Deep Core (2000) Poster

(2000)

User Reviews

Review this title
22 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
3/10
Awful: Predictable and Full of Clichés
claudio_carvalho30 January 2004
Brian Goodman (Craig Sheffer) is a scientist specialized in drilling operations. He aborts a dangerous perforation, leaded by Alan Morrisey (Harry Van Gorkun) and Darryl Simmons (James Russo) and destroys the whole project and facilities. A few years later, he is working with his friends Sam Dalton (Bruce McGill) and Rodney Bedecker (Wil Wheaton, from Star Trek), when he detects an abnormal movement of the tectonic plates, provoked by Alan's new enterprise. Brian meets Alan, and together with Allison Saunders (Terry Farrel), a highly graduated scientist from MIT, try to stop the movement of underground layers of Earth. This flick is awful: very predictable and full of clichés. The characters are badly developed, the story is horrible and it does not work. The best part is the ironical dialog of a married couple, asking for information in a road bar. The Brazilian distributors called it `Catastrophe', maybe a hint regarding the terrible quality of this film. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): `Catástrofe' (`Catastrophe')
15 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Yep, it's really that bad.
Sollus17 April 2004
I just want to add my voice to the critics and say, yes this movie is REALLY bad.

It has no suspense to speak of except where the characters start pretending to be serious. No link to reality, what in the world qualifies some oil fire fighters to run cutting edge equipment other than they're the inventor's drinking buddies. THESE guys are going to set off nukes to save the world? No wonder it's about to end.

As for casting, I think the only criteria was who was unemployed when it came time to shoot. Personally though I have to say I did like the Wil Wheaton Molten Shower scene.
14 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Only so so because it came before The Core
fields2423 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
The only saving grace (grimace) is that it came before The Core. With much the same basic plot and science but with more "famous" actors and a bigger budget. Similarities: Laser Gatling gun performing the drilling. The core spinning and trying to start/stop it with nuclear bombs, Hero is a scientist, Crew are scientists and mechanics, (Delroy Lindo and Will Wheaton), practically, and they go to the core by digging a hole with: a self-propelled vehicle. The Core was much better done with better special effects while Depp Core looked like it was made on a long weekend in the American southwest. The flames of the oil well, being put out during the beginning of the movie, keep flaming even after it is supposedly put out. This seems to be a premonition of how their endeavors become in making a movie, and saving mankind: another fizzle.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Bad to the core, and not deep at all
CatTales26 May 2002
The same flaming digital f/x repeated over and over during the credits hints that there's something wrong with this film. However, if you ignore that warning and continue to watch, all sort of evils will escape from this Pandora's box: a machine that allegedly blows up but only showers sparks like a sparkler; hand-held camera shots with that home-movie look; a cliche villain/capitalist; the cliche battle between the scientist sexes; a brief earthquake scene of a city (looks like a postcard) wherein one tall building starts to crumble like a jigsaw puzzle; an odd puffy-faced (like he just had his wisdom teeth removed) twenty-something Whil Wheaton making a joke about his ex-wife...This is no modern "Crack in the world," no hidden diamond in the rough but a depressing clunker. On the positive side, it makes you appreciate aspects and techniques of good movies you took for granted or weren't aware of.
12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Some Fun Entertainment With Average CGI
Kage-326 June 2001
Alright then, we've got Craig Sheffer playing the creator of a mobile drilling machine that causes a major worldwide countdown to disaster. Of course, he walked off the job a year or so earlier fearing that his creation might be used as a weapon. He was right. It's the potential for that disaster thing I just mentioned which brings our would-be hero back to save the day. If this sounds remotely like so many other films out there, it probably is.

This is B movie territory, folks, but it's a FUN ride! Sheffer gets to dig down 120 miles into the Earth and place 5 nuclear bombs that will create a chain effect that stops the planet from tearing itself apart...while also saving valuable budget money by not showing too many disasters on the surface (always visible because the camera shakes before we get some cheesy CGI effects).

Along for the ride is James Russo, Wil Wheaton (giving a better performance than in "Python") and Terry Farrell (Dax from "Star Trek: Deep Space 9"). What the film isn't able to entertain you with visually because of what I'm assuming is a modest budget, it more than makes up for in dialogue and acting. There are a few techno-babble bits here and there, but these guys (and gal) are enjoying themselves and provide some welcome laughter. Forget the other Government stiffs. They kind of pad the film a bit and aren't nearly as fun to watch.

