealing " I hope this solution works or we're all going to die " and the production team shoot themselves in the foot by making the premise more interesting by introducing a ridiculous scientifically implausible effect Mercury has on Earth as it draws closer . It doesn't make the slightest bit of sense and of course is achieved by cheap CGI . It's a case of overkill and considering the lead is played by Kirk Acevedo best known for his role as Alvarez in OZ who manages to portray soul crushing angst very well you do think the film might have worked better if it concentrated on character rather than unlikely spectacle

Wonderfully horrible yet sort of entertains

[yaroslavc · 3/10 · 14 December 2012]

This is another one of those horrible SyFy movies with just over the top cheesy acting to top off already crazy stories that you sort of enjoy, but for absolutely the wrong reasons! I found myself watching this movie and cheering on all the cataclysmic events that occur......hoping that all the annoying characters would meet their demise and fail to save the Earth. Am very disappointed to say (lil bit of a spoiler) that most of the characters and Earth survive...but hey, ya always gotta have hope that one day SyFy will catch onto how annoying their characters and situations are and actually do something right by showing them meet their spectacularly over the top end and let down the citizens of Earth who will all be completely and totally annihilated within moments of realizing that those weren't really any kind of heroes up there in space, just a bunch of goofs! Doesn't that sounds like a GREAT ending to some of their movies?????

Typical Daytime TV tripe..

[dragothic · 1/10 · 31 July 2015]

Add soccer Moms in various suits, Guys who should work in DIY stores, also in various suits, and shaky camera - (it adds a sense of 'urgency', don't ya know ?) - along with college kid production values.. this is typical daytime TV crud that here, in the UK at least, is screened on the 'Horror channel' and the Horror i assume, is that anyone is expected to enjoy it.

Its a mess, obvious cliché's ... dumb plot, and lines delivered with such feeling and believability that you'd be excused for thinking you're watching, er, daytime TV. Not that evening TV is much better however. but i digress.

Yup, the special effects are 'special' well .. compared to a mid 1990s PC screen saver they are. I think most Movies, either big budget Hollywood ones, or crap like this, are pretty vacuous nowadays, pandering to the lowest common denominator, quick jump scenes, meaningful glances (or face acting) strong Women and stupid Men, a disgraced underdog and their ultimate redemption, a bit of love interest, a wood panelled station wagon, a crazy Guy who was right all the time, some slightly mischievous teenagers, an old bloke who is evil/wrong and later comes 'round, some flashing lights, lots of PC screens, a vital upload/download and some people running across what appears to be an empty car park, and the climax or reveal towards the movie and the inevitable race or tension towards the end.

I might as well copy / paste that above paragraph into 99% of movies on this Horror TV channel.

Things i learnt: Science is still using valve electronics ? (tubes for our North American readers)

in 2011, 1990's modem sounds are still considered fascinating.

FRS (PMR 446) walkie-talkies go for absolutely miles and miles..

The 'actors' have just come from the hairdressers

Its Canadian and they use a garden shed for their spacecraft internal scenes with 1960s 'Star Trek' noises

dry ice is still fun

cut scenes from a old video game also double-up as space action sequences.

having one facial expression is considered acting (the Guy who looks like a insurance salesman)

Movie's inspired by a mid 90s screen saver should have a disclaimer at the start of the film stating such.

i'm getting a bit bored typing this now, but i will just ask, who was this movie made for ? my guess either the tin-foil hat Art Bell brigade who wouldn't know the difference between CGI and reality or someone who just happens to be about 6 years old. That's it. expect more of the same, and expect the actors to be doing a stint on infomercials in the very near future.. unless the 20 year old tech they're using breaks first..