The Core (2003) User Reviews

I actually enjoyed this one...

[buiger · 6/10 · 29 April 2007]

How do you jump start the Earth's core? Well, if you want to find out (and have a few laughs in between) all you need to do is watch 'The Core'...

Yes, it's stupid, yes, it makes no sense, yes, the science is flawed, and yes, it's impossible. Nevertheless, I have to say I enjoyed watching this movie. It's one of those 'get a beer and some popcorn, turn your brain off and enjoy the afternoon' type of pictures. If you are not pretentious and take this film for what it is, you are more likely than not to enjoy it as I did.

All in all, this is a classic disaster flick, and for a disaster flick, this is above average.

Just Fun

[DumaNV · 7/10 · 7 April 2003]

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.

B-Grade entertainment

[Meredith-7 · 6/10 · 15 October 2003]

I didn't mind this film, but then, I was not expecting much. The "disaster" was built up nicely in the first 30 minutes, with some decent special effects. The acting was above par for this type of film, but the characters seemed to be a little underdeveloped. Very much a poor mans Armageddon, this is good Sunday afternoon entertainment. The film is a little long, it drags a bit in the middle, and the ending is contrived - but it's a lot better than some of the other "blockbusters" currently released.

Logic takes a beating

[davidmay · 1/10 · 28 April 2006]

This expose is for people who have seen the movie and can't quite put their finger on why they have come away feeling so dirty. Well people, following are a few reasons why The Core poops all over science along with having the worst plot, characters and premise of all time.

Firstly, that little speech the physicist gave to the class about sound traveling through rocks? He says something about the wavelength increasing (ding right), and then says the frequency will decrease (bzzz wrong). Frequency stays the same regardless of the medium it is traveling through. It is the wavelength that will in fact decrease.

Secondly, what's with the explanation of how the Earth is going to end? Burning a peach with a deodorant can? Come on, I know military people are considered no-brainers, but he was demonstrating this to the people that lead a high tech organization. This patronises any military personnel, as well as the audience.

Thirdly, The premise of the film is based around the effects that occur because the core of the Earth stops rotating. Let me just first note that there are geological records to say that the magnetic field has changed direction many times in the past, with evidence to support that each time it has been reduced close to 0. To the best of my knowledge, and that of every history book out there, this happens without any of us combusting like the peach.

Fourthly, the scene with the golden gate bridge heating up because of a hole in the magnetic field? I think someone got magnetic field and ozone layer mixed up. The idea of punching a hole in a field is absurd. The field may be weakened, but the atmosphere would still protect our little bridges from cosmic radiation.

Fifthly, there is a force field (magnetic) around the Earth, not much of one, but there is one, not an "electromagnetic energy field". An energy field would do sweet f*ck all to deflect radiation. The same radiation that is supposed to wipe out humans like the peach...

Sixthly, 5 200-megaton nukes? Come on, those would weigh about 250 tons together. Let's try transport that on the dildo shaped 'virgil'. And the computer simulations of how they would be set off? All in 1 spot? That wouldn't create the required rotational force, since there would be no rotational force due to symmetry. He finally gets it right in the end to place them apart from each other. How they initially overlooked this one, I have no idea.

Seventhly, the material used to withstand all the pressure and temperature on 'virgil' was called 'unobtainium'. nuff said.

Eighthly, assuming we just spent the entirety of the world's budget on developing paradoxically copious amounts of unobtanium, it would take another 10 budgets over to have the resources to "control" the internet.

Ninthly, when 'virgil' was tunneling downwards, why could the people walk around inside as if it was horizontal? They mentioned the rotating bridge, but didn't mention anything about rotating hallways, or the rip in the space-time continuum needed to walk straight between the bridge and the subsequent hallways. The compartments would need to rotate individually, which would put them out of alignment with each of the other compartments. Logically, they would be aligned parallel for everyone to be walking horizontal, and not fall to the front of the ship, as the front is pointing towards the centre of the Earth. If only they could pretend virgil was round, and the entire inside could rotate as one. A pity every shot shows a long cylindrical ship incapable of this.