It's especially nice to see Sheffer in a more heroic role after "Hellraiser: Inferno" and Wheaton still has a smile that will make you melt. If you can overlook some really fake CGI effects and just take the movie for what it's supposed to be, entertainment, then you could do a lot worse than give "Deep Core" a try.
12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Deep Core? The Core?
ozbear5 July 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Difficult to tell actually who is copying whom since apparently Deep Core is dated 2000 and The Core is dated 2003.

At any rate, the similarities (but not the budgets) are compelling: 1)Laser-operated drilling gizmo for going through the Earth 2) Lots of magma around 3) People get snuffed by magma 4) Earth put in peril by misuse of something related to drilling/earthquakes 5) Nukes needed to restore balance 6) Five nukes required 7) Detachable unit(s), at least one required for success.

Draw your own conclusions.

I must admit that Wil Wheaton did a credible job.

I didn't mind him getting snuffed though.

Oz
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
One of the worst movies I've ever seen. A MUST-WATCH!
wgolsen2 December 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Just heard a program on the radio about the worst movies ever made (gems like The Room and Plan 9 among them) and it motivated me to come here and highly recommend Deep Core as a must-watch bad movie.

Deep core features all of the core elements of a classic sci-fi failure: Laughable dialogue, cheesy CGI, weak plot and terrible acting (even Bruce McGill's - though he's a pretty good character actor otherwise). All of this combines to make an awesomely bad experience.

It's also worth noting that Deep Core features the absolute BEST human-lava-melt scene in cinematic history - surely never to be outdone.

Rent this and laughs will ensue.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Boring To The Center of the Earth...
Scott_Mercer28 January 2008
I have a DVD binder called "Inside The Earth," which contains about a dozen films with the same basic plot: scientists must use "futuristic" drilling machine thingy to drive into the center of the Earth to save the planet by either a) realigning tectonic plates b) setting off nuclear bombs c) allowing volcanoes to explode, thus relieving pressure, etc. or some such babble that makes no sense at all. And I've never even taken a geology course. Or, the other plot option is that they are merely exploring the center of the earth find lost civilizations, monsters, etc.

Quickly, here's a list of all the films, and a brief comparison to this one:

The Core: The Gold Standard. Much higher budget than this one, and a fun B-movie that doesn't take itself nearly as seriously as this one.

Journey To The Center of the Earth: I liked this, even though it had Pat Boone in it. A good old fashioned fantasy film from back in the day.

Mesa of Lost Women: See my review here on the IMDb. One of the worst movies ever made.

The Phantom Empire: Fred Olen Ray directed mish-mash of a ripoff of Indiana Jones, a 1950's alien invasion movie, and a 1930's serial. A lovable jumble of insanity. They spend most of the movie running around in the cave in Bronson Canyon, a legendary B-movie location in Los Angeles. Super fun for B-movie fans. Others might get annoyed.

Unknown World: Another machine-thingy must drill into the Earth to save civilization. Actually pretty well done for a no-budget film from 1952. Black and white of course.

Beast From Haunted Cave: Okay, they didn't go down into the Earth that far, only into a cave. But they find a cool monster in there. Enjoyable Roger Corman produced schlockery.

The Incredible Petrified World - Also 1950's black and white. They find a secret underground world (here comes the twist) under the ocean floor! They descend in a diving bell. Zero budget here. Incredibly boring. Only saving grace is John Carradine, but he can only do so much. Rating real low. Skip it.

Village of the Giants - I think there's a cave in this one? Is that why I stuck it in here?

Sound of Horror - Haven't watched this one yet, but I believe it's about people dying in a cave in Greece.

At The Earth's Core - Classic 1970's schlock! Based on Edgar Rice Burroughs. Classic Saturday afternoon fun fare. Worth watching.

The Lost Continent - People enter the Earth and find lost world of dinosaurs..."so bad it's good." Some hilarious moments. Another black and white low budget non-epic from the 1950's.

I need to pick up "The Cave" and "The Descent," two recent films with people dying undernearth the earth.

DEEP CORE stacks up pretty well against some of these. There is a ton of hilariously bad dialog, and the interior of the Drilling Thingy is really bad and low rent.

