10,000 Days (2014) User Reviews

Poor story, stiff acting and dialog

[nospamx · 2/10 · 17 January 2015]

Don't waste your time with this stinker. Even John Scheider (of Dukes of Hazzard fame) can't save this film. I've heard better dialog and voice acting in high school plays.

I can't think of anything good to say, other than it had potential, but completely wasted it. Worse, it ends suddenly just as something is finally about to happen. (I was told this was episode 1 of a TV series?).

Dozens of plot holes and science/fact errors. A couple of semi-cute ladies (bundled up, sadly). Fake snow. Story involves a sudden ice age, a frozen Air Force One, flashlights powered by blood, awfully choreographed "fight" scenes, idiots who miraculously can make 50-year old frozen electronics work, and much other nonsense.

Verdict: 2 stars, barely. I've seen worse, but not often.

Poor effects

[mjcarter73 · 2/10 · 17 June 2015]

Well this is a very poor movie. The story revolves around a new ice age following cometary impact and the scenario has two themes. A romeo and Juliet situation and whether the world will warm up. The latter has two options either a natural event or a deliberate intervention using nuclear weapons, access to which the survivors acquire through their discovery of air force one. However none of this is resolved, the lovers are still in warring families, the nucs are never launched but still threaten and two young people set off to find a warmer land walking right out of the script. This is one of those stories where the writer has envisaged a situation but really has no idea what could happen to make it interesting. The movie simply ends in the middle resolving nothing. I see another reviewer threatens a sequel... I don't think so because I think they simply ran out of ideas. In my opinion Movies that don't have a start a story and an end should simply never be made. Sadly this one was and as a viewer I feel cheated.

Good idea, terrible quality.

[joyofthesower · 3/10 · 21 November 2015]

I gave this movie a 3, because I was interested in the idea of it. I hated the acting and way it played out though. I love John Schneider, and I love his acting. I think this movie had potential but the acting ruined it. I enjoyed the idea, and I personally think this could be a good TV series idea, and I also think that the conversation was cheesy. They spoke real simple, and the movie was hard to really be focused on, I'm writing this review while watching it, that's how bad it is! Anyways, it was only $1, so I suppose that's not bad. I would say they also could make the story-line move along, there was too much dialect, and slow moving parts for an hour and half movie. If it had a better pace, I think I could handle this movie.

Huh?

[funbmemt · 5/10 · 2 November 2015]

This movie starts out fairly decent. Think Hatfields vs McCoys on desolate ice post doom days. Unfortunately, it is the worst cliff hanger ever. I was waiting for the words "to be continued" to roll across the screen and even looked to see if I was supposed to flip the disk over for part two or something. This movie literally stops in the middle of filming like they ran out of budget to finish it or something. I've heard of leaving endings up to the viewer but this was ridiculous. I liked the characters. I understood where they were attempting to go with it. The filming is low budget but acceptable. The total disregard to end the story or hint at a sequel is seriously disappointing.

Rats can't vomit

[nabokov95 · 1/10 · 23 November 2014]

