WATCH YOUR FAVORITE
MOVIES & TV SERIES ONLINE
TRY FREE TRIAL
Home > Action >

Path of Destruction

Watch Path of Destruction For Free

Path of Destruction

The movie opens with a faulty nanotechnology experiment that results in a massive, deadly explosion. The company's CEO manages to sidestep blame by framing a meddling young reporter (Katherine), who now holds the only surviving evidence needed to expose the truth. All the while, the dangerous nanoparticles - having escaped from the explosion into the stratosphere - threaten to destroy nearby cities with wildly destructive weather patterns. Among the chaos of the storms, and on the run from the authorities, Katherine must - with the help of a young scientist - get the evidence to the government to enlist their help before it's too late...and the deadly disaster turns worldwide.

... more
Release : 2005
Rating : 3.6
Studio : Unified Film Organization,  Sci Fi Pictures,  Armored Productions, 
Crew : Production Design,  Set Dresser, 
Cast : Danica McKellar Chris Pratt Stephen Furst Franklin Dennis Jones David Keith
Genre : Action Science Fiction TV Movie

Cast List

Reviews

ChanBot
2018/08/30

i must have seen a different film!!

More
Curapedi
2018/08/30

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.

More
ThedevilChoose
2018/08/30

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

More
Justina
2018/08/30

The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

More
Dr Moo
2015/01/05

I came across this on Netflix by accident and thought it looked like a decent enough movie. I thought it would be an entertaining way to kill some time on a rainy afternoon. It looked to me like a good enough Sci-Fi disaster-adventure movie. I was wrong. It's waste of your time and a movie so bad it does't even qualify as so bad it's good, but might just crack so bad it's funny.The story -- just kidding -- there isn't one! We have something half resembling a story as some tiny black things escape an oil rig and start killing people in inconsistent ways with no real reasoning behind it. We have an evil corporation responsible who decide to blame the stereotypical clichéd reporter for the black things getting loose. We also have the scientist she teams up with despite her being a fugitive with her face on every news station. That fact is ignored when she sees some unspecified security types and gets past them by... wearing a hat.The film (for want of a better word; calling this a film is an insult to the movie industry) opens with our heroic reporter talking to her friend about his family. Alarm bells should start ringing at this point since that almost certainly means he'll be dead in five minutes. It actually takes less than that time for him to die. The film (or whatever this is) ends with the reporter and scientist flying an EMP to destroy the black things with a colonel. It's already established that there's more than one soldier under his command so why does he take these two non-military individuals with him on a mission that could prove deadly, with the fate of mankind in the balance?! This is exactly the sort of logical failure this (supposed) film expects us to accept as Gospel Truth and believe it would be done like this, which it wouldn't.What is the worst movie of all time? It's hard to say for sure, but this is a definite contender. With extremely poor special effects, scenery chewing overacting "performances" and every cliché in the book it is hard to think of many movies worse than this.

More
TheLittleSongbird
2012/06/26

I was intrigued by Path of Destruction's concept and felt it had a lot going for it. But it was let down by mediocre execution. The Sci-Fi/SyFy channel have definitely done much worse, at least Paths of Destruction had some better than choppy editing and a good performance from the lovely Danika McKellar. The rest didn't really do all that much for me. The rest of the cast are not as terrible as casts for SyFy have been since, but they do lack McKellar's enthusiasm. David Keith especially seems to be going through the motions. The special effects have also been worse in design, but they do still look cheap and not very easy to tell what they were supposed to be. Not to mention they are poorly-utilized, made to do countless absurd things that only further amplifies SyFy's technical and scientific ignorance. The script is rather thin in structure and doesn't leave the actors much to work with, the story was fine in concept but rather trite and contrived in terms of the finished product and while the characters don't make the mistake of being irritating(like various character from SyFy creature movies, especially, have been) they are clichéd and we don't learn very much about them. On the whole, better than anticipated but didn't deliver much other than three or so things, most of the time SyFy is lucky to get even that so they're lucky this time. 4/10 Bethany Cox

More
lovercanon
2005/09/26

I thought this movie was a hoot. Seriously. I couldn't stop watching it. I'm not sure if it was because I wanted to hear someone say "nanobots" again, or if it was to see Danica McKellar's bare mid-drift and cleavage, who by the way, has seriously grown up since her "Wonder Years" days. (Not that anyone who saw her July spread in "Stuff" couldn't attest to that already!) I thought that she and Stephen Furst were great. She provided one of the only "ties to realism" with a very real and compelling performance, and Stephen Furst provided, you guessed it, comic relief. He hasn't lost his touch since "Animal House." It's a fun movie that thankfully doesn't take itself too seriously, and I recommend it- I had a great time.

More
Jeff Softley
2005/09/25

Although it looks like he did only 2 or 3 days of work on this utter shlockfest of a Sci-Fi Channel piece of junk, poor David Keith has his name attached to this garbage. At least he's working and drawing a check, but it's a long way from the Brubaker days ...This sci-fi mess should be required viewing for all films students: as an example of what a film looks like when things go completely wrong. The production design is all but nonexistent, the direction is sloppy and terrible at the same time, the acting is as bad as it gets, and the script sounds like an 11th grade English class did it as a week-long project, an hour at a time over five days.I'm still waiting for the David Keith / Keith David co-starrer. These are two good actors when they get good material, and they've suffered long enough in the B-movie realm. Tarantino, are you listening?

More
Watch Instant, Get Started Now Watch Instant, Get Started Now