Polar Opposites

Take one part lousy script, add painfully poor acting and turtle-slow pacing, then mix in some cheesy special effects and plenty of stock Air Force footage and you get Polar Opposites. This direct-to-the-Here! Channel exercise tries to position itself as a gay disaster movie but only ends up a disaster.

The film takes a long time time go anywhere - thanks to a mother lode of uninteresting sub plots. By the time the film gets moving, you frankly won't care. The magnetic poles on the earth are changing due to an atomic blast in Iran (oh, how topical). The movie is all downhill from that point. To make sure you get the point, the whole magnetic field concept is explained several times...in once case by using a battery and a tangerine.

See the crazy cancer patients in the free clinic endure earthquake after earthquake. See the lone scientist (didn't the actor play Mr Sheffield on "The Nanny" TV show?) who has the disaster all figured out but no one will believe him. See the scientist bicker with his live-in dad using some of the worst dialog ever put on film. See the "exciting" earthquake sequences when it is so painful obvious someone is simply shaking the camera and the falling debris is Styrofoam. See the top Army general try to make sense of what is going on and then try to stop an atomic attack on Iran (oh, how topical again).

I wish I could explain the ending but I am still scratching my head trying to make sense of it. As for the gay angle, there in one brief man-to-man kiss at the end of the film. So if you are looking for frolicking cute guys, you will not find any in "Polar Opposites." You have much better things to do than watch this mess. Go wash your hair, cut the front lawn or use a tangerine to explain to your kids about the magnetic forces around the earth.

If you're expecting a splashy, big-budget Hollywood disaster flick, you should stick to "The Day After Tomorrow" or "Deep Impact." "Polar Opposites" strength does NOT come from million dollar fx, or performances by academy-award-winning actors. The thing that makes this low-budget independent film so engaging is the story and the relationships that develop while the story world unravels on screen.

At its simplest, "Polar Opposites" spins a tale about a possible global disaster set in motion by a nuclear blast, and how a scientist is called upon to save the day. The scientific theories proposed by the story are chillingly accurate, and they are what hooked me initially. It's refreshing to see science-fact made understandable and yes, entertaining (the tangerine/battery visual was funny). But the film goes beyond simply laying out facts and ideas to tell the story. It puts together a group of characters that have real issues in dealing with the problem, and with each other. There is a father/son relationship (Charles Shaunessy and Clive Revill) that is touching and real, funny and even corny at times. Tracey Nelson and Kieren Hutchinson play doctors coping with the crisis, but they still have a playful side to their relationship. And the actor playing their patient, Al (Ismael Carlo), is both unsettling and tender.

In the end, the disaster unfolds like it might in any other disaster flick (although, as I mentioned, without the huge big budget fx). But the story and the characters were the ingredient that actually made the film quite enjoyable.

This was well done not cheesy like most of your movies. Thank you so much . Great cast and views . I love the the location and well done . I hope you do a part 2.. Great story line and how it was played out . I hope you do more of these movies seem like a good cause movie . It's so sweet . I love penguins . They are one of my favorites . I don't normally watch Hallmark any more because all the story lines seems to be the same . And storylines are very very cheesy . I think yall can do way better this is 2025 . The story lines can be better . So I will be waiting to see if you take my advise . I have tons of ideas lol to help you .

I will call out a bad movie, but this is better than a 1 star.

Give credit where credit is due. The acting and cinematography are better than just acceptable. The people in front of and behind the cameras obviously had skills. The direction even appears to have been capable.

Ok, the script (one of my hot buttons) could easily have been better, like a great team in search of something better than a mediocre script. Even then, I wouldn't call this movie a bad script poster child ... pieces are actually good. It is almost like a good writer wrote snippets and then a really bad writer tried to piece them together. Then a so-so director wasn't sure what to do with it???

No, this won't be on TV, but this is a solid 3 or better.