I'll give it a four for good old yocks. If DEEP CORE had taken itself a little less seriously, it probably would have rated a 6 or 7 for entertainment value. The Core is much funnier. Stanley Tucci's performance alone makes it worth your time.
6 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Reasonably bad acting, seriously worse story.
Pallieter7 October 2001
I guess this is a good movie to watch in the cinema, though only if you have someone to talk to (or more). Take an early show and bring popcorn. The best part of the movie is the shot after the movies is over, where this guy sings "I guess you're not here about the noise" - so make sure you stay untill the very end.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
extreme cheap CGI
trashgang29 February 2012
When I saw this flick on a compilation DVD containing two flicks for a few cent I picked it up because I recognized a well known face from the horror genre. Craig Sheffer I do know from Nightbreed. But looking a bit closer I saw another face, this time female that I knew from Hellraiser III: Hell on Earth, namely Tery Farrell, she was even seen in the still unavailable The Deliberate Stranger (1986).

So far so good but that's were the good things stopped. This flick has nothing to do with horror. This is just a B-flick with very terrible CGI. But somehow I kept watching what would happen. So it's not a movie that you will hate but also not one to remember. The acting wasn't that convincing and the story wasn't one to cheer. This could be if it was made in the seventies one of those flicks that would be shown at a drive-in. So I think that you know what I mean. The ones with stupid plots and goofy lines. Maybe one to see on a rainy afternoon.

Gore 0/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 1/5 Story 2/5 Comedy 0/5 Story
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
"Deeply" misunderstood, wonderfully outlandish fun
I_Ailurophile21 March 2022
There's one thing you absolutely must understand about this movie: It was never intended to be taken seriously. Any belief to the contrary is immediately, emphatically squelched within the first seconds of the runtime, with ludicrously stylized opening credits and wildly overzealous camerawork greeting us in even just the first five minutes. Yes, just enough care was put into the production, including a fair amount of star power, to present an air of earnest intent. But 'Deep core' is built purely for over the top fun, and I feel sorry for anyone who can't recognize that approach and just enjoy themselves. Because with that one insight, this is honestly a super time!

"Over the top" and "deliberate" are absolutely the right terms to use, for they readily apply to every possible facet of the movie. The special effects, the dialogue, the characters, Richard McHugh's score (and a very unnecessary but very welcome MIDI rendition of 'Ride of the Valkyries'), the performances, Rodney McDonald's direction, the scene writing - and the narrative, unmistakably borrowed if not altogether plagiarized for overly self-serious 2003 blockbuster 'The core.' And so it is on down the line, including a passing sexist stereotype and jesting, marginally xenophobic undertones. Even the contributions of behind-the-scenes departments like costume design, and hair and makeup, border on cheekily overt.

I genuinely appreciate the screenplay concocted between Phillip J. Roth and Jim Christopher, which in the first place name-drops some general scientific concepts, only to fabricate a discretely unscientific plot therefrom - and which at all times and in all ways is never anything other than highfalutin, far-fetched, nonsensical entertainment. There's a clear, intentional through-line from the campy genre flicks of the 1950s to 'Deep core,' with further influence from disaster movies as old as 1933's 'Deluge' and as then-new as Michael Bay's 'Armageddon.' Why, it's worthwhile to further discuss these inspirations, because just as 'The core' impressed as an underground variation on 'Armageddon,' there are absolutely elements of Bay's bombastic ensemble piece here, particular in the characters. Furthermore, the 'Star Trek' alumni among the assembled actors are no mistake: we also get technobabble in the dialogue, exterior shots of the computer-generated vehicle, and set design for the vehicle's interior that all call to mind adventures in the Final Frontier. We even get shaky cam, and the "Star trek shimmies!"

And I love it.

As suggested, there are some very familiar names in this cast, and more familiar faces. Terry Farrell, Wil Wheaton, Bruce McGill, Donald Li, James Russo, and even Craig Sheffer are all known actors, and good ones at that, each with a swell list of credits. I know what they're capable of, and so were the producers - and their skills in this instance mean wholeheartedly embracing the pomposity, and every embellishment to their characters' personalities. No one involved in 'Deep core' had any illusions about the type of movie they were making, and I can only imagine that each day on set was more fun than work. The good humor in the players' portrayals is communicated with high fidelity to the audience - I may be jaded and cynical, but even I can see the dexterous combination of sincerity and bluster that marks the acting.

Any viewer who isn't receptive to the distinct flavors in this kitschy feast is best served dining elsewhere from the beginning. Thankfully, as stated, it's from the very beginning that the title tells us exactly what to anticipate - and just in case we missed the memo, that tack is accentuated once more as end credits role, with each most prominent cast member shown one-by-one in a moment of off-the-cuff levity during filming. And with that, any reservations I may have had are completely washed away: I had mixed expectations at best as I started watching, but with the rapid perception of what the filmmakers were doing, I just as quickly gained a great enthusiasm for the feature. 'Deep core' wears its heart and its forebears on its sleeve, with no pretense otherwise, and that's exactly the kind of low-grade cinematic experience I can get behind. For sure, this isn't going to be for everyone, but I feel bad for those who so profoundly misunderstand it such that it earned so poor a reception. I, for one, find 'Deep core' to be a gratifyingly lighthearted piece of sci-fi tomfoolery, and a very satisfying one at that. I think this is well worth the less than 90 minutes it takes to watch, and is most recommendable for anyone who enjoys the genres and various influences it upholds so proudly.

Two thumbs up from me!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Cheesy
be23615 July 2006
Special effects was quite cheesy, as you can see a lot of the shots were poor CGG (computer generated graphics). Also the story line was dorky and boring, and quite implausible. The lady character was good-looking. huh.

The vehicle looked like it was from Battlestar Galatica.

Not much more to say, not worth the money to pay to see, but if it's free, I guess it's okay.

That's about it.. don't have much more to say.

The "Wil" character from Star Trek didn't add much to the story line.

The Chinese connection was lame.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Deep?...A bit shallow...actually
buckaroobanzai501 July 2002
I'm not going to say much more that what has been mentioned in other posts about this movie. It has a really brilliant intro sequence using loads of slow motion and atmospheric music. This really drew my attention to it, but by the first 30 minutes or so, I realised that it was just B movie fare. And I could'nt figure out the plot...If there was one.

At least the actors aren't taking it seriously.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
what a crappy movie
abmannetje11 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Sorry guys, but I think this was a very crappy disaster movie. It starts when everyone is introduced while the movie has already begun. Over and over again I get to see all the names, written in flames.

The complete budget for special effects seems to be wasted on digital explosions, and these were not so good. The machine used for saving the world looks like a giant card-board box with Grey spray-paint. On the most stupid moments the speed is taken out of the story. Come on guys, the world is about to end, you're the devoted ones to save it, don't bother on saying "please", or stop the vehicle and start an argument about who's turn it is to launch the nuke, etc, etc.

When taking a roller-coaster ride in a machine through the earth, it is expected that all persons move the same way. Not in this movie.

The cockpit is made of white IKEA-boxes with office chairs with only a few monitors and some buttons. The drill is making a hole twice as big as the vehicle, etc, etc, etc.

I wonder, wasn't there an actor prepared to warn the director that he was making a disaster of this movie, instead of making a movie about a disaster.

I usually like this type of films, but not this one.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
As seen on Telefutura, "Deep Core" has shallow reach of talent & innovation
the_glorious_sob4 December 2012
I've now watched enough movies on TV & in Spanish to set the bar low for expectations. Films as bad as "Deep Core" prompt me to do other activities like play the Wii on another TV made almost-useless by the digital transition a few years ago. & when I do focus on the movie, I make some comments or riffs about how crappy the scene is. "Deep Core" is another silly sci-fi film about how some scientists use a very ginormous machine - possibly worth a trillion tax dollars if it's a government asset - that's equipped w/ the requisite nuclear bombs & one rogue scientist to complicate the mission, which is to prevent some cataclysmic catastrophe that could kill millions, as evidenced by either stock footage of past disasters or modest-looking CGI demonstrating destructions of world landmarks (e.g. California's Pacific Coast Highway or some church in Quito, Ecuador). This also stars two thespians from a "Star Trek" spin off: Wil Wheaton from "The Next Generation" & some actress from "Deep Space Nine." I have to say that now that I enjoy Wheaton as Sheldon's nemesis-turned-pal on "The Big Bang Theory," that silly scene of him taking a deadly magma shower in this movie is forgiven. & I assume "Deep Core" had a mid-range budget, as all the exterior shots of the drilling vehicle were done on a computer while the interior shots look like something in a sketch comedy show. I think if I actually bothered to watch & understand the Spanish dubbing to learn the story, perhaps I'd hear some jokes or double entendres about drilling. But I doubt such comedy would be in the movie. In conclusion, "Deep Core," judging by my 2 outta 10 rating, isn't crappy enough to scare you into turning off the TV. But the dialogue & plot - the scenes w/o CGI graphics - is so unintriguing that it's recommended to do a little multitasking such as eating, websurfing, or if your TV has PIP, watching something better on the other screen.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
The movie kept me captivated but only out of morbid curiosity.
Simdude1 September 2002
The movie kept me captivated but only out of morbid curiosity. It was simply the worst movie I have ever had the misfortune of watching. The movie oozed badness in every bad scene with every bad line. It is like watching a 90 minute car accident.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
This was just a awful, awful, movie.
boggie475822 November 2011
Warning: Spoilers
I was in shock watching this steaming pile. Bad acting is putting it lightly. What a pile. I did like it when Wil Wheaton bit the dust or lava. What was up with that life saving laser shooting machine that looked like it was made of some cheap metal and the door was operated by very thin cables that any lave or magma would melt through like butter. I just couldn't stop watching this awful movie, kind of like watching a train wreak, my brain was saying look away, but my eyes couldn't. And those camera angles from the floor, I don't get that. The acting and dialog was so bad. When Bruce McGill said something to Terry Farrell like whats your problem Trixi, I knew some 10 year old wrote the script. I liked the Core (more money) even though it was a big ol can of cheese whiz, but this movie (hammer to someones glass piggy bank) was nothing more than a stinking box of moth ball.
0 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Recommending this movie for two factors
stumpmee7725 February 2006
One: Terry Farrell comes off as a tremendously likable character (but again she was my favorite on DS9) and balances with Craig Sheffer's super annoying, know-it all wooden faced Brian Goodman (I find even the name grating). The plot of course I've seen in a dozen other sci-fi films using other elements as a source of danger, and with higher levels of suspense.

Two: The interaction between the team members on the vessel comes off far more mature and professional than those on "Red Planet" made the same year or 1968's "The Green Slime". That alone upgrades rating it over those two, both of which I gave very, very low scores.
8 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Bad... but not horrible.
bikejump3 August 2003
Deep Core.. what can you say? Mediocre acting with poor CGI and no plot? Yes. Wil Wheaton? Yes. Nobody else you've ever heard of? Righty-o good buddy. But besides that... well... there really isn't much.. The box looked sort of cool. The opening credits were alright for a second, until they started intercutting them with scenes.... I didn't like this movie, but I didn't hate it. I may be one of the few who likes Wil Wheaton, but he gives this movie all the personality it has.

C+
5 out of 11 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Sort of like an apocalyptic type movie of course with heroes and bad guys, and everything turns good out in the end.
jamielee20051 January 2005
Wow! This was a great movie. Craig portrayed a great character as he always does. I think his best work was in Nightbreed, but he has done more great work than that. I think Bruce Mcgill was awesome, CUTE, and funny in the film as well. I like all of Bruce's work that I've seen so far, especially as Daniel Simpson (D-Day) Day in Animal House, and Jack Dalton in MacGyver. He was so cute in these two. Terry, Wil, and all the others did a great job. I thought it was very sad to kill Wil off not only because he was the youngest, but because he was so cute too. This is also a very hard movie to find in my location, but this movie is one of my favorite movies from 2000 to 2001. Hope to see another great movie like this one soon, and wouldn't hurt my feelings to see the same people, especially Bruce or Wil, in one either.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Hey I saw a preview for this movie last night a the theater - oh wait
cindymurray15 April 2003
If you take a movie and it doesn't work out so good, just keep the script and recast it three years later. Anyone who saw this movie and said it sucked had better not go see the core and say it rocks. I love it when hollywood blatantly recycles movies that bombed.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
How do you vote 0 ?
rockanna26 August 2011
The only problem I have is how do you vote zero on this film?

Cause voting 1 is just way to much. OMG this movie sucks.

Who ever gave it more than 2 stars should be hanged really.

Worst part is I have to post 10 lines just to review this flick when one word really covers it.

Horrible in the strictest sense would do just fine.

Really bad acting is being nice.

The machine doing the tunneling was a joke.

I think the plot must have been taken from like a funny book from the 1950s.
0 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed