Armageddon (1998) User Reviews

My Ultimate Guilty Pleasure- how do you assign a rating to that?

[madmaxmedia · 8/10 · 24 April 2006]

This movie is my ultimate guilty pleasure. It's inane, manipulative, has hyperactive cutting, a ton of glaring inaccuracies (pointless to even discuss or debate), and probably 29 other glaring faults. And why in every dramatic slow-mo emo shot are there 3 helicopters flying in unison overhead? What's the point of having 3 helicopters flying really close together? Who cares! It looks cool. If one day I am having a heartfelt talk with my daughter, I hope there are 3 helicopters flying overhead to really 'bring it home' (and Aerosmith performing in the background.)

Despite it all, I still love watching this movie. Anytime it is on TV I can watch it 'til the end. Bruce Willis does a great job doing his Bruce Willis 'thing' (smart alecky tough guy), and the supporting cast is really great. Steve Buschemi in particular gets the best lines. An awesome assortment of ragtag castoffs (spitting funny one-liners) must save the world- who would have thunk it?

I think Armageddon was actually conceived by suits in a studio office (no really, I read that in a magazine), which is I guess another strike against it. Yet only a bunch of suits could come up with a 'high concept' like this (so high it's basically a parody by itself.) And only a director like Michael Bay could make it. He's far more suited to these types of movies, rather than big historical epics like PEARL HARBOR (which I really, really disliked.)

I read somewhere once that this movie is as close as Hollywood gets to pure cinema, in that it is basically completely divorced from reality of any kind. Is that good or bad? I don't know. I do think if you're going to ditch convention and any semblance to reality, you may as well go all the way. It's better than having something that is a confused mess that tries to be different things (Pearl Harbor.) There will be no 'it could really happen!' here.

So after all this, believe it or not I am going to give this movie a big fat whopping 8. Why? Because IMO it unabashedly succeeds at what it tries to set out to be, whatever that is. That makes no sense, since I am basically saying by all logical accounts this movie may actually suck, yet I am giving it a 8. But hey I loved this movie.

I'm 38. Today I watched this movie first time

[leonidasoriginal · 8/10 · 23 February 2020]

With horrible movies coming out month after month I searched for a good movie. And I found Armageddon on HBO GO and remembered that I never watched this movie in full. So many years after release, I took the time, headphones, 50 inch tv and some popcorn. Let me tell you one thing - THIS IS ONE FANTASTIC MOVIE. They don't make movies like this anymore. We give oscars to crap today, this was pure pleasure and I'm glad I never wathched it before. I always caught part of it. But today, 22 years later hehe :) man, I miss the old movie making skill.

One of Those Guilty Pleasures

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 13 June 2017]

After discovering that an asteroid the size of Texas is going to impact Earth in less than a month, NASA recruits a misfit team of deep core drillers to save the planet.

The real mystery surrounding this film is how it got released by the Criterion Collection. Both this film and Michael Bay's "The Rock" received the Criterion treatment at one time. And while both are very enjoyable films, do they really belong with Criterion? I feel that by merely being released by them, there is an added importance stamped on the film.

But as far as guilty pleasures go, this is a fun and entertaining film. I could do without the romance angle, but the idea of blowing up an asteroid before it hits earth (which assumes a lot of questionable science) is just classic science fiction, here given more legitimacy and budget than ever before.

Incredibly unrealistic, but still a fun 2hrs20min

[0w0 · 7/10 · 24 September 2019]

Steam, wind, sound and gravity on an asteroid flying through space? Yeah the director didn't really think this whole 'space thing' through (or I think he simply didn't care... he was just like: "Meh, let's just make it fun"). And the movie is pretty fun, if you ignore the obvious inconsistencies and plot holes. Just take it like this: It's a movie of Bruce Willis and his team of misfits attempting to save the world by going to outer-space and blowing up a giant asteroid that's hurtling towards earth. PS. Liv Tyler at 21 y/o was unbelievably beautiful... she's distractingly gorgeous in the movie.

Great cast with tons of energy

[HotToastyRag · 7/10 · 8 July 2019]

Believe it or not, I managed to escape the 1990s without sitting through Armageddon. I'm notoriously squeamish about "we're all going to die!" movies, so the only reason I did sit through it was because it was Bruce Willis's week on Hot Toasty Rag. Thankfully, my mom prepped me for it and told me everything that happened so I wouldn't be too scared or sad. So, if you're squeamish like me, and you want to watch it anyway, just ask your mom how it ends.

He must have been busy, or didn't want to seem old enough to have a twenty-year-old daughter, but the leading role Bruce Willis took on seemed tailor-made for Kevin Costner. Bruce held his own and wound up making a certain scene one of the most iconic scenes to come out of the '90s. He plays a gruff, tough oil driller with a soft spot for his daughter, Liv Tyler. Liv, raised around gruff, tough friends of her dad, has fallen in love with one of them, and her dad's not happy about it. Liv and Ben Affleck's romance seems a little unimportant when Bruce and his entire crew are called to NASA to save the world.

Sure, I'm not a fan of the premise of the movie-a giant asteroid heading for Earth isn't my idea of a good time-but the cast is so delightful it makes everything worth it. Everyone has tons of energy and brings their own presence to the screen. Bruce had his classic combination of machoism mixed with being a softie on the inside. His fellow drillers-turned-astronauts are an eclectic group impossible to dislike. Steve Buscemi has a weakness for women, and his antics are hilarious and remarkably charming. Will Patton has a broken homelife, and he's given a touching scene the night before the rescue mission to reconcile with his family. Michael Clarke Duncan, Owen Wilson, and Ken Campbell aren't really given anything to do besides rattle off one-liners, but the one-liners are funny, so I don't think anyone will complain. Back at NASA, the head of the program and mission is Billy Bob Thornton, and he always brings a little something special to his roles. Keith David, a head honcho from Washington, brings tension and severity to the plot, and Jason Isaacs plays a scientist with good intentions.

When Bruce's group is brought to NASA, they have to go through a mini-boot camp to make sure they're physically able to undergo the mission. It's a very funny sequence, started by William Fichtner, who plays the only certified astronaut on the mission, quipping, "Talk about the wrong stuff!" when he sees the odd lineup. Bill has a great, meaty role, and he's completely believable as a disciplined, intelligent patriot who's scared yet confident. Peter Stormare puts on yet another accent, Russian this time, and plays a quirky astronaut who's been stationed in space for too long at the expense of his social skills. There are plenty of comic reliefs in this movie, Peter included, to even out the immense tension of the plot. Even though you'll be worrying about the end of the world, you'll be laughing through your fear.

Since this is a Michael Bay movie, you can expect overactive camera angles and tons of special effects. The opening sequence is incredible, even when watching it twenty years later, as a meteor shower destroys New York City. There's a lot to appreciate in this movie, with the push and pull of the characters, everyone's special quirks and motivations, and the Oscar-nominated song, "I Don't Want to Miss a Thing." The romance between Liv and Ben is really the only downside; it's supposed to be true love and more powerful than the end of the Earth, but it feels like a summer fling between two teenagers. Liv is given many tearjerker scenes throughout the movie, and since she was only twenty years old during the filming, I decided to cut her some slack. I remember the difficulties of being a young actress and how sometimes the emotions you think are being projected in front of the camera don't end up coming across very well. So, when you watch her scenes and she's supposed to be crying over the danger her boyfriend and father are in, keep her age in mind and be kind.

To call yourself a true '90s kid, you'll probably want to rent this movie. You'll probably have a good cry during the credits, but if you like these "we're all going to die!" movies, you'll probably enjoy yourself during the process. Go ahead and bring your Kleenexes, and enjoy what this very large cast brings to the screen.

DLM Warning: If you suffer from vertigo or dizzy spells, like my mom does, this movie will not be your friend. Since I counted 66 spinning camera shots and 13 canted angles, as well as 4 scenes with strobelights and 6 scenes with a severe shaky camera, you should be aware that this movie could make you seriously sick. In other words, "Don't Look, Mom!"

Kiddy Warning: Obviously, you have control over your own children. However, since this is an "end of the world" movie, I'd wait until my kids were a little older until they watch it.

Shut your brain off and enjoy the ride

[ercfunk-445-950046 · 8/10 · 4 December 2018]

Typical Michael Bay movie, lots of action and things explode really for no reason. It's still a fun flick. So many actors in it.

Has all the ingredients of a good action movie...

[NoArrow · 29 June 2003]

...that's exactly what this is: an ACTION movie. It's not supposed to sweep the Oscars, the acting isn't supposed to be perfect, and it's not supposed to make perfect sense.

The story follows a group of oil drillers sent by NASA to stop an asteroid that will strike the world in eighteen days. The drillers are taught and trained to become astronauts (in a very comedic scene) and then sent to the asteroid to drop the nukes and blow it up. After that, a whole lot goes wrong.

I loved this movie, and I hate how everyone's been calling it 'mindless action'. It's not mindless, it's actually very dramatic. The acting is great from pretty much all accounts, even Ben Affleck does a good job.

Bruce Willis captures the 'reluctant hero' role, and Liv Tyler does well as his daughter. Steve Buscemi delivers a great comedic performance as the genius who goes insane once they land on the asteroid.

Great, funny, intense, dramatic movie. 8/10.

far fetched, over the top, funny. i like it!

[polkadotlegwarmers · 7/10 · 21 December 2004]

*minor spoilers* This film follows the basic asteroid going to hit earth plot. They find out about the asteroid, some brave souls are sent to destroy it, they get into problems, and one has to die to save the planet. With one major twist. Does NASA send a group of highly trained astronauts to save the earth from destruction? No. instead they call on Harry Stamper (Bruce Willis) and his gang of oil drilling misfits. This happy gang are rounded up from a strip club, casino and various other hideouts, to save the world.

This makes from a many laughs and eventually a "happy ending". If you want a serious film about saving the planet, don't watch this. Its way to far fetched, and has far too many funny moments to be taken seriously. This is great entertainment. For example when the mad Russian astronaut hits the space shuttles engine with a spanner to get it started! Hilarious. Steve Buscemi's character provides some of the films funniest moments. The acting's OK and the special effects are great.

If you want a far fetched, over the top, voyage into space with the strangest bunch of astronauts around, watch this film. Don't take it seriously, don't expect it to be realistic, just sit back and watch it.

Fun, Action-packed movie.

[XJoey · 8/10 · 15 May 2003]

This movie seems to be a movie that many people love to hate. I don't see why it has such a bad reputation. It is meant to be an Action/Adventure/Sci-Fi movie, and it definitely lives up to this. It is what it is. Many people have tried to compare it to Apollo 13, but that's like comparing apples and oranges. They are entirely different fruit. Apollo 13 is based on a true historical event (Docu-drama), while Armageddon is an Action/Adventure/Sci-Fi movie. It has plenty of action and adventure, a lot of humor, and a bit of romance. Is the story realistic? Not hardly, but name ANY Action/Adventure/Sci-Fi movie that is. That's why they call it Science FICTION... For those who criticize this movie, nothing will change their minds. However, if you HAVEN'T seen Armageddon, take a chance, watch with an open mind and try not to let all these negative reviews spoil your enjoyment of a really fun movie. Remember, a movie is meant to ENTERTAIN, and Armageddon does just that, if you let it!

I agree that this film is stupid but I was entertained

[preppy-3 · 7/10 · 22 July 2009]

After some silly opening narration by Charlton Heston the story starts. According to this an asteroid the size of Texas is going to hit the Earth in 13 days. If it hits it will destroy the entire planet. (I know I know--just go with it) So NASA (led by a slumming Bily Bob Thornton) hires a group of oil drillers (led by Bruce Willis), trains them how to work in outer space, sets them off to drill a hole in the asteroid, set explosives and get the hell out of there...all in 11 days. Also, before the asteroid hits, meteors are coming down and virtually wiping out major cities like New York and Shanghai.

As you can see logic disappears pretty quick in this one. Director Michael Bay has said he makes movies for teenage boys. That's no surprise. There's LOTS of explosions here, lots of masculine men fighting each other and a plot dumbed down so anyone can understand it. There's also a hysterically funny "love" story between Ben Affleck and Liv Tyler (their goodbye scene using Animal Crackers has become a classic of bad cinema). Despite all this the movie WAS a huge hit. I saw it in a theatre back in 1998. It was a ridiculously stupid movie but I'd be lying if I said I wasn't entertained. It pounds you into submission with some incredible widescreen imagery, LOUD stereo sound and some truly unbelievable special effects. After a while you ignore the stupid story and just sort of go with it. As for characterizations--well who needs that? All of the actors are playing walking, talking clichés. There's not one person that acts like a normal human being. Liv Tyler tries but the script is stacked against her. Also I LOVE how she's allowed to casually stroll around the top secret NASA facility while her father and boyfriend are on the mission! The acting is as good as it can be. Willis delivers his regular one note performance; Thornton doesn't take this seriously for a moment; Tyler tries; Affleck looks lost and Steve Buscemi, Owen Wilson, Will Patton and Michael Clarke Duncan basically hit their marks and say their lines. So this movie is big, loud, stupid and far too long but it WAS entertaining. Just turn off your mind, sit back and watch things blow up. I give it a 7.

the biggest waste of my dad's money i spent in a long time

[alfkev · 1/10 · 17 September 1999]

Even though my father treated me to Armageddon I felt as if I'd wasted my own money. I felt so bad, I apologized to him as we walked out. This movie was so bad I wouldn't recommend anyone to watch it if the could see it for FREE. It was long, stupid, non-entertaining, and horrible. This and GODZILLA were two of the worst movies made in recent years. Why cant more of these "blockbusters" have the same thrills, heart, and wit as the STAR WARS series. Hollywood should realize that there's a reason these movies are so popular.

DO NOT GO SEE ARMAGEDDON!!!!!

Are you kidding me?

[somodikrisztian · 10/10 · 18 July 2020]

This is my all time favourite movie. So American, so stupid, so spectacular. A fast paced masterpiece by Michael Bay, the music is top notch, and there are many great moments. I've seen it countless times and I just LOVE it!

Suspension of disbelief

[markokhoward-854-530441 · 7/10 · 13 April 2020]

This film is unashamedly corny. Unrealistic with a cheesy end but it's entertaining. And when the people giving this 2's, 3's & 4's should politely remove their heads from their asses if their problem was lack of realism. It's pure cheesy entertainment so just enjoy it and don't over think it.

Worse than all the spoofs

[syncopation · 4/10 · 8 January 2007]

Half of the movie is is flashing lights and shaky camera. The rest is made up of predictable characters (think science vs. government, 'know-how' vs. authority, etc.)

What is the worst aspect about this movie? Is it the cars being thrown around in the first 5 minutes, is the horrible 'Russian' accent of the 'cosmonaut', is it the uninspired characters, the poorly integrated Top 40 hits, or the "US will save the world" vitriol? No. It's the fact that regardless of the "sad" ending - there is very little suspense in this movie - we basically know what's going to happen.

The one good part of this movie: "American components, Russian components: all made in Taiwan!"

The Good & Bad Of 'Armageddon'

[ccthemovieman-1 · 28 November 2006]

This could have been super but, as with the case of most modern action films, the action is way overdone. Still, it had its moments.....

THE BAD -One word describes a lot of scenes in here: chaos. Things are blown up all over the place, people are shouting everywhere. It gets to be too much, especially in the last hour which gets ludicrous. You practically have a headache when you're finished watching the 150 minutes of mayhem.

Half of the disasters that happen to the astronauts were not needed, and many of them come one after the other. It wound up muddling the story. Do today's filmmakers think you have to have something dramatic and loud every two minutes to keep their audiences? And talk about loud.....holy eardrums, Bataman, you could be deaf listening to this movie which includes a lot of loud heavy-metal "music." It's too noisy.

There are touches of "Independence Day" mentality with very unrealistic with a veteran astronaut smuggling a gun on board a ship; the daughter of the one of the astronauts barging into the command center and shoving the center's leader in the middle of a crisis (in reality, she wouldn't be allowed in the room to begin with); and the usual last-second impossible heroics. I mean, sometimes I swear I was watching a movie made specifically for morons. Speaking of stupid, what was that goofy cosmonaut character (Peter Stormare) all about. That's just another example of what I was just talking about - totally unrealistic people. Why does Hollywood like to portray astronauts - some of the classiest, most educated and reserved people in the world - in such a negative light? Just another of its sicknesses, I guess where good is bad and bad is good.

THE GOOD - What was great to watch in this film were the special-effects, especially the disaster scenes with the meteors hitting the earth. They were spectacular. A few of the panoramic scenes in here were beautiful, too. (This is a must for widescreen DVD.)

There is a good mix of humor in this adventure thriller. That humor makes some of the characters likable, even though they are still unrealistically sleazy heroes. Steve Buscemi had most of the good comedic lines. I liked Billy Bob Thornton as the NASA boss. He's very interesting to watch. Bruce Willis plays his normal macho-hero role. His heroic effort in the end is nicely sentimental. The special-effects, as mentioned earlier, were perhaps the best right in the first 5-10 minutes of the film - a real attention-grabber right off the bat. Actually, the first half of this film is far better than the second half.

HIGHLY entertaining

[FeastMode · 7/10 · 25 June 2019]

Beastly movie on so many different levels. action, intensity, suspense, creativity, acting (mostly), likable characters, comedy, music, emotional parts, love story, getting you emotionally invested. never once bored on a 2.5 hour movie. you definitely have to turn your brain off, but if you do, you'll have a great time. and this movie gives me the feels. hard core. numerous times. (about 5 viewings, 6/30/2020)

This just goes too far sometimes, but it's good

[lagriff05 · 7/10 · 16 June 2007]

I'll say it straight out, this movie let me down quite a lot. I wanted an epic badass of a film that would revolutionize the way I see movies. I got an epic behemoth of a film with more then ample doses of goofy monkeying around inserted sometimes at the most inappropriate of scenes. Bruce Willis stars in this movie along with Ben Afleck and Liv Tyler as two young lovers, and it's safe to say that there aren't too many complaints with the acting (although admittedly there were some weak spots there, too).

No, my main problem with this movie is the comedy. Now, I'm all for comedy, but the directors of Armageddon didn't seem to be taking their own plot too seriously at some point. I was in awe at the utter stupidity of the characters in this movie, especially toward the second half of it, and specifically Rockhound (Steve Buscemi, who does do a very good job acting here anyway). We all need some lighthearted fun in our movies, but what we don't need is for the comedy to interfere with the dramatic parts of the movie, which it almost does a few times here. Rockhound's foolishness and monkeying around almost ruins several scenes and it doesn't fit with the whole theme of saving the Earth. Why did they even put the parts involving the stripper and then later the machine gun on the asteroid into the movie? It's safe to tell who we can all throw rocks at for ruining the movie. Why on earth is he so lenient about it? It makes no sense. I can say the same thing for most of the crew at the beginning, too, they seem awfully laid back for a bunch of guys about to go save the world. Bear was falling asleep and making comments about a hot girl during the teaching sessions. What? Like I said, I like comedy fine, but here it just hinders what would otherwise be a phenomenal movie.

This movie is full of explosions (big explosions, too, we're not talking about little buildings. We're talking entire cities all at once here. That's epic.), romantic love scenes, and other action clichés. They're actually done quite well, until we get Rockhound or Bear making more dumbass jokes. The whole mishmash makes Armageddon look like a PARODY of the action genre at some points, and it hurts the score. A lot. If I were to see this movie without any prior knowledge of action movies, and having never seen one before this, I would get a flawed first impression of the genre. It's not quite to the level of Scary Movie and Date Movie, of course, but it's not an upstanding example of how to incorporate comedy into an action movie. See Die Hard 3 or The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly for that. Sorry, but Armageddon just goes too far overboard sometimes.

No, I don't hate this movie though. I do like it quite a lot. It's great fun for a Saturday night with friends or if you've been drinking (lol). The ending scenes with Willis and Afleck are very touching, as are most of the scenes involving Liv Tyler. It's also got some extremely triumphant moments, and the explosions and special effects are amazingly done. Check out those skies toward the end! The scenes with Chick (Will Patton) and his ex-wife and son are extremely touching, and are the saving grace of the quieter parts of the movie. Beautiful. And like I mentioned before, it's EPIC. In all caps, too. There aren't many other movies like this that can touch it in epic-ness. Not even Die Hard or it's sequels are more epic than this monster of a film.

Recommended to action fans who can stand stupidity in their movie-viewing. I'll be watching this one again, too.

I don't care if it is shallow, i love it

[mjw2305 · 8/10 · 15 January 2005]

What did everyone expect when this film was released, i expected exactly what i got, stunning visual effects, good surround sound and plenty of action (and yes i expected the traditional dose of sentiment too)

This movie is pure escapism fun, which has its place in my collection, movies like Independence Day and Armageddon are great fun to watch and as a bonus the characters weren't bad the script was reasonable and action was indeed plentiful. There were a great deal of laughs too (mostly intentional) anyone who hasn't seen this but just wants relax and enjoy a good (yet Shallow) action flick then this certainly fits the bill.

For pure entertainment value i score it 8/10

If this is for you then check out The Core and Independence Day, avoid the Day after Tomorrow and Deep Impact, there not really for action fans.

A great mix of everything.

[Spaced · 7/10 · 6 October 1998]

I felt that this was one of the great movies of 1998. It had all the elements that make a movie great. The characters were well developed, the story was great and planned out, good acting, and special effects. I felt as though the special effects didn't make the story but only added to it. Also this was not your 'typical' Bruce Willis action role. He did a great job in this. I felt as though it was one of his best performances and fortunately it was in a great movie.

Only one person I know enjoyed Deep Impact over this once since it had two comets instead of one. We won't count that since he also said that Aliens was dumb and had corny acting.

Underrated even in the year 2019

[Exsosus2 · 10/10 · 17 May 2019]

Sometimes IMDB group rating is wrong. And that is OK. I have learned my life that being wrong teachs me lessons in life.

However, in this film, my girl whispered to me that it was perfect, and I have to admit I agree. I have also spoken to many many friends and family members about this film and they all call it a ten.

So there you have it. Sorry the critics couldn't do their job well enough for us on this title. Even they make mistakes, from time to time. Its OK to be wrong.

Be sure to enjoy this with a glass of wine, or tea if that is your choice because it is so intense I nearly recieved a heart attack twice.

Not a masterpiece, but good fun besides

[TheLittleSongbird · 7/10 · 6 June 2010]

There are things wrong with Armageddon, but I don't think it is a bad movie. In fact I think it more as a guilty pleasure. It is shallow in the character development, the film is much too long by twenty minutes not helped by the sappy love-story subplot and Ben Affleck got on my nerves. With its faults it is entertaining, and I do think it is better than Pearl Harbor, which had amazing spectacle but was bloated and had an awful script. So what makes Armageddon entertaining? Well, the visuals are incredible, and the music is great. I liked the script, clichéd it may be but there was enough tongue-in-cheek for me to be entertained by, and the film realises it's a parody and that it is politically incorrect something those talentless hacks Friedberg and Seltzer should have already learnt by now. The direction is decent, and the acting was good, Bruce Willis, Billy Bob Thornton, Will Patton and Steve Buschemi coming off best. Overall, no masterpiece by all means, but it is not Michael Bay's worst movie and definitely not the worst movie ever. 7/10 for the entertainment value and the visuals alone. Bethany Cox

Badly written and offensive

[bluejamie · 2/10 · 25 August 2006]

I saw this film last night.

And I'm worried I'm turning into one of those left-wing liberals they rightly make fun of in South Park. Because I found it hugely offensive. Am I being ridiculously sensitive? Firstly, there's the old staple that is America being the only country in the world that is physically capable of anything, ever.

Secondly, and chillingly, there is the early meteor strike hitting some (unnamed – why do they need a name?) Asian country. The reaction to this is to look at it as a warning. As in "my god, imagine the tragedy that *could* happen". Because, you know, it happened to Asians. It might happen to white Americans, and *that* would be tragic.

Then, later on, a bigger meteor hits Paris. Our cast on the ground are irritated, because this might mean our boys have less time than they thought. Not much upset in America. No mention that a lot of people have died.

Then there's Michael Clarke Duncan. A wonderful actor, wasted. Never has a black man been so token. Among a team of hardcore drillers, his job seems to consist of standing in the back, occasionally saying "Hey, you da man." Really. Why did they even bring him? It's not like he's petite - he weighed down that shuttle for nothing! Not once does he lift a tool, steer a space ship or even help fix anything that blows up.

Even if you ignore the Russian Cosmonaut (Peter Stormare, another great actor wasted in a pointless role), who seems drunk most of the time and hits things with spanners instead of fixing them because "Dat's how we do dese dings in Russia", it's pretty horrific.

All cemented of course by the site of blond, blue-eyed American children all celebrating in corn fields at being saved and everything being all right. Because all the death and destruction to the rest of the world is irrelevant.

You expect the bad script, the dodgy acting, the implausible plot (fat, middle aged men being trained in 12 days to be astronauts? Including one who appears to be retarded?). But I couldn't believe the racism and xenophobia implied in the film, and the callous disregard for the lives of anyone not corn-fed American.

It's a chilling indictment of the attitude of a section of Western Society to the world.

And it's a crappy film too.

Underrated

[bah_cacatule · 10/10 · 19 June 2010]

this movie is arguably one of the best movies i have ever seen and to be honest i can NOT understand its current IMDb rating... it has everything in needs to be a movie worth remembering after tens of years! it can put a large smile on your face in its funny moments, and it WILL bring tears in your eyes in its most emotional moments... this movie is a reminder of why human life is worth cherishing, worth fighting for, worth DYING for... it features great human valors such as love, forgiveness, heroism, sacrifice, sturdiness.. i must have seen it at least 8 times by now and it never, NEVER ceases to impress me to the point of tears.. to conclude with, i am very disappointed in the viewers that voted on this movie here.. honestly it deserves 10/10

Entertaing Bad Film

[jeremy3 · 6/10 · 24 February 2021]

I do not understand why critics hated this movie. The main point of a movie is to entertain the audience. Admittedly, on the surface it is about as schmaltzy, bubble gum, and simplistic as can be. Maybe that was Michael Bay's whole point. The movie had great special effects. The audience was entertained for the whole movie. No time for boredom. The best part were the silly quips and one liners that the actors said. They were not real astronauts. They were oil workers, and they were not afraid to whine and express their frustrations about their lot trying to save the Planet. The message was to never give up, and to trust yourself and your team. It was a bad cliched movie, but maybe it was really poking fun and having fin satirizing all disaster movies. So, I will not say it is Academy Award material, but the movie entertained.

a multimillion dollar blah movie

[Lumpenprole · 3/10 · 18 March 2002]

spoilers

This movie is not action packed; it's slow and boring. It's not funny or exciting, it's predictable and plays on cheap sentimentality and vague patriotism. The special effects are not imaginative or impressive. They are noisy and uninspired.

The acting talent is wasted on hopelessly stupid one-liners and clichés. These are spouted by characters they ought to just be called `gentle giant black man,' `eccentric genius who is about to crack,' `square jawed hero coming of age,' `by-the-book coward,' `luckless gambler who lives by a code of honor,' `impulsive princess' and so on.

And the writing! How many undramatic countdowns did they think they could fit in this thing? Does a scene where people have to defuse a bomb by cutting one or another wire even count as fiction anymore? The drama of the last 15 minutes of the movie depends on the audience caring if some jerk can put aside his personal differences with Ben Affleck and say bye bye to Liv Tyler in time TO SAVE THE EARTH. All the work is done; we just have to wait a couple more seconds for Harry Stamper, the jerk, to toss off a few cotton candy lines. I know Bruce Willis is a generally charismatic guy, but his Harry Stamper character is an obnoxious bore. I thought he earned the Golden Razzy he was awarded for this role.

Since the movie is so long, the plot so obvious, and the dialogue so disposable, one can't help but notice the lame inaccuracies, inconsistencies and plot holes. 800 feet into something the size of TX is less than a pinprick. Try walking 800 feet into TX and see how close to the center you are. After all the discussion about the artificial gravity on the Russian station, it appears to be arbitrary once inside. Actually, gravity comes and goes throughout the movie. Does it make any sense that anyone besides Michael Bay would give these morons a couple shuttles and send them to blow up an asteroid threatening the earth?

The sentimental phone/insurance/cola commercial style montages were revolting.

I do like action movies. Really. This one is boring, stupid and really stuck on itself. It deserves hatred and scorn because it's everything Hollywood's most expensive efforts have become - a bunch of cheap cliches running from one expensive explosion to another. Oh yes, the whole thing is permeated by a Neanderthal conservative outlook on sex, politics and so on.