PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
4,8/10
7,4 mil
TU PUNTUACIÓN
Cuando una fuerte tormenta coincide con alta mar, desencadena una marea colosal, que viaja sin piedad por la costa este de Inglaterra hasta el estuario del Támesis. No se trata de si, sino d... Leer todoCuando una fuerte tormenta coincide con alta mar, desencadena una marea colosal, que viaja sin piedad por la costa este de Inglaterra hasta el estuario del Támesis. No se trata de si, sino de cuándo se va a inundar Londres.Cuando una fuerte tormenta coincide con alta mar, desencadena una marea colosal, que viaja sin piedad por la costa este de Inglaterra hasta el estuario del Támesis. No se trata de si, sino de cuándo se va a inundar Londres.
- Dirección
- Guión
- Reparto principal
- Premios
- 2 nominaciones en total
Bart Fouche
- Chopper Pilot
- (as Bart Fouché)
Reseñas destacadas
The production values for this film make it fall short of Hollywood blockbuster status, and the script makes it fall short of cult status. What is left is a tired formulaic attempt at the disaster movie genre that will disappear with the ebb tide.
A decent cast, are either miss cast, or cannot be bothered.The beautiful Joanne Whalley is unable to bring any gravitas to the role of Police Commissioner Nash who wears the most irritating matching waist clincher above her skirt.
Jessalyn Gilseg plays the heavyweight part of Director of the Thames Barrier with all the conviction of a fairground candy floss. Her Canadian nationality and accent were presumably drafted in to appeal to a transatlantic audience. It, and she, fails.Her initial appearance in a tight fitting pink jogging suit as she arrives at work is risible.
The part of the "Siren old git who was right" is played by Tom Courtenay as though he is acting in his sleep, and the various plot twists that are designed to energise his son, played by Robert Carlyle, struggle to get any response from him.
Nigel Planer looks determined to commit ritual hari kari for his failings as Met Office Director, or for his acting, or both, and only David Suchet emerges with some credit for his role as Deputy PM.
There was enough in the story, and the cast and the effects to have produced a decent effort. Alas that did not happen.
A decent cast, are either miss cast, or cannot be bothered.The beautiful Joanne Whalley is unable to bring any gravitas to the role of Police Commissioner Nash who wears the most irritating matching waist clincher above her skirt.
Jessalyn Gilseg plays the heavyweight part of Director of the Thames Barrier with all the conviction of a fairground candy floss. Her Canadian nationality and accent were presumably drafted in to appeal to a transatlantic audience. It, and she, fails.Her initial appearance in a tight fitting pink jogging suit as she arrives at work is risible.
The part of the "Siren old git who was right" is played by Tom Courtenay as though he is acting in his sleep, and the various plot twists that are designed to energise his son, played by Robert Carlyle, struggle to get any response from him.
Nigel Planer looks determined to commit ritual hari kari for his failings as Met Office Director, or for his acting, or both, and only David Suchet emerges with some credit for his role as Deputy PM.
There was enough in the story, and the cast and the effects to have produced a decent effort. Alas that did not happen.
There's something intriguing about disaster movies. The simple, primal premise can lead to several great stories. Granted, most disaster movies tend to explore familiar territory instead but I can usually live with that.
Unfortunately, Flood probably marks the low point in the history of this sub-genre. Robert Carlyle is undoubtedly the star of the movie, even though screen time is split between different locations and characters. He gives a barely decent performance. As well, Joanne Whalley is very uneven. Veteran actor Tom Courtenay (he played in Doctor Zhivago for heaven's sake) is particularly bad. I mean, his timing is completely off most of the time and his characterization is extremely poor. What an embarrassing performance for that man. The rest of the cast ranges from decent to really bad with one exception: Jessalyn Gilsig, whom I thought might be there as a plot device/eye candy gives by far the most convincing performance. Doesn't mean much considering how bad everybody else is but still nice to see that she cared.
The script is really bad, confusing and cliché. Some of the worse lines I have heard in quite some time are delivered by the actors one after the other.You've seen this story a thousand times. It employs every dramatic hook and tear-jerkers you've seen in "Outbreak", "Armageddon", the Poseidon movies (original and remake) and many others.
The direction is awful. No sense of timing, nothing inspired. The shots are bland, dialog and action both fail to flow. Editing is bad but how do you edit such a mess? Without a doubt, this movie tried to rely way too much on (rather poor) CGI. The human factor, the drama and struggles of the characters are glossed over. Scenes where the characters must actually face the flood are rare and poorly done. The made-for-TV feel gives nausea. Some guy is supposed to go down a rope from an helicopter? No problem, let's show him inside a helicopter and make a really poor cut/editing job and have the next frame with him safely on the ground, in the most obvious way possible.
The movie score is rather poor. All over the place, no timing.
The ending is probably the worse I have seen in quite some time. Very much like they ran out of ideas. Scrap that, you can't run out of something if you never had it in the first place. Must have ran out of budget.
This is a really amateur job. I give it a 2 for using London as a location, which is a nice change, for Gilsig being actually decent in a key support role and for the few CGI shots that were decent (those of the water closing in on London and the gates).
