Well, yes, SOLAR CRISIS (an ambitious Japanese/American co-production) just might have so many flaws you could pave a road from here to Tokyo with. But it still isn't the exceptionally bad movie that many say it is. However, I'll immediately add that this movie is only worth seeing if you're a real sci-fi buff, because general movie-lovers, in search for a decent plot and well-written dialogues (two name only 2 things) will be thoroughly annoyed by SOLAR CRISIS.
Now, the basic premise is actually very promising: In the year 2050, a predicted giant solar flare threatens to incinerate the earth. In order to prevent this from happening, a crew of scientists are on an outer space mission to launch a bomb into the sun. Its explosion should prevent the flare from harming the earth. Other then this interesting story, the movie has two other things going for it: A noticeable cast and rather excellent special effects, especially the outer space sequences, displaying various space-crafts. Some of the set-designs were also decent (including a neat-looking robo-truck).
But that's about it. For one thing, the movie's pace is way too slow. You might lose interest along the way, resulting in boredom kicking in. There's also quite a bit of plot-stupidity to be spotted. For example: The main villain Arnold Teague (a filthy rich corporate executive played by Peter Boyle) has taken it upon himself to sabotage the rescue mission (I'm not even going into the fact as to how he tries to achieve this). Whether he believes the disaster will happen or not even is irrelevant at this point. The point is: Why the hell would anybody want to sabotage the only mission that could save the planet earth and all mankind from total extinction. That simply defies all logic (or maybe I missed something in this movie, I really don't know). Then, another annoying aspect is that the ending of the movie feels like it was rushed big-time. The whole movie builds up to the sequence where the bomb (navigated by a soon to be sacrificed crew-member) is send off into the sun. Instead of giving us an exciting scene and showing the effects the explosion might have, we just get some nifty colorization effects, and then the movie ends with a final shot of the scientists returning to earth in their spacecraft. You just can't have a whole movie slowly building up towards the final pay-off, and then deliver an anti-climax that's over in less than 5 minutes. The same goes with the elimination of the villain. This also happens in the last 10 minutes of the movie, and we get absolutely no exciting showdown or interesting twist or anything for that matter. We don't even see him die. Apparently he was on board of an aircraft that some military folks blow out of the sky.
As for the acting in the movie: Though the cast was great, not all of the performances were. Charlton Heston's acting-style seemed to have passed its expiry-date. And on top of that, he's got the most of all those really redundant emotional scenes. The film-makers really should have focused on bringing a bit more action, tension and thrills in this movie, instead of spicing it with all this sentimental stuff. On the other hand: Jack Palance really seemed to have fun in playing Travis, though his character really in no way served the general plot. It was fun seeing him and he's good as always, but why his character was written into the screenplay is beyond me. I've always found Tim Matheson a bit too stiff as an actor, but he was decent in his roll as Steve Kelso, the mission's commander. Some fellow commentator mentioned that Haas-character was really bad. Of course he was bad; he was portrayed be Paul Koslo and the man simply has not what it takes to be a good actor. A noticeable cameo was given to Michael"The Hills Have Eyes"Berryman. So, you see, the complete cast does manage to entertain.
Now all the afore-mentioned flaws should probably provide enough reasons to flunk this movie. But I can't. Maybe because of 2 reasons: For one thing, I really liked the underlying theme/idea this movie had that in the wake of a world-threatening disaster, worldwide nations would put aside their differences & conflicts to unite in an effort to save the wold. Another reason is we will probably never again (with all that colorful CGI going on in sci-fi movies nowadays) see such nice and convincing miniature space-vessels (that type of white ones we got familiar with through the early STAR WARS movies and 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY) in sci-fi movies. Is that a lame excuse to not flunk this movie? I think not and it's just not that bad like some people claim it is.
Now, the basic premise is actually very promising: In the year 2050, a predicted giant solar flare threatens to incinerate the earth. In order to prevent this from happening, a crew of scientists are on an outer space mission to launch a bomb into the sun. Its explosion should prevent the flare from harming the earth. Other then this interesting story, the movie has two other things going for it: A noticeable cast and rather excellent special effects, especially the outer space sequences, displaying various space-crafts. Some of the set-designs were also decent (including a neat-looking robo-truck).
But that's about it. For one thing, the movie's pace is way too slow. You might lose interest along the way, resulting in boredom kicking in. There's also quite a bit of plot-stupidity to be spotted. For example: The main villain Arnold Teague (a filthy rich corporate executive played by Peter Boyle) has taken it upon himself to sabotage the rescue mission (I'm not even going into the fact as to how he tries to achieve this). Whether he believes the disaster will happen or not even is irrelevant at this point. The point is: Why the hell would anybody want to sabotage the only mission that could save the planet earth and all mankind from total extinction. That simply defies all logic (or maybe I missed something in this movie, I really don't know). Then, another annoying aspect is that the ending of the movie feels like it was rushed big-time. The whole movie builds up to the sequence where the bomb (navigated by a soon to be sacrificed crew-member) is send off into the sun. Instead of giving us an exciting scene and showing the effects the explosion might have, we just get some nifty colorization effects, and then the movie ends with a final shot of the scientists returning to earth in their spacecraft. You just can't have a whole movie slowly building up towards the final pay-off, and then deliver an anti-climax that's over in less than 5 minutes. The same goes with the elimination of the villain. This also happens in the last 10 minutes of the movie, and we get absolutely no exciting showdown or interesting twist or anything for that matter. We don't even see him die. Apparently he was on board of an aircraft that some military folks blow out of the sky.
As for the acting in the movie: Though the cast was great, not all of the performances were. Charlton Heston's acting-style seemed to have passed its expiry-date. And on top of that, he's got the most of all those really redundant emotional scenes. The film-makers really should have focused on bringing a bit more action, tension and thrills in this movie, instead of spicing it with all this sentimental stuff. On the other hand: Jack Palance really seemed to have fun in playing Travis, though his character really in no way served the general plot. It was fun seeing him and he's good as always, but why his character was written into the screenplay is beyond me. I've always found Tim Matheson a bit too stiff as an actor, but he was decent in his roll as Steve Kelso, the mission's commander. Some fellow commentator mentioned that Haas-character was really bad. Of course he was bad; he was portrayed be Paul Koslo and the man simply has not what it takes to be a good actor. A noticeable cameo was given to Michael"The Hills Have Eyes"Berryman. So, you see, the complete cast does manage to entertain.
Now all the afore-mentioned flaws should probably provide enough reasons to flunk this movie. But I can't. Maybe because of 2 reasons: For one thing, I really liked the underlying theme/idea this movie had that in the wake of a world-threatening disaster, worldwide nations would put aside their differences & conflicts to unite in an effort to save the wold. Another reason is we will probably never again (with all that colorful CGI going on in sci-fi movies nowadays) see such nice and convincing miniature space-vessels (that type of white ones we got familiar with through the early STAR WARS movies and 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY) in sci-fi movies. Is that a lame excuse to not flunk this movie? I think not and it's just not that bad like some people claim it is.