Rats can't vomit and I can't walk out of films. Normally that's not an issue. In this case I had to remind myself of that throughout and take increasingly frequent glances at my watch to see how much time was left before I could leave while muttering "Please, please let it stop" under my breath. Poor special effects, a ridiculous storyline, appalling dialogue and terrible acting (but, to be fair, the actors really didn't stand a chance from the get go in this one). Apparently, within a generation, our future selves have divided into scientifically and technologically gifted guitar playing peace loving Eco hippies who still pray before meals and testosterone driven Ghenghis Khan ninja style combat loving Mongolian warriors who talk in suitably archaic language about their clan, fortresses, honour and the glory of battle. (Talking of ninjas the film is written and directed by Eric Small, who was the assistant director of "3 Ninjas: Knuckle Up" (1995) IMDb rating 3.9). Between them you've got what I guess the film makers would like to call a doomed romance "Romeo and Juliet" sub plot going on. I very quickly wished all of them had died in the apocalypse like apparently everyone else on CGI planet. Ninety one minutes of watching a frozen empty landscape would have been more entertaining. Sometimes a film can be so unintentionally bad that it exerts a mesmerising and highly entertaining fascination all of it's own, like watching a train wreck. This isn't one of them. The Christmas turkey has definitely come early this year. Please be kind to yourself people and stay far, far, away. There are better, more life affirming and rewarding, ways of wasting 91 minutes of your all too short existence. Book a root canal treatment and turn up early, go to your train station and deliberately miss your train, try to read a book written in a language you don't know, go shopping and leave your wallet at home, start a collection of interesting things you find on your sidewalk, go out and start saying hello to people you've never met, see how many hot dogs you can eat before you throw up ... anything but this. If you see any ratings higher than 3 then I suggest you check out just how many other ratings the reviewer has submitted. My guess would be just one, glowing, for this film and this film only. My score 1/10, simply because IMDb won't let me go any lower. For clarity, that means that "3 Ninjas: Knuckle Up" (1995) is 4 times better than this! In conclusion, just about every other film I've seen in my whole wasted movie watching life was better than this one. This is the kind of film that makes you wish film had never been invented. Finally, the "end" of the film directly suggests there will be a sequel. If there is a God ... there won't.

Postscript: 25 days later 4 reviewers have given it a 10, making it obviously one of the greatest films they have ever seen. They are either: a) Masochists who need serious help; b) Sadists who want you to suffer the way I suffered; c) in the pay of those responsible for this monstrosity; d) a combination of the former. Despite this it's still pulling a (grossly exaggerated) score of 3.7 on the crapiness index. IMDb - you really need to do something about these people!

I knew it!

[keithmayes-35880 · 7 May 2017]

Just by reading the films opening lines I knew we were in for a bad time. A comet colliding with our planet knocks it out of its orbit and further away from the sun, turning it into rather chilly place to live, a lot like Antartica on a bad day. In reality of course, such an impact would have reduced our planet to a pile of orbiting gravel, useful only for an alien rockery. Anyway, I decided to stop looking for reality and being critical and instead just try to go with it. I failed. I got up and made a cuppa. After that I fed the dogs. Then I checked my emails. I looked up and the movie was still running unfortunately. I washed up the cups, went on YouTube and learned how to stop the alarm going off on my watch, quiet useful actually as it was going off at 9:30 every night. I looked back at the film which then quiet inexplicably started to look interesting and 10 seconds later equally inexplicably ended. I would have said it was a total waste of time, but I did fix my watch, so for that I score it 1 out of 10.

One of the most ambitious concepts for a low budget movie completely ruined by near-irredeemable execution

[TheLittleSongbird · 1/10 · 13 August 2015]

10, 000 Days did have a good idea going for one, and very ambitious for a low budget movie. It also could have been fun with the right execution and if any effort was put into it, sadly that was not to be, because other than a decent performance from John Schneider there is nothing else to recommend 10,000 Days.

The acting, other than Schneider, is at best very bad. Peter Wingfield has shown he can be good, but compensates too hard, he tries to be mysterious but comes over as campy instead. The rest of the actors are so amateurish and flat that it's embarrassing. To be fair, they are not entirely to blame as they were saddled with a script that's filled with cornball moments, gibberish explanations (if you call them that) and insultingly irrational sci-fi, as well as very poorly written characters developed in a non-descript and negatively (and, for some, racially) stereotypical way.

10, 000 Days' story is very dully paced and incoherently told, with things introduced but either never resolved or even abandoned as well as things that needed explaining but never were. The movie ends far too abruptly, with an leaving-it-all-hanging effect rather than grasping the opportunity in tying up any loose ends, while it also contains some choppily edited and very poorly choreographed fight scenes. People have said that 10, 000 Days felt like a failed TV pilot, something that I wholeheartedly agree with, and it was to be honest a concept that would have worked better as a TV series, the movie just left things too underdeveloped and unexplained.

It's a cheap-looking movie as well, shot in a drab and unfocused way and the special effects are laughably bad, and even worse than that in some points (like at the beginning). The music is largely uninteresting, and there is very little competence in the direction. Overall, liked the concept but absolutely hated the execution. 1/10 Bethany Cox

keep distance

[gnmartins · 1/10 · 27 November 2014]

What to say about this movie? It is awful! I could say more about the acting, special effects, story, but I prefer to let you read the nabokov95 review. He gave me some minutes of fun after this waste of time, so I recommend you go just after my review. His review should be just after mine.

I came to IMDb after watching the movie, just because I couldn't believe that a film so bad like this could ever end like it have: suggesting that will be continued.

I truly don't recommend that you see this film, but if do, don't forget to have your 2 minutes of fun reading what nabokov95 wrote about it. He entitled as "Rats can't vomit".

Aftermath of comet hitting earth - Iceage - 2 clans fight - the end...

[jjpywakit · 1/10 · 28 February 2015]

OMG, John Schneider and Peter Wingfield! Are you on welfare? Foodstamps? What on earth would ever possess you to agree to be in this horrible movie? This was the single worst movie I have ever seen, and I am almost 60 years old! Please people don't waste any of your precious lives watching this movie. It has barely a plot and just ends in the middle, like there was no end.... it just goes from movie to roll credits. huh? I'm happy about one thing, I watched it on TV, so I didn't waste any money. I happen to like John Schneider and Peter Wingfield as actors, so I hope they are more selective than this in their future film endeavors. I liked Schneider in Smallville and Wingfield in Sanctuary. This was definitely not their best work!

Close to one of the worst films I had ever seen,

[angelav-44055 · 1/10 · 22 June 2015]

This has got to be close to one of the worse films I have ever seen and could not cope with watching all of it as it was so bad. It could have been so much better as the base storyline is not too bad. The script was very dull and amateur and the characters very weak, how it ever got released is a mystery to me.

Disjointed scenes all over the place jumped from one subject to another. I left watching it to do ironing which I hate but it was better than having to watch the rest of this film.

Don't waste your time watching it go do something more entertaining. If this film made any money I would be surprised.

Just WOW!

[feel-1 · 1/10 · 26 January 2015]

After 2 minutes I was cringing in my seat. After 5 minutes I felt embarrassed for all the people involved in this production. After 15 minutes I felt embarrassed that someone of the same species as me would do a horrible thing like this to one of the most popular art form of our time.

Honestly, several actors in the movie act so bad that they don't even look like humans. Their body language is so wrong that the movie would have been a lot more plausible if they were impersonating aliens posing as humans. Well, maybe that was revealed to be the case in the end, but I felt that it it's more important to write this review than to finish watching the movie.

Not that bad

[bandit86 · 7/10 · 2 May 2020]

I thought this was better than expected so I was entertained even with a weak story line. The end as mention by others, was abrupt and unsatisfying, all I can think of was this was a pilot movie for a TV series that when no place.

This movie had ED.

[papamccain · 5/10 · 3 January 2015]

It was an interesting premise. The dialog was high school level. The actors did a fair job considering what they had to work with. The special effects, snicker, must have cost a fortune in fake snow and the looping windstorm effect. It's halfway worth watching I suppose. If you wish to subject yourself to this movie then stop reading now. SPOILER ALERT kind of...

The movie managed to keep my attention, but halfway through, it ended. More loose strings than a yarn shop hit by a tornado. I can guess the producers ran out of money or the actors got bored, I don't know. I can't find a sequel anywhere, I feel kind of c-blocked.

This is like 'Battlestar Galactica: The Movie' (1978) - it's TV content repurposed as a feature film

[smccandlish · 4/10 · 6 November 2019]

I like a few of the cast members in this, especially Peter Wingfield, Kim Myers, Kelsey Sanders, and John Schneider. The premise is semi-thoughtful, though not terribly original (not just in the wake of a series of "the world's freezing over" movies, but further back in sci-fi, e.g. Michael Moorcock's novel 'The Ice Schooner', 1969). And the core theme - that in an apocalypse, the main threat is other people - is an old and familiar one, and much better executed lately by 'The Walking Dead'.

However, much of the the 1-star negativity hurled at this production is treating it as if it's a regular feature film. It's not. It's a compression of the 2010 one-season TV series into a feature- length TV movie. I thus give it some slack in several respects. The effects are about on par with Sci-Fi Channel stuff of that era, and so is the dialogue, set design, costuming, cast calibre, etc. (What sets this apart, negatively, from series like 'Stargate' and its spin-offs, which also often had crap dialogue, cheesy production design, and low-end FX, is really the quality of the writing, of the plot-crafting.) Even the cliffhanger ending is the result of the TV series itself being cancelled before the story could be wrapped up. The kind of stilted dialogue (and dialect) of the outsider Farnwell clan is nowhere near as annoying as the "Cru-speak" of the Grounders in 'The 100' (which has survived 6 seasons so far, at least 1 longer than it should have). See also the super-mega-unbelievable diction of "King" Ezekiel, Eugene Porter, Jadis, and "Alpha" in 'The Walking Dead' (again, the overall plot writing saves that show from some terrible, terrible dialogue and characterization decisions).

I'm not sure WHY '10,000 Days' was repurposed into a movie (aired on television, then later released on DVD), but I'm glad it was: It allows a sci-fi junkie (and a Schneider fan, and whathaveyou) to get the gist of the show - warts and all - without having to watch 11 almost-hour-long episodes. That said, some of the character development is clearly lost, and a few lines and interpersonal reactions come across as non sequiturs, because too much of the original context has been cut out, especially when it comes to relations between family members. Anyway, it's really not THAT bad. If you want bad, see 'Stonehenge Apocalypse' (which oddly enough also has Peter Wingfield in it). Maybe I just liked '10,000 Days' a little because I once had a nightmare about a comet or asteroid glancing off the Earth with enough force to knock it out of orbit, with similar climatic results. And I also knew I was getting a compressed TV show of dubious original quality, and was happy for the compression.

Great Potential, but horrible execution

[mistela67 · 2/10 · 26 February 2015]

10,000 Days is all about potential wasted, and I blame the director.

There were certain things that were in place to work for this movie. The premise was actually okay. A few changes to the storyline, and it would have been great. The film stock was high quality; not the typical SyFy movie camcorder variety. The CGI was not horrendous. And the actors took their lines seriously, although I had issues with one character oddly talking like he was a leftover from a 300 movie, and some typical whiny women who have the maternal instinct thing going way past annoying.

The main issue with the movie, though, is that it isn't interesting. It's dull, draggy, too much dialog, and the plot is incoherent. I was waiting for something to happen, but nothing ever did. Even the characters looked as bored as I was. Because it was so uninspiring, I couldn't keep my attention, and thus, the storyline started to not make sense to me.

I don't mind a bad movie that should have been bad from the get-go. But movies that have potential, but are ruined by poor direction, are nothing less that shameful, especially considering how hard it is to get a movie produced these days. Wasted opportunity and effort, guys.

2/10.

Worst Ending Ever. Run, don't walk...run away!

[redbaron-86192 · 2/10 · 30 August 2020]

Ninety minutes of my life that I cannot get back. Bo Duke has done much, much better. I guess there were bills to pay. It was as if someone came onto the film set and repossessed the equipment and they had to suddenly end the film abruptly. At first I thought there was potential and the bad CGI effects were forgiven; but, even the bad acting and poor dialogue were made even worse by the most awful movie ending I've seen in 50 years. At least reading the review entitled "rats cannot vomit" gave me a good laugh (nicely done!). Stay away from this one.

yawn

[mrmgarnham · 3/10 · 12 January 2023]

So much promise so much of a borefest with no ending. Bad cgi, plot holes, bad directing, bad script.

IMDb still trying to force spoiler laden reviews with the new minimum character limit IMDb still trying to force spoiler laden reviews with the new minimum character limit IMDb still trying to force spoiler laden reviews with the new minimum character limit IMDb still trying to force spoiler laden reviews with the new minimum character limit IMDb still trying to force spoiler laden reviews with the new minimum character limit IMDb still trying to force spoiler laden reviews with the new minimum character limit.

Seriously????

[redmanmarc · 1/10 · 3 August 2019]

This movie had some of the worst effects, fight scenes, dialogue and direction I've ever seen. Still, I sat and watched it. Even though the story was so-so, I got into it enough to want to follow it to the end. And there was the killer - there was no end! It just stopped like watching one part of a two-part miniseries. Basically watching this movie will do nothing more than waste 90 or so minutes of your life as there's no conclusion. I have no idea why this movie ended this way but whoever is responsible for it should have never been allowed in the movie industry. Ridiculous.

Do not, I repeat, do NOT watch this movie.

[skagon · 1/10 · 17 September 2018]

Yeah, this is my very first review, but just trust me on this one. This is a "movie" made by stitching up fragments of what was meant to be a 12-episode series. Is this all? I wish.

First, the special effects are really B-grade. I mean, seriously cheap stuff and lots of green screen which is blatantly obvious. Secondly, the plot is laughable.

==For the record, even though I cannot possibly fathom why you'd watch this thing, SPOILER ALERT. Major spoilers from now on.==

I mean, picture this: you and your clan are barely surviving in what looks like a frozen wasteland up on the mountains in some "observatory", for f#ck's sake. Moreover, another clan wants said observatory and your ass. You go to explore some under-ice cavern and all of a sudden, Airforce-bloody-One falls down after some tremor. In one piece. Wings and all. You go inside, find everyone frozen solid. So, what do you get from, I repeat, Airforce-bloody-One? Food? Nope. Medical supplies? Noooooo... Guns? Nah. Batteries? Flashlights? Clothes? None of the above. Instead, they get the... wait for it... black boxes of the plane (!!!) and some nondescript radio-looking thing (the size of a cell phone) that allows them to... communicate with the US nuclear silos. Obviously, the black boxes themselves have a 3.5" audio jack and a play button, so you just hook it up and listen. Right? Do. Not. Think. So.

Thirdly, the science is beyond laughable. I mean, these guys didn't even ask a high-school graduate about the scientific validity of the plot, let alone a real physicist. Get a hold of this: the earth is struck by a *comet*, which knocks it off its orbit around the sun (hence the frozen wasteland) and they want to re-warm the area by using a few nuclear warheads. I mean, where do I even start with this? A. any celestial body big enough to knock earth off its orbit in any substantial manner, would have vaporised half the earth's crust and sent the entire planet back to the state it was a few billion years ago, i.e. ball of molten lava. Or almost that. B. you cannot re-warm an area for any significant amount of time by using nuclear bombs. Sure, if you calculate it precisely, you could thaw out a few square kilometres, but in a "snowball earth" scenario, it would freeze right back within a few hours. Not before irradiating said surface and you with it, though, with lethal amounts of all sorts of sugar and spice. C. You cannot and do not charge batteries and flashlights by rubbing wool! Static electricity does not work this way! D. People do not die when the vehicle they're in hits a bump (and a moderate one at that) and they positively do not come back to life spontaneously, a minute after CPR.

Finally, the so-called movie ends, not with a bang, not with a conclusion, but, because it was meant to be a TV series, with a cliffhanger! But not before ruining 90 minutes of your life with ridiculous ice-pick fights, complete with axes and walking sticks, people who survive apparently polar conditions yet their only barrier from the below-zero conditions is an ordinary metal door (!). Oh, and the bad guys live in ice caves.

So, is that enough for you? If you want more and your life is 90 minutes too full of worthwhile things to do, by all means, go ahead and watch it. If you want to watch a movie that actually makes sense, even in a distant, remote kind of way, distance yourself from this abomination correspondingly. You *can* do better than this.

Another sucky ending

[wildcatsong-339-434468 · 1/10 · 22 November 2020]

I'm guessing their budget ran out?? Terrible ending - everyone should avoid this movie for that reason alone.

somehow enjoyable, mainly because you expect something important to happen during the movie.

[davequaranta · 6/10 · 12 May 2021]

Copious amounts of margaritas got me through this movie. Decent story, but some of the acting was just plain terrible. The ending is disturbing. It's like they run out of money and had to shoot the last 10 minutes of the movie in 10 minutes Anyway, I will never watch this movie again, but it was still better than many other Hollywood movies that have much bigger budgets. Because I had very many margaritas, I feel generous and I'll give this movie 6 stars.

COMET- 23, 10,000 DAYS-ZERO

[nogodnomasters · 3/10 · 29 November 2018]

The film take places 10,000 days into the future after the big one, COMET 23 strikes the earth. The earth is not destroyed but knocked out of orbit. Through a freakish occurrence only two family clans survive and are feuding. The bad guy wears black and a large hat that looks like a Darth Vader helmet. The Becks (good clan) discover Air Force One and may be able to launch nuclear weapons and heat up the frozen earth. Toss in a kid and a Romeo and Juliet element and you get the idea.

I like the idea, somewhat. Okay I got past the fact the earth wasn't destroyed, nor was our rotation or axis tilt altered at all. I never did understand why they didn't leave Colorado and head toward the equator if heat was an issue. Their power generation and greenhouse abilities needed explanation that didn't come. All of that would have been fine, even with the CG background, if they had created just one decent character.

The acting and dialogue was horrendous. The characters were unrealistic, perhaps more so than the plot.

My advice is to go watch "The Colony" again or better yet, "Snow Piercer".

No F-bombs, sex, or nudity.

Nucular. Ugh!

[david-90022 · 2/10 · 29 September 2023]

The film-makers obviously assume that viewers all have magnifying vision, so the written prologue is suitably microscopic and completely illegible.

In the first few spoken lines, the protagonist says, "nucular," instead of "nuclear". SO annoying, and it tells you exactly how bad the rest of the film is going to be... Later, we get "REzources".

All of the women have improbably beautiful hair and complexions, the the men are all ruggedly handsome (after a comet-strike: yeah, right) also have beautiful hair - including the young male character, who looks like a girl.

Of course, this being based in Amurca, everybody still believes in an imaginary supernatural being, so they all hold hands when saying grace before a meal.

Dreadful.

I know ...

[moviehawg59 · 7/10 · 5 November 2018]

*Spoilers* "I know" that this "kinda cheap" version of an apocalyptic tv movie ... has been absolutely butchered by most reviewers, but I like where it was headed ... sort of. One thing I do not like is, there almost ALWAYS has to be that one IDIOT voice of contention ... who always thinks you have to KILL and TAKE everything you want, and not just stay a part of the community and work together, for the greater good. The "bad guys" (so-to-speak), are actually mostly family members of the "good guys", who just did not want to get along with everyone else. They've gone to calling themselves "clans", living out on the ice, and spending every waking moment plotting how to take what appears to be the only remaining building left on the planet, away from the good guys ... (oh, if you coulda just got along with everyone else and STAYED THERE in the first place)! What appears to be a kind of "saving grace" is, towards the last third of the show, they (good guys) actually find AIR FORCE ONE under the ice. Needless to say, there are some things on board that could significantly help a group who is just trying to survive. BUT, there is also something on board that could destroy any hope of ever having anything close to a return to something close to a regular life (the "bad guys" find out about this because of a Romeo & Juliet kind of relationship between a good GUY and a bad GIRL). She tells about the discovery because, evidently, Big Daddy King bad guy, is not above threatening the lives of children (who he claims he's trying to SAVE), to make "Juliet" divulge how to sneek into the "good guy" building, to steal their equipment). At the very end, we discover something that can change everyone's entire way of life (if only they can check it out, verify the "hope", and get back in time to tell everyone before the bad guys start the war to end all existence)! Seems worth another "movie of the week ... or two", or even one or two short seasons on "hoodoo, voodoo, yoohoo, or some other streaming service", etc. But, we already know THAT didn't happen. I would like to have seen if they coulda made it more interesting, with a little more time?