Tenthly, the giant geode that they crash into? All that pressure, all that temperature? But if that wasn't enough, they get out, and walk around. I know those space suits they had on looked cool, but they couldn't withstand the ~1000 degrees of temperature, and a few thousand kPa of pressure that is needed to keep the geode from collapsing under the weight of the world.

Eleventhly, when the ship springs a leak? It would have been like a nuke going off in the ship, but instead, it took a few minutes for the compartment to crush.

Twelfthly, the unlucky guy that has to walk through 9000 degrees temperature in a suit only designed to withstand 5000 degrees. He makes it to the duct and switches the lever? 9000 degrees is about 2-3 times the temperature of a nuclear bomb going off. I think the walls and floor of the corridor would have been glowing white with heat. Our man would have been vaporised, but lucky for him, only his converse pumps melted to get to the lever.

Thirteenthly, the guy that pulls out the plutonium rods undergoing fission? He didn't even have a helmet on. $10 says his kids will have 5 noses, 3 mouths, and a foot coming out of their heads. I guess it's a good thing though that the DNA of such a twit is wiped from our society in these industrial accidents.

Fourteenthly, when the power cut out from the lack of reactor rods, they hook up the power cables to the inner hull. Where do they put the ground? There needs to be a potential drop for power to be gained, and if there was a ground, then anyone that touched the hull would have been electrocuted.

Fifteenthly, the arming code for the nukes was the first four prime numbers... 1 2 3 5... Pretty sure 1 is not a prime number.

Well, thats about all, and thats not even going into the fact about how the core could stop spinning in the first place. Thanks for your time.

A middling, mildy entertaining diversion.

[Li-1 · 18 April 2003]

** out of ****

The Core is the "low-budget" answer to Armageddon, meaning it was made on less than half the cost but desires to be its equal in delivering thrills and big buckets of popcorn fun. Now, whether or not you liked Armageddon is a good determinant of whether or not you should even bother watching The Core in the first place. I myself haven't seen that Michael Bay/Jerry Bruckheimer production in a while, and memory serves that it was an unbelievably preposterous, but enjoyable thrill ride that had a great sense of humor. How does The Core compare?

Well, if I hadn't seen Armageddon, I might have liked this film more, which is not to say that it's a weaker movie, just that the disaster formula plays out in much the same way so there's a sense of deja vu hanging over the proceedings. There are a lot of people out there who hated Armageddon, perhaps for its absurd science or for its quick-cut action sequences, so for those who didn't like the latter, The Core would be more up their alley, though the science here is even sillier.

The premise is the anti-Deep Impact/Armageddon. A group of expert individuals have to go to the center of the Earth to jumpstart the core, which has stopped spinning for some unknown reason. Heading this mission is professor Josh Keys (Aaron Eckhart), who's leading a six-man team, with a woman playing a key role, of course, as the pilot, played by Hilary Swank. Recognizable faces Delroy Lindo, Tcheky Karyo, Stanely Tucci, and Bruce Greenwood round out the rest of this very expendable team.

Already, we realize the plot is fundamentally impossible. The only people who wouldn't recognize this are those still in grade school, so they'll probably get a kick out of the movie while thinking they're getting some kind of education out of this because of all the scientific mumbo-jumbo and technobabble. More discriminatory viewers will scoff at all the sudden new inventions that aid our intrepid group of heroes, particularly the hull Delroy Lindo devises that's actually strengthened by heat. For me, scientific flaws are acceptable so long as it's not so blatantly obvious, but this movie's stretching my suspension of disbelief.

But those who don't care for any scientific inaccuracies will wonder, is the action any good? The answer's a mixed bag. Almost all the action is entirely CGI-related, so the question of whether or not you find it exciting to see an "earthcraft" (named Virgil) get banged around quite a few times is crucial to your enjoyment. The action aboveground is all given away in the trailers, and none of it's particularly exciting, thanks to the weak special effects. The space shuttle crash, the destruction of the Roman Colosseum and the Golden Gate bridge are not examples of CGI-work at its best, to put it kindly. A 60 million dollar budget isn't quite enough to pull a movie of this sort off, and it sometimes shows.

Surprisingly enough, the scenes set below ground do somewhat make up for the slack. A crisis is introduced every five to ten minutes to keep the characters working, so what we get is a briskly paced and often enjoyable second half. The effects work is still spotty, but I found the characters relatively engaging, the situations fairly compelling, and the Mcgyverish-solutions amusing. Still marring this outing on a consistent basis, however, are the film's predictability, the occasionally really bad dialogue, the lack of solid intentional humor, and the stilted finale. The Core is not an unenjoyable timewaster, but it's not exactly a great night at the movies, either.

Better than often given credit for

[clay_thompson · 7/10 · 16 August 2006]

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.

Core has chewy center, cheesy surface

[dfranzen70 · 5/10 · 23 September 2003]

Hollywood's gone to the outer reaches of our galaxy (not to mention others), it's plumbed the depths of the ocean, mapped dank swamps and arid deserts, but one place it hasn't gone to with any sort of regularity is the inner core itself.

The Core is certainly one of those movies for which one must suspend disbelief. It's a science-fiction movie that emphasizes fiction over all; that is, the physics of the film don't hold up to snuff. If you're an engineer or physicist, you should be smart enough not to watch it - you'll just spend most of your time second-guessing the inane psuedoscience.

It seems the inner core of the Earth has stopped spinning, for some reason, and this has caused the electromagnetic field that surrounds and protects the planet to begin to decompose. This is evidenced by, among other things, pigeons in Tralfagar Square in London suddenly veering at plate-glass windows and sundry people who wish they were extras in a less-violent movie, like Daddy Daycare or maybe Finding Nemo. At any rate, the world's leading scientists, commissioned by the military (it wouldn't be a Save the Planet from Imminent Destruction without our pals in the movie military), figure out that the core's stopped rotating, and that Something Must Be Done to get it going again.

Ah, but what? We've only drilled down about 8 miles, and according to my calculations the distance from the surface to the core is .... a bit further. We must drill down, sayeth the sage scientists, and lo and behold, through the magic of movies, there's this guy in the desert who's been working on a laser rocket thingy that'll help them blast all the way down. This handy little thing is just the cure, so a crew is hastily assembled: Commander Iverson (Bruce Greenwood), Major Beck Childs (Hilary Swank), Dr. Josh Keyes (Aaron Eckhart), Dr. Serge Leveque (Tcheky Karyo), Dr. Conrad Zimsky (Stanley Tucci), and Dr. Ed Brazzelton.

Like such doomsday movies as Armageddon, what The Core has going for it are likeable characters and a lot of nifty FX. It also has the unknown working for it; we don't know what lies beneath the thin crust of the Earth, because we haven't drilled beyond it. That allows filmmakers a lot of free reign to depict whatever the heck they want in terms of What's Down There.

What The Core has going against it, however, is a predictable plot and some howlingly awful dialog. Now, it's not giving anything away to mention that at least one person doesn't make it back from this mission. It's also not giving anything away to note that there's at least one knockdown, drag-out hissy fit of a scene in which Keyes admonishes Childs for something she didn't do. It's hysterical to watch, although I suspect the emotion the director was attempting to convey was more like empathy, not euphoria. Or ennui, which is unfortunately how some of the movie felt.

The Core is cheesy. No, not the actual inner core - although, come to think of it, maybe it is, since we don't know for sure what it's made of. And wouldn't that be fitting? A cheesy core for a cheesy film made by cheesy people in a cheesy society? Who's up for some Muenster?

