The beginning of the movie showed promise, but I got suspicious when the bank and food run scenes lasted about 5 seconds each. The writer(s) lost their train of thought when 1/2 of the movie was devoted to a formula disaster flick that had nothing to do with the main premise. Great entertainment for the sheeple.

-- fatanddumb (fatdumb@and.happy), November 22, 1999

Answers

Yep, the meltdown scene was too long and detracted from the first half of the movie. A plane falling from the sky was a great opener, but the pace died after that.

I heard that the movie was not to depict a bank run, but there certainly was a hint of one with the long teller line and the irate customer who could only withdraw $100.

What I found strange was that the entire East Coast power grid crashed, but there were no apparent problems (except for the nuke plant itself) in Seattle with the lights blazing after midnight.

-- Slobby Don (slobbydon@hotmail.com), November 22, 1999.

We don't have no nuke plant in Seattle!!!

-- Cherri (sams@brigadoon.com), November 22, 1999.

How did all the people in the bar in NY (which was lit w/candles) get to watch TV? I didn't see a generator scene.

-- phread (lurking@y2k.com), November 22, 1999.

"We don't have no nuke plant in Seattle!!!"

Of course not! The movie was fiction remember. What ever happened to the nuke plant in Satsop, WA?

The movie presented an unrealistically optimistic scenario. It's not the nuke plants we need to be concerned with, but the nuke bombs coming from countries that have more Y2K problems than the U.S.!

-- Slobby Don (slobbydon@hotmail.com), November 22, 1999.

I don't know much about nuclear reactors but......I don't think I would spend a lot of time standing in the core about 20 feet from the rods. Maybe it's just me. Overall - dumb movie.

-- (rcarver@inacom.com), November 22, 1999.

I hadn't any interest in the movie, but at the last minute decided to watch it as a comparison to Y2K: Year To Kill.

I must say Y2K: The Movie was especially shoddy. It looked like a remake of the 1960's dud Panic In The City. I was so bored I couldn't retain my concentration. I seldom watch t.v., months can go by before I turn it on, and I could see why watching Y2K: The Movie. The acting was terrible, the script almost schizophrenic, focus on characters who were meaningless and didn't pretain to the topic, a bar in an outage with full electrical power, cheap, short in duration, and tacky "special effects," a past NASA showcase figure with a vocabulary on the level of any random fourth grader? Harvard and Stanford graduates with the same simple and limited vocabulary?

I don't think it was "great entertainment for the sheeple." I think the sheeple had their own intelligences insulted.

It was very obvious why the "gobmint" didn't care if it was shown on t.v.

-- Paula (chowbabe@pacbell.net), November 22, 1999.

The core rods were made so that it is possible to monitor them visually, as long as they are stable (Most people of course would take the proper caution and wear a radiation suit). But beyond that, the core at the time the main charatcer was down there was above 3500 degrees Fahrenheit. The heat radiation alone would have melted his clothes to his skin in a fraction of a second. And then his internal organs would have exploded, as his blood boiled. At that temperature the core would be just a little more than a third as hot as the surface of the sun.

"Y2K The Movie" was dumb and chock full of inaccuracies. I guess that sums it up.

-- (anon@anon.com), November 22, 1999.

"...was dumb and chock full of inaccuracies."

Rather like Y2K newsmedia reporting. Life mirrors.

Diane

-- Diane J. Squire (sacredspaces@yahoo.com), November 22, 1999.

"B" movies. Gotta love 'em :-)

-- Tim (pixmo@pixelquest.com), November 22, 1999.

Re: the scene in the bar opened with a shot of a motorcycle and a hand revving the engine and showed a wire going to the tv....think they were trying to tell us that the motorcycle was acting as a generator. In spite of that....it was a crummy movie and I wasted my time watching it!!! Some silly things I noticed was that a handful of troops were going to evacuate a 10 mile radius of a city and they had time to go door to door? I think not! They would have used a megaphone and not slowed down at anybody's house let alone knocking and putting up signs! Also, was curious how come a mircochip in the airplane that crashed was using a time zone where it was not manufactured! Hey, and no steam when the water hit those exposed rods....as if!!!

At least when I watch McGyver make bombs out of peanut butter sandwiches I don't expect any better...but Y2K the movie....I give it two thumbs down!

On the lighter side, did you enjoy the one prepper they showed with his Elmer Fudd hat, lumber jacket and boots in his surburban home? I thought it was good humor...and by the way...the only prepper in the movie and he got shot....bummer!

*Sigh* what is it going to take to get out the real facts???

-- Attap (attap@telusplanet.net), November 22, 1999.

We don't have no nuke plant in Seattle!!!

We know that. The only Nuke plant I can remember seeing in WA was Trojan, closer to portland where I am from, but Trojan is dead.

-- C. Hill (pinionsmachine@hotmail.com), November 22, 1999.

Why didn't the power go down at GMT????? I thought the grid was timed by that....Just another hmmmmmmmmm

-- Sammie (sammiex0@hotmail.com), November 22, 1999.

Cherri, we don't have no nuke plant in Galveston, either!!! LOL We have plenty of prisons in Texas, though. Can't wait for those doors to swing open. :-)

-- Gayla (privacy@please.com), November 22, 1999.