Do not be fooled by those who rate this movie anything higher than 3/10. Either they have suffered like the rest of us watching this movie and only seek to draw others into their own personal hell, or they truly saw some redeeming quality in this movie and so are not to be trusted as they are a danger to themselves and others. As a fan of "bad" movies I can say that this one is a masterpiece. I will only summarize what other reviewers have so eloquently detailed in their reviews...terrible, terrible plot, acting, dialogue, characterization, locations, sets, special effects, production values, and bad, bad science. There are "good" bad movies and there are "bad" bad movies...this is the latter. You have been warned.

I loved it. I enjoy disaster movies especially when the plot, however thin, holds together. I would have liked to have seen a better romance between Anthony Lemke's character and character Denise Balaban. He was handsome, she was adorable, and it was sweet. Interaction among the lead characters was smooth but predictable if you weren't willing to just enjoy the ride. David James Elliot and Lemke were handsome throughout and even at 53 Elliot is so charming he could pass for 35. Yum. I constantly search for disaster movies worth watching and this one was. The only criticism I have is for the parts of the movie that tried to be more serious than necessary. Julia Ormand is beautiful, as always, but married to a man far too old for her character's appearance. And it is odd to me that the actor playing their son is a blue-eyed, snow-blond guy. **shrug** It was an entertaining way to spend a Saturday night :)

I don't get all the negative, self-righteous criticism of the movie. It's a movie about a next-generation space shuttle that can take civilians into space and to the moon rather quickly. Of course it's not believable because it's impossible to do something like that. So set your belief aside and enjoy the movie for what it is: science fiction. Of course you can't talk back and forth instantly to a spacecraft that's near the Sun, but think about how boring it would have been if the director had made it realistic and we had to wait 8 minutes for each response. The person who criticized the part about the cell phone being used to call the shuttle obviously missed the part where the computer geek patches it through the company space communications system. The special effects were better than I expected, although I got tired of seeing the sun shown as a giant ball of lava-like material. Sun loops are magnetic and have a certain form -- nothing like what was portrayed. Since the entire movie is about how the Sun behaves, I would have thought they'd pay more attention to trying to make it look like what it actually does.

One point about science fiction movies, is to impress the viewer with science or technology that could once be real. But in this movie nothing makes sense about science. Not speaking about the bad and slow plot with sometimes terrible unreal action performances.Just to name a view paradox: -they are close to the sun, but are communicating on video phone in real time. The signal would take at least 7 minutes between the sun and earth. (later they correctly state that the impact would only be seen 7 to 8 minutes later on earth.) -As the engines don't work and they float around the moon they experience g forces! In reality they would only feel 0 gravity on board because the gravitation of the moon and the acceleration of the ship would cancel each other out. Same like a space ship in orbit. -How comes that its always daylight in USA and Afghanistan at the same time? -When he is activating the bomb manually in space (0 bar airpresion) he would explode. -the sun is 330000 times bigger than the earth so an impact would we like a tear drop into the oceans. And most probably the space ship would melt long time before it would hit anything solid. At least I don't know anything that wouldn't at 6000 kelvin. Even Ta4HfC5 already melts at 4488 K.