Worth a Dollar if You Have Two Hours to Kill

[Quicksand · 6/10 · 15 January 2005]

How can you tell when a director is bad? I mean, assuming the director is given $50 million or so, competent actors, and a halfway-decent script, what would the film look like if he/she REALLY didn't know what he/she was doing? I think that film would look a lot like "The Core."

From the preview stage, this movie was on my "might see it but not pay for it" list, so I just now caught it on cable. Hilary Swank and Aaron Eckhart will definitely have Oscars someday, and most of the other actors who make it on the ship are of similar caliber. The comic relief generally works ("I'm going to need Xena tapes and lots of Hot Pockets"), and the plot is no more ridiculous than, say, "The Day After Tomorrow" (though it is slightly LESS ridiculous-- at least this movie attempts to offer a cause for the problem, however unlikely).

I remember watching "Entrapment," another John Amiel film, and thinking it was, in a word, awful. The editing was off, the plot lumbered ahead only through the will of Sean Connery's accent and Catherine Zeta-Jones spandex-clad anatomy. Watching "The Core," Amiel has decided his mistake was pacing, and turns up the volume to eleven and full speed ahead, hoping the charisma of his actors covers his butt. In the second half of the film, this works fine. In the first half, it just shows his limitations as a director... poor special effects during the space shuttle landing that could easily have been fixed with model work or different camera angles; birds going crazy and smacking into buildings look exactly like someone tossed a dummy against a building, then the editor cut it as close as possible. Truly, this is a man at the helm who doesn't know what a good film is supposed to look like. I wonder what an Ed Wood movie would have looked like, if someone had given THAT guy $50 million?

Characters die with clockwork predictability, and my only problem with the resolution was the actors were TOO good. They play geniuses, the absolute best in their fields, so when the movie ends I wanted to spend more time with them, see what incredible problems, discoveries, adventures they had next. The movie itself is barely a D+, thanks to the actors, occasionally adequate special effects (which we will call simply "effects"), and a really great score to hold it all together. I'd buy the score (not the pop songs over the credits) before I'd watch the movie again, but it's a thumbs up effort for everyone who isn't Amiel. Worth a dollar if you have two hours to kill.

Poor science but better fun

[SnoopyStyle · 5/10 · 12 October 2013]

The core of the earth has stopped spinning, and its protective magnetic field is disappearing. The world starts to suffer from unusual disasters. The only people that could stop it is a disparate group of individuals who must travel to the center of the earth and set off some nuclear warheads.

It's a good excuse to blow up all the world's best places. The science is passable as these doomsday scenario goes. It's not the worst sci-fi idea. This has some fun moments. They had fun blowing stuff up. The story moves along nicely. It's fun even with DJ Qualls 'hacking' the earth. The CG is top notch. There isn't anything wrong with that part. It's a big budget treatment of a sci-fi B-movie concept.

Better Than Many People Claim

[Theo Robertson · 6/10 · 28 February 2005]

I remember the critics really laid into THE CORE on its initial release . Granted the central premise of Planet Earth stopping on its axis is ridiculous but the script structure compensates for the bizarre scientific impossilbilities . Look at the opening scene with people dropping dead in Boston , it does its job of drawing the audience into the story . It doesn't stop there because a few moments later we cut to London and see a remake of THE BIRDS . Not not good enough for you ? Well wait around because they'll hopefully be a disaster around the corner that will appeal to you

It's never explained in any convincing detail how the Earth's core stopping spinning can cause these effects but we're talking about a Hollywood movie not some theory put forward by Stephen Hawking . Unlikely events do happen in Hollywood movies as if you hadn't noticed so when people criticise this movie as being " Dumb " they're perhaps taking life a little too seriously

For what it is - A dumb movie with special effects and an action adventure concept - THE CORE certainly succeeds . We're shown a ballsy heroine played by Hilary Swank who can actually act and unlike say the very similar Armageddon we don't have to put up with macho American flag waving at every opportunity .

