When a star in a nearby galaxy becomes unstable and goes supernova, an astrophysicist puts together a dangerous and desperate plan to sheild the Earth from the destructive burst of radiation heading toward it.
Adam M. (redbaronredsoxfan) from BURLINGTON, VT Reviewed on 7/3/2022...
A fun disaster movie. I enjoyed it, kind of wonder what the other reviewers were talking about. not every movie has to be a big budget theatrical release! Definitely worth adding yo your collection if you enjoy disaster movies. Check it out!
1 of 1 member(s) found this review helpful.
Movie Reviews
Worst movie of the decade
Steven D. Hult | Berne, IN United States | 11/13/2009
(1 out of 5 stars)
"Plan 9 From Outer Space now has a rival for the worst movie ever made. This movie is so bad that it actually may be worth watching for a laugh. There are so many glaring inconsistencies in plot, location, setting, time-line, and background that it is hard to believe it was not done on purpose. One example (and this should not be classified as a spoiler - nothing could spoil this movie any worse): the main character is shown on a space station one second before he blows it up with 8 nuclear bombs on board, and the inexplicably shows up alive after the event??? How many telephone poles can crash down on a car to necessitate searches for new vehicles? Roads are totally empty until the plot needs more vehicles, and then suddenly there are a lot of cars. The area has been devastated, but in a scene from high on a launchpad, the area and traffic in the background shows normal everyday life. Pathetic special effects are laughable. It appears the director had taken the script into the bathroom with him and mistakenly exchanged it with the toilet paper he had used."
Ya, What they said
Bobby G. Bristoe | Ellettsville Indiana | 11/21/2009
(1 out of 5 stars)
"This Movie was so bad that it doesn't deserve the 1 star I had to give it. If this movie had been made in the early 50s, there could maybe be some excuse for it. But it wasn't, and there is no excuse for making such a bad movie. I have seen science fiction made in the 50s that was much better than this. The other reviewers have already said everything that needs to be said. Don't waste your time or money.
Bobby"
Horrible movie.
Killer J | Bronx, Ny | 11/12/2009
(1 out of 5 stars)
"This movie was absolute trash. I didn't bother buying the movie. I just watched it online, and it wasn't even worth watching online. The acting was poor and so was the character's. Whoever made this movie should be ashamed of themself's. Please don't waste your time watching this movie. Your not going to find anything good in this movie."
I would actually give this movie NO STARS
Wandaroo | Rochester, MN United States | 01/25/2010
(1 out of 5 stars)
"This is about the worst movie I have ever seen--terrible acting..terrible special effects and bad camera work. I kept expecting the robots from Mystery Science Theatre 3000 so pop up. This movie was made for them to make fun of. When there was an earthquake someone just stood and shook the camera and the actors fell back and forth against the walls. I thought this was made in the 70s the sets were so bad and the special effects were a joke. Their computer screen at the military base or whatever it was looked like the original pong game. The dialogue was hilareous it was so stupid. DONT RENT IT AND DONT BUY IT>"
A low budget is no excuse for making of such a bad movie
Emc2 | Tropical Utopia | 01/25/2010
(1 out of 5 stars)
"I just regret I did not listen to the comments from the fellow reviewers below, but as a hard die sci-fi went ahead anyway. In a nutshell, this is a really bad bad movie, from any angle you look at it. Lousy plot, mediocre acting and directing, poor special effects, using lots of old NASA clips from the Space Shuttle, and so rudimentary that any TV series from the late 70s has better SFX than this flick. I really think that despite the low budget, nowadays there is no excuse for making such a lousy movie (and Moon demonstrates that a good movie does not necessarily requires a fat budget). And by the way, the 2012 addition to the title is just a marketing hook trying to take advantage of the 2012 phenomena hype.
In summary, do not waste your time and money watching this movie. Together with Impact, Meteor, Polar Storm, and Meteor Apocalypse, 2012: Supernova will be remembered among the worst sci-fi of 2009."