Do yourself a favor and check out Day After Tomorrow or just about any disaster movie before this one. This includes older classics like The Towering Inferno.
Unfortunately, Flood probably marks the low point in the history of this sub-genre. Robert Carlyle is undoubtedly the star of the movie, even though screen time is split between different locations and characters. He gives a barely decent performance. As well, Joanne Whalley is very uneven. Veteran actor Tom Courtenay (he played in Doctor Zhivago for heaven's sake) is particularly bad. I mean, his timing is completely off most of the time and his characterization is extremely poor. What an embarrassing performance for that man. The rest of the cast ranges from decent to really bad with one exception: Jessalyn Gilsig, whom I thought might be there as a plot device/eye candy gives by far the most convincing performance. Doesn't mean much considering how bad everybody else is but still nice to see that she cared.
The script is really bad, confusing and cliché. Some of the worse lines I have heard in quite some time are delivered by the actors one after the other.You've seen this story a thousand times. It employs every dramatic hook and tear-jerkers you've seen in "Outbreak", "Armageddon", the Poseidon movies (original and remake) and many others.
The direction is awful. No sense of timing, nothing inspired. The shots are bland, dialog and action both fail to flow. Editing is bad but how do you edit such a mess? Without a doubt, this movie tried to rely way too much on (rather poor) CGI. The human factor, the drama and struggles of the characters are glossed over. Scenes where the characters must actually face the flood are rare and poorly done. The made-for-TV feel gives nausea. Some guy is supposed to go down a rope from an helicopter? No problem, let's show him inside a helicopter and make a really poor cut/editing job and have the next frame with him safely on the ground, in the most obvious way possible.
The movie score is rather poor. All over the place, no timing.
The ending is probably the worse I have seen in quite some time. Very much like they ran out of ideas. Scrap that, you can't run out of something if you never had it in the first place. Must have ran out of budget.
This is a really amateur job. I give it a 2 for using London as a location, which is a nice change, for Gilsig being actually decent in a key support role and for the few CGI shots that were decent (those of the water closing in on London and the gates).
Do yourself a favor and check out Day After Tomorrow or just about any disaster movie before this one. This includes older classics like The Towering Inferno.
When you read the premise, and see the cast list, you think you're going to be in for something quite special. The only thing I can really say is, didn't Ton Hardy develop his looks some years later? No, all joking aside, this really is a mess, the version I have is much longer then the running time suggests. There's nothing wrong with the story, it's quite clever, I have gripes with the acting, script, direction and special effects, all are generated dire, the likes of Robert Carlyle, David Suchet and David Hayman battle with what's basically a woeful script. Some of the worst extras acting you will ever see, mass panic, and they're static, and at one stage grinning. It's 2007, but the effects look at times as if they've come from a 1970's Doctor Who story.
I remembered this quite don't, time has not been kind to it. 4/10
I remembered this quite don't, time has not been kind to it. 4/10
Having seen the ratings as 4.8/10 we didn't expect much from this. However we think it's better that that. I've given it a six. It's obviously been made to a tight budget so some of the special effects are not that special and reminded me of 1970's Thunderbirds but on the whole it was surprisingly watchable. I think the actors gave it enough to get it over the line. It wasn't difficult to follow which is good for Saturday evening viewing when you've had a few glasses of home brew.
I recently purchased this on DVD as I hadn't heard of it and like robert carlyle.
Obviously this movie is not going to have Hollywood blockbuster special effects,in saying that though the special effects were decent enough,and the acting was fine also.
I found the movie to be enjoyable and do not regret buying it at all,at almost 2 hours long it is just the right length for this type of movie.
Do not expect thrilling explosive action from beginning to end though,it is a fairly well balanced movie with a decent enough storyline!
Obviously this movie is not going to have Hollywood blockbuster special effects,in saying that though the special effects were decent enough,and the acting was fine also.
I found the movie to be enjoyable and do not regret buying it at all,at almost 2 hours long it is just the right length for this type of movie.
Do not expect thrilling explosive action from beginning to end though,it is a fairly well balanced movie with a decent enough storyline!
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesU.K. rock band Fightstar used clips from this movie for their music video, 'Floods'. The band had set the release date, but had to change it because of the real floods hitting the U.K.
- PifiasIn one scene, its very obvious that the Prime Minister's helicopter is a fake, toy one.
- Citas
Leonard Morrison: Not this much water!
- Versiones alternativasThere are at least two vastly different versions: original ITV two-part mini-series running for more than three hours, and 106-minute DVD version.
- ConexionesFeatured in WatchMojoUK: Top 10 Movies That Totally Destroyed London (2018)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
- How long is Flood?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Fecha de lanzamiento
- Países de origen
- Sitio oficial
- Idioma
- Títulos en diferentes países
- Flood
- Localizaciones del rodaje
- Empresas productoras
- Ver más compañías en los créditos en IMDbPro
Taquilla
- Recaudación en todo el mundo
- 8.272.729 US$
- Duración1 hora 50 minutos
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta