The Core

Mankind can do what imposible for the sake our planet earth

I enjoyed this a lot, its an old fashioned disaster flick, suspenseful with solid special effects, an interesting (if far fetched) science based story and great cast. Story goes; a scientist/teacher (Aaron Eckhart ) discovers through several natural disasters (Hilary Swank, Bruce Greenwood in space shuttle disaster) a catastrophic problem with the earths core (its stopped spinning) so he and a team of the worlds (mostly American) experts are assembled to embark on a dangerous mission through the earth to the middle of the planet to kick start "the core" using nuclear weapons. What could possibly go wrong? This movie sets up like The Day After Tomorrow and then heads into Armageddon territory with shades of Chernobyl or K19 thrown in towards the end as one member of the team solo missions into certain death to save the day. I liked all the characters from this ensemble cast, and found the story exciting especially as the team first enter the earths crust, actually giving me claustrophobia and anxiety. A more than decent escapism during my quarantine.

A lot of people seem to dislike this movie but I think they are the kind of people that go to movies just to knock 'em. These are the kind of people who read books, listen to music, and watch TV shows just to create a mental checklist of all the things that are done wrong in their own brilliant opinions. So if you follow me so far, here's my brief review of The Core. My reactions to the various big budget disaster movies of recent years have been varied. My expectations were low going into "The Core" because the trailer, while interesting, still made the movie look like major cheese potential. But I must say I was pleasantly surprised with this movie. For what it is, which is pure popcorn escapism fun, it works. The special effects and sets are excellent, the actors are all good, and the story was not nearly as hokey as I thought it would be. Aaron Eckhart, Hillary Swank and Stanley Tucci are all pretty respectable actors, and they give the movie the substance that it may have otherwise lacked. Yes, the cliché "hacker nerd" and military brass characters are a little old, but they don't ruin the experience. I have no idea how realistic or plausible the story is. But "The Core" is one of those entertaining movies that will take you away for a ride if you can suspend your disbelief. Thumbs up for a good effort.

I don't know much about geology, but what little I do know suggests that the nature of the Earth's core is such as to be impervious to any merely human intervention, and that traveling to it is something human beings probably never will be able to do. Hence, any SF flick about humans doing one to rectify the other is likely to be as fanciful as The Wizard of Oz, so a big "caveat emptor" is attached to this movie. I figured that anyone audacious enough to cook up an eco-fable like this would have checked his science so as to make the movie more believable, but apparently I was wrong according to the legion of IMDb reviewers who have savaged this film. This film reminded me a bit of the 1966 film "Fantastic Voyage," in which a group of scientists and their craft are shrunk to the size of a microbe and injected into the body of a scientist (or was it a diplomat?) who has been wounded in an assassination attempt, in a race against time to save his life. "The Core" resembles "Fantastic Voyage" in several ways: First, the technological premise that makes possible travel to this inaccessible realm is so far-fetched as to be more magical than scientific. Second, in all but a few places, the inside of the body is naturally quite dark, and so, one would think, is the interior of the Earth; but in both movies, these unseen realms are aglow with light. Third, the sex ratio is similar: Four men, one woman, who of course is played by Raquel Welch. Fourth, none of the characters rises much above stereotype, since the story is driven by situation, not characters. Fifth, come to think of it, Hilary Swank, while not as voluptuous as the young Raquel Welch (who could be?), does slightly resemble her. Sixth, the events of the film are kept secret from the public, and Edmund O'Brien's General Carter is very similar to General Purcell, who is played by that excellent and serviceable character actor Richard Jenkins. (Unfortunately, every time I saw Jenkins, I was distracted by memories of his hilarious performance as Walter Wingfield in "Say It Isn't So.") I will say one thing in this film's defense: As absurd as it may be, and as uninspired in terms of plot, characterization, visual effects and believability, it did keep me watching to find out what would happen next all the way to the end.

Jon Amiel is a well known and respected director known for his work with actors, so it may come as a bit of a surprise that he wanted to tackle a project like this. And he does say in the 'featurettes' that he wanted this to be a character driven narrative. And if you check the deleted scenes you'll see there was in fact enough material to make it so. But something happened in the cutting room. The scenes that added depth to the characters were cut, leaving only the vestiges of a run of the mill catastrophe science fiction movie. And it's wonderful the special effects people are proud of the work they've done but as viewers we're not interested so much in that as we want to have something pleasurable to watch. And that's where this turkey fails.

I wasn't sure I wanted to see this in the theatres. There was something fishy about the trailers -- there were two distinct trailers: one which played on the whole "journey to the core of the earth" fiasco; and one which was much more interesting, touting the whole "government weapon conspiracy which wrecked the world" angle. I was more partial to the second one, and there wasn't really much of this in the film. It was mostly about putting together enough duct tape logic to get a machine that could travel inside the Earth. Unfortunately, the film played a little rough and tumble with the science, using it only when it suited them, and sweeping it under the carpet in other circumstances, hoping no one would notice. Case in point: they go through great lengths to explain how this gadget will destroy all rock and metal which gets in its way, then come up with a fantastic new element which resists this laser drilling mechanism. Later, they find out that this drill can't get through diamonds (or for that matter, amethysts). Why not just build a ship out of diamonds? We can mass produce these now -- why not just take the existing science a step further. Case number two: this miracle metal, "unobtainium", has the fantastic capability to absorb heat and convert it into energy (somehow). So later, while swimming in 9000 degree molton nickel, they use a blowtorch (!) to solder copper cables to it. There's obviously two things wrong here. #1, shouldn't this guy get electrocuted by standing so close to the bulkhead? #2, how could a blowtorch make the bulkhead hot enough to take the solder? This thing is holding back 9000 degree metal on the outside. Every calorie of heat from the blowtorch would be converted into "energy". I won't even go into the whole idea that heat IS ENERGY! This drove me nuts every time they mentioned it. There's dozens of these bad science examples running throughout the film. But really, I don't care what kind of science you use, as long as you at least keep it consistent throughout. What was even funnier about this film was the fact that they took the greatest minds in the world of geophysics, and simply dropped them into the molten mantle of the planet. Why would you do this? I'm surprised none of them dies during training... what if they were all to die instantly? Wouldn't it be a better idea since they had a RADIO UPLINK TO THE SURFACE to have some Navy/Air Force/Space program pilots drive the vessel? As much as I hate to say it, I liked Armageddon better than this film. And I absolutely hated Armageddon. But at least it had a little star power, a little campy humour, and some personality to the characters.

A really nice way to spend an afternoon, The Core does not pretend to be a huge Sci-Fi mega movie, but rather a pretty good romp with some pretty nice special effects (the birds, the Golden Gate Bridge, etc.) and even like to poke at itself. I love Sci-Fi movies where the professor or the hot-shot pilot don't have all the answers and yes, there are holes in this film that you could drive cities through, but really, who cares? Sit back, munch on that popcorn, sip on that soda, and have just fun with this predictable, simple, yet enjoyable movie.

Written by people who must have failed all of their high school science classes, directed by someone who must have never seen a computer actually function, this film is jam packed with the most tired clichés of filmdom. The acting is abominable--and by actors who are very talented. Shot almost entirely in television style close ups, this film is an insult to intelligence. It all starts with an awful script--it really seems like someone just recorded a bunch of twelve year olds playing "rocket ship" together--"whoah, someone diverted our energy! where's it gone?"(actual line!)--transcribed it, and decided to spend one hundred million dollars on it. No reason to write a spoiler, you've seen it all before a hundred times, mostly on television. Basically, if Ed Wood was given a gigantic budget, this is what he would've made. It just goes to show that in the words of Miles Davis, "you can't polish a turd."

I love this flick,not boring for a second,moves along at a fair clip,no long drawn out boring scenes.But boy,is it stupid,oozes out of every frame but not for a second does that get in the way of doing it's job,which is to entertain,which it does in spades. The science is at the same level as 'Journey to the Center of the Earth' with James Mason,no giant mushrooms here,but we do get giant diamonds and a geode the size of New York. The actors are all having a blast,playing it straight for the most part,their fun translates to the audience,but never over the top.The effects are capable,the story ridiculous,but who cares,a more fun disaster movie is not too easy to find,it certainly is a 'guilty pleasure' type of flick,and some days,that's all you want to see.

I am watching "The Core" after having read several other comments about the movie. The sentiments expressed go from being "Fine Movie" to "Worst Movie ever," the last obviously coming from someone who rated "Starship Troopers" as the "greatest Sci Fi movie ever made." There are parts of this movie that are actually very good. The first thing to give credit for was the cast that they had. It is a very good cast. Let me repeat, a very good cast. Alfrie Woodard has never given a bad performance, and although her role was relatively small, she brought moral gravity to the role that the movie needed. Delroy Lindo showed a range that I have never seen him do. Obviously better recognized as a man in control, he was nigh on perfect as the forgotten but brilliant scientist who still stings over Stanley Tucci's Conrad Zimsky having stole his discoveries from a generation earlier. Tucci, a fine actor, did take it over the top a bit too much. DJ Qualls gives an underrated performance. He is 6'2" but makes us believe he is a 5'7" geek. He gave a touching performance as he tried to slow down the big bad that caused the problem in the first place. Aaron Eckhart, normally a baddie, did a believable performance, with Hillary Swank, a two time Oscar winner bringing her easily recognized skills to the screen. I originally wanted to blame Director Jon Amiel for the faults of the movie, but when I went back and considered individual roles and scenes, I realized that he did the job he was paid to do. The visual effects were more than adequate, constrained by the need, not for realism, but by the need to show things that would further the story. So where did it go wrong? First, the problem, I believe, was with the writing. The script was very uneven. Part of it came from what appears to be last minute changes in the story line. Early trailers suggest a very different story -- and rumors from Hollywood at the time indicated this was true. Too much of the story telling was quick and dirty, trying to just get it done. Had they not been locked in to a predetermined release date, they could have gotten the script right. Second, it seems there was a problem with editing. There were times when the film just went clunk. Was it poor editing in and of itself? Or was it editing that had to serve the problems with the script. Far from a perfect movie, but one with some very good elements. Give credit where credit is due.