Watch 10.5: Apocalypse For Free

How sad is this?

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

I must say that I should not be wasting time giving a review on this piece of drivel but I am compelled to! First of all, the acting was second-rate, the direction was like watching someone with a case of jitters who never used a tripod or similar device to hold the thing still! I never felt so annoyed since watching Blair Witch (not to mention that fight scene in Bourne Ultimatum - Paul Greengrass' annoyingly hand-held direction!).And at the end the ludicrous scene where everyone broke down and cried at once, even Mr President (Beau Bridges) ... I mean how undignified was that?!

I don't know if anything here is a spoiler or not, but I'll include the warning...just to be safe. But first, a different type of warning...a WARNING TO THOSE WHO MAY BE SUBJECT TO SEIZURES: DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE. (Sorry for the shouting.) The horrific camera work (the zoom lens on the camera was apparently stuck in an in/out/in/out/... mode, and they apparently didn't have the budget for another camera) is so bad that I've had to turn the TV off...I didn't get that warning feeling, but the headache was so bad I could easily imagine it being next...and this movie is NOT worth a Grand Mal seizure...trust me!Also, I only rated this a "1" out of 10 because there isn't a "0".Possible spoiler here....Wasn't Dr. Hill's (Kim Delaney) father mentioned as being DEAD in the original 10.5? Or am I thinking of another movie?

This film was one of the most corny, clichéd and hackneyed films I have ever seen. Even the camera work was corny - for dramatic scenes they continuously zoomed in and out on faces like a parody. The problem was, they were serious. The director responsible for those corny zooms should be exiled somewhere far, far away.The science was absolutely awful. The concept that anything man-made could influence a tectonic event was unbelievable. I won't even mention that fact that events usually taking millions of years could suddenly occur within days! To have a fault open from Hudson's Bay to the Gulf of Mexico not only displays a total ignorance of science but strains incredulity beyond the breaking point.The dramatic scenes were actually embarrassing to watch. I have seen people witness real disasters who didn't react as badly as the actors in this film. Beau Bridges should be ashamed for appearing in this film. I could go on, but suffice to say that all those involved in this films should be drummed out of SAG, DGA, DGC, ACTRA and any other film related association! But that is just my humble opinion.Thank you.

I always watch disaster movies, but 9 out of 10 they turn out to be disasters themselves. This movie was no exception to that rule. The story is simple (as it should be): Mother Earth shows her wrath and has no mercy doing it. The president of the US (who else, as no other country seems to be affected — Hawaii being the US) takes charge and assembles a team of experts to tell what is going on and provide a solution to the problem. No complaints from me there. But why oh why does the daughter of the president have to happen to assist the doctor who treats the wife of the FEMA rescuer who saves his own wife who happens to be in the same building as the father of the scientist in charge who happens to be the discredited geologist who happens to have the 'solution' (no spoiler intended), all supervised by the daughter of the FEMA director who happens to be in direct contact with the president (to come full circle)? To cut it short: suspension of disbelieve is not something thought about thoroughly by the filmmakers.But that's story wise; in a disaster movie you expect disaster to take place, and indeed is does. The special effects and computer graphics are good (for a TV movie at least). No cardboard boxes, or Styrofoam walls flying around (not too obviously anyway), and the CGI is up-to-date. But then again the story line (or rather the suspension of disbelieve) cuts in: the imagery on the computer screens at the geological crisis center are good quality, but unrealistic; the distance people and helicopters are maneuvering from exposed lava or occurring earthquakes is sheer impossible; not to mention the small amount of people that apparently are actually caught in the disaster (admittedly, the number of extras swarming the make-shift medical rescue centers is impressive).Overall the movie shows rather realistic disasters, but that is all it does. There's no real science in the movie, there's no real personal drama (should I care for a person just because he/she is introduced to me?), and there is no satisfactory ending (yeah, yeah, we shall overcome …).