If you're looking for an entertaining pop corn movie THE CORE should do the trick

Your Kung Fu is not strong

[pensman · 3/10 · 13 April 2023]

This is a movie filled with actors you immediately recognize, Hilary Swank, Alfre Woodard, and Stanley Tucci, and then there are the actors you recognize but just don't have names to go with the faces: Aaron Eckhart, Bruce Greenwood, Delroy Lindo, Ray Galletti, Tcheky Karyo, DJ Qualls and Richard Jenkins. You have then a B- cast who should be recognized as an A cast because they are all such good actors that you are almost willing to watch this throwback 1950s really bad "science" fiction movie. Think of a mashup of 1959's Journey to the Center of the Earth with Pat Boone and Gertrude the Duck with It Came From Beneath the Sea (1955) with Kenneth Tobey and Harry Lauter (who deserved better films). This film is actually worse than you could ever expect with every cliché line and trope gathered together for an epically bad disaster movie. Don't be surprised if you find yourself rooting for the Earth's core to just stop and destroy the planet. The "special" effects are so bad you can tell that matchbox cars are falling into San Francisco Bay as the Golden Gate Bridge collapses. I did enjoy seeing Rome destroyed. The only thing missing from this film is Godzilla appearing to save the planet. I suggest you watch the film with foam beer cans to throw at your TV screen.

Awesome rubbish.

[Colin-630-935811 · 8/10 · 19 September 2015]

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.

A good B-grade disaster film... for what that's worth!

[evilasahobby · 5/10 · 17 June 2003]

My advice - go out and see "The Core" for a brainless evening if you like disaster films and / or b-grade films. It meets the criteria for both and generally moves along fast enough that you don't stop stop to think how stupid some of the dialogue and ideas are.

"The Core" does the right thing by hiring good actors to deliver terrible dialogue. The special effects are passable and there are plenty of unintentionally funny moments (like a room full of people cheering after the announcement of "We've got central flow!").

A dumb film that is pretty forgettable, but the ride itself delivers everything you'd expect. Just remember to disengage your brain before watching!

For what it is, it works

[thirdi · 6 March 2004]

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.

A cinematic kick in the testicles (mild spoilers)

[big_john22 · 1/10 · 22 May 2004]

I just got done watching this...uhhh...movie, if that's what you can call it. It happens to be one of the worst movies I've seen in a long time. Not since "Mission to Mars" have I hated a movie so much. This movies few supporters try to say "relax, and enjoy a mindless disaster flick."

The question is, exactly how mindless are we supposed to be? Should we completely remove our brain first by smashing our head on a rock until it falls out, because if so, I'll do it. It would surely be a hell of a lot less painful than watching this rancid mass of decay again. And I love mindless action flicks. The problem is even for a pure f/x only movie, it sucks. All the "special" (as in, short school bus special) effects look like they were done by some failing college students using their pirated and hacked version of 3D studio. During the space shuttle crash sequence, I was half expecting to see little strings attached as it bounced around like it was in a freaking puppet show.

The "acting" (a very loose term) was below sub par, and everyone seemed like they hated the very movie they were acting in. Hilary Swank's character couldn't be any more plastic, annoying, and clichéd if she tried, and as for the rest of the cast, yuck. Delroy Lindo, was okay as Dr. Ed Brazzleton. I wish I could have skin that could withstand 4500 degree heat for 5 minutes. (It was 9000 degree in the core, but the suit could 'only' handle 4500 degrees, and naturally, someone has to go outside.) Then again, it might have been lucky for him, so he didn't have to suffer the humiliation of being 'saved' by whales.

All in all, this movie was an abomination; a freak of nature that could have only been devised by the most twisted and sadomasochistic of minds. Maybe in about 10 years or so, they'll do a "Mystery Science Theater 3000" for it.

