I rented the DVD for "Impact" (2009) that aired on ABC TV in June.
ABC at least tried Science fiction with Impact and the Summer TV series "Defying Gravity" (2009).
I felt it was okay for TV movie. It looked like it was shot on HD video, not film. Natasha Henstridge looked great and did a good job. The male lead David James Elliott also provided a decent performance of his character.
The film itself leads up to a rocket going to the moon and a mission on the moon.
I'd like to talk about the mission to the moon specifically.
The visual effects were great. On the moon the spacesuits looked great. It was a first time I saw LED lights in a semi-circle inside the suit's helmets on-screen to illuminate the actors.
The ship and hardware on the moon were good and the budget didn't seem to skimp on them for being a TV mini-series. Even mission control in Europe looked decent.
About a month ago I picked up a used DVD of another TV sci-fi film Earthstorm (2006) with Stephen Baldwin, Amy Price-Francis, & Anna Silk that was produced in Canada by a Canadian production company Cinetel Films. Oh my God! Earthstorm was a blatant ripoff of the plots of Armageddon (1998/I) and Deep Impact (1998). I can't believe they weren't sued!
The acting was awful. (They hired Stephen Baldwin after all...) The spacesuits were almost as bad as the Virtuality (2009) pilot. All of the production design was very cheap. It was like a 1960s sci-fi space B-movie cheap. I bring it up as after seeing that cheap-o TV film and then seeing Impact I can appreciate certain aspects of a TV film but not the entire film.
At least from Earthstorm I was able to see for the first time the actress Anna Silk.
Check out this funny commercial with her.
She is very beautiful and reminds me of Mary-Louise Parker in her 20's.
Sure Impact had a lot of exposition on the science part of the science fiction with walks down corridors and in meeting rooms but it was necessary. I wish the mission to the moon had gotten started earlier in the show.
From a production design and visual effects perspective I felt the mission to the moon was done very well. They didn't run out of money for the climax of the film.
You could call it a disaster movie, but it is more of a science fiction movie. Yes the science part is not great. Sure go ahead and rip the science to shreds. You would not be in disagreement.
What did YOU think of the mission to the moon part itself?
Source
ABC at least tried Science fiction with Impact and the Summer TV series "Defying Gravity" (2009).
I felt it was okay for TV movie. It looked like it was shot on HD video, not film. Natasha Henstridge looked great and did a good job. The male lead David James Elliott also provided a decent performance of his character.
The film itself leads up to a rocket going to the moon and a mission on the moon.
I'd like to talk about the mission to the moon specifically.
The visual effects were great. On the moon the spacesuits looked great. It was a first time I saw LED lights in a semi-circle inside the suit's helmets on-screen to illuminate the actors.
The ship and hardware on the moon were good and the budget didn't seem to skimp on them for being a TV mini-series. Even mission control in Europe looked decent.
About a month ago I picked up a used DVD of another TV sci-fi film Earthstorm (2006) with Stephen Baldwin, Amy Price-Francis, & Anna Silk that was produced in Canada by a Canadian production company Cinetel Films. Oh my God! Earthstorm was a blatant ripoff of the plots of Armageddon (1998/I) and Deep Impact (1998). I can't believe they weren't sued!
The acting was awful. (They hired Stephen Baldwin after all...) The spacesuits were almost as bad as the Virtuality (2009) pilot. All of the production design was very cheap. It was like a 1960s sci-fi space B-movie cheap. I bring it up as after seeing that cheap-o TV film and then seeing Impact I can appreciate certain aspects of a TV film but not the entire film.
At least from Earthstorm I was able to see for the first time the actress Anna Silk.
Check out this funny commercial with her.
She is very beautiful and reminds me of Mary-Louise Parker in her 20's.
Sure Impact had a lot of exposition on the science part of the science fiction with walks down corridors and in meeting rooms but it was necessary. I wish the mission to the moon had gotten started earlier in the show.
From a production design and visual effects perspective I felt the mission to the moon was done very well. They didn't run out of money for the climax of the film.
You could call it a disaster movie, but it is more of a science fiction movie. Yes the science part is not great. Sure go ahead and rip the science to shreds. You would not be in disagreement.
What did YOU think of the mission to the moon part itself?
