virek213 There isn't a whole lot that can be said about the 2006 two-part TV miniseries 10.5: APOCALYPSE that hasn't been said about its 2004 "prequel" (which was just "plain-old" 10.5), except that it's a special effects extravaganza come true, with zero fidelity to scientific plausibility. This time, an all-star cast, including Kim Delaney, Beau Bridges (as the President), Dean Cain, and Frank Langella, find that the catastrophic earthquakes that leveled Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Seattle in the original miniseries are growing so intense that they will eventually split the continental shelf asunder, and cause parts of the United States to separate. This, of course, requires radical and (naturally) implausible action.John Lafia, who both directed and co-wrote both this film and the original, went to great pains to declare both films to be entertainment, not to be believed. He's right, of course; but the same could be said for a lot of similarly apocalyptic mega-disaster movies of the last decade and a half. The hard truth of the matter is that it's just very hard, to get past the level of implausibility that is thrown the viewer's way in 10.5: APOCALYPSE, and how sometimes the acting by an otherwise credible cast veers occasionally towards the laughable. Even previous films like the 1974 sci-fi/disaster opus EARTHQUAKE, or the 1990 made-for-TV film THE BIG ONE: THE GREAT LOS ANGELES EARTHQUAKE (both of which depicted the wiping off the map of Los Angeles), and the later 2009 Roland Emmerich-directed end-of-the-world spectacle "2012", compared to 10.5: APOCALYPSE, are made by this film to look like as if someone on the order of Stanley Kubrick or Steven Spielberg directed them, since the implausibility and the frequently lame dialogue weighs everything down to a large degree. And Lafia's overuse of the zoom lens is especially grating, though, to be honest, this is a two-part TV miniseries, and not a big-screen extravaganza.But then again, you will most likely not be seeing this film for plausibility, since the biggest reason for the existence of 10.5: APOCALPYSE, as was the case with the original, is the incredible special effects destruction sequences, this time involving Las Vegas and Houston; and the rescue sequences are done with a certain measure of credibility. This is, as advertised, a very uneven flick, and probably should rate a zero for plausibility, though to be kind I'll give it a '2'. As a special effects lover's paradise, however, I'm indeed rating it a 10.5, which averages out to a '6' on the IMDb ratings scale (or 6.25, to be on the nose).

fly_usa_jets The acting was bad and way over the top, but not funny enough to become a cult classic. Basically, this film was just a waste of electricity; to make and to watch.Why Hollywood continues to think that action/disaster films should contain long, drawn-out, personal stories about love, romance, and a variety of "internal-demons" is beyond me. Most people I know DO NOT go to disaster/action films to see that crap. We do go see ACTION AND DISASTER! This film, and part two, could have been chopped down to 30 minutes of interesting footage of things blowing-up, flooding, and falling into holes. The rest was complete gibberish and insulted my ears and my sensibilities. I get sci-fi fantasy; the general concept was not offending ... in fact, it is/was interesting and why I decided to watch this horrible piece of garbage. When will directors/producers/writers get that they can take us for a ride, so long as they give us something interesting to look at along the way and not bore us with dialog and plots that have nothing to do with the story at hand. I don't give a damn about family conflict and lost loves or someone "finding themselves" while cleaning the wounds of a fallen old lady... give it a rest! That's what Oxygen and Lifetime are for! I want to see things action and it only mildly has to make sense. This is FANTASY! Stop bring real-life drama into the picture.

MartianOctocretr5 Gets a couple of points for the laugh-at-it value.It picks up a few minutes after the end of the first installment. A major earthquake has just annihilated part of southern California, clear out to Barstow, with millions of casualties. We see some guys in Vegas, only 150 miles from Barstow, who would have certainly felt such an immense quake; and witnessed news coverage of it. What are they doing? Preparing for a possible danger to Vegas? Mourning the victims of the disaster? No, they're playing poker. The father of the heroine in both movies is winning, so that must be why he's not concerned with his daughter's fate much.That's only the beginning. We see President Bo Bridges, still looking like he's suffering stomach wall spasms (like in the first movie). The scientist girl goes to discover more seismic problems are coming. Then an inconsiderate quake interrupts her dad's poker game. This opens the obligatory Poseidon Adventure rip off sequence, complete with all the disaster movie trimmings: arguing, wrecked staircases, aftershocks at just the wrong moment, panicky person gets killed, one of the rescuers is related to one of the fleeing survivors, etc.Then the scientists watch as a major fault cuts across the heartland. Good special effects here, but the story line remains ludicrous. What's right in the way of the fault? A nuke power plant, what else. And so it goes.Outrageous, but fun.

saintcecilia Just to add to the other comments, what happens to Amy's Secret Service men? One minute they're talking into their watches, next minute nowhere to be seen. And why on earth do both Dr Hills have to fly to the site of the explosion and give instructions to Army munitions guys about where to place the explosives? And, talking of Earth, where is the rest of it? If Accelerated Plate Movement is happening in the US, presumably it's happening around the world - but there's no mention at all - not even that the rift is also heading north to Canada - did anyone tell the Canadians? And, if the rest of the world isn't affected, surely the President would be receiving offers of help from somebody. To sum up, this film is far too long to enjoy as a disaster movie and it doesn't have anything else going for it. Too many plot lines (isn't anybody an orphan any more?), cheesy dialogue and the pseudo-artistic camera work. Kim Delaney is good value, as is Frank Langella, but I would have liked to have seen Randy Quaid in there somewhere and David Cubitt was killed off way too early (but that's just a personal preference on my part).