I can't believe they got Harvey Dent for this film

[electryshian · 7/10 · 7 May 2020]

This film has a lot of great talent in it but they kinda rushed through it and thus missed out on what these guys can do. Other than that its a fun apocalypse movie that is enjoyable if you just kinda look the other way... every 5 minutes lol

garbage. period.

[anandblr · 1/10 · 13 October 2004]

SPOILERS!!! actually- what would spoil the film is actually watching it.

the sheer magnitude of idiocy boggles the mind. I have never seen a movie that was as much a waste of film as this was. I haven't bothered to see who wrote the screenplay for this flick because I'm afraid I'll never see anything he's attached to. ever. there are so many clichés is this movie it defies imagination.

exhibit a- reluctant unlikely hero who SAVES THE WORLD!!!

exhibit b- team of world- savers who get killed one by one.

exhibit c- unappreciated guy sacrifices life to save above mentioned world. lots and lots of emotional blackmail.

exhibit d- unsure female lead who 'finds herself' thanks to hero. with smooch during moment of danger (why god why???!!???)

exhibit e- geeky hacker dweeb

exhibit f- said dweeb 'hacks the world!" his word not mine.

exhibit g- bad dude sacrifices himself to save the world. glib last words included.

exhibit h- incessant use of 'oh my god??!!?!!'

don't. please don't. please don't see this movie. it sucks.

A likable film that actually had me cracking up more than shivering with fear.

[ilovedolby · 7/10 · 29 March 2003]

Hollywood has always had an infatuation with films that deal with natural disasters. However, the portrayal of such disasters is usually far over-blown for the sake of dramatic effect. But these films can't be taken seriously, as their purpose is nothing more than to give their audience an exciting, wild ride. This was the case in `The Core,' the new film from director Jon Amiel whose last film was 1999s `Entrapment,' which starred Sean Connery and Catherin Zeta-Jones. At first glance, `The Core' appears to be a science fiction/disaster flick about the end of the world. However, after analyzing the film, it's safe to say that this film is about 25% science fiction, and about 75% absurdity. But don't let that stop you from seeing it. Despite its silly story, `The Core' is a likable film that actually had me cracking up more than shivering with fear.

The film opens with various minor catastrophes occurring worldwide, from 32 sudden deaths in a major American city to flocks of birds flying into crowds of people and buildings (an apparent rip-off of Hitchcock's, `The Birds'). Scientists are brought in to examine these occurances and they hypothesize that the core of the earth has stopped spinning. They now need to find a way to get the core rotating once again in order to stop the cataclismic events from taking place. With the help of world's best scientists, they create a ship, properly titled as `Virgil,' designed to travel to the center of the earth, dump off a nuclear payload of about four bombs, and then as Aaron Eckhart's character, Josh says, `then we outrun the biggest shock wave in history.' `The Core' has some great talent. Eckhart (`Erin Brockovich') and Tcheky Karyo (`The Patriot') portray professors brought on to study the devastation of the super storms and strange deaths that are happening. Stanley Tucci (`Road To Perdition') plays a famed scientist with a severe ego problem. Hilary Swank, the Oscar winning actress of `Boys Don't Cry' plays a NASA astronaut sent to maneuver the ship through the earth's interior, along with Bruce Greenwood of `Double Jeopardy.' Richard Jenkins, who has appeared in several Farrelly brother's films including `There's Something About Mary,' and `Me, Myself, and Irene' appears as a general in charge of the mission.

Perhaps the film's most humorous points transpire when DJ Qualls (`The New Guy') enters the film has a hacker recruited to keep the media out of the public's eye by hacking the Internet and rooting out those who know of this secret mission to save the planet. If word of the events did get out, naturally as in any disaster flick, the fear of rioting and social unrest could take place. `The Core' is filled with clichés. It's easy to sit there and point out scenes that have taken place in other films, especially `Deep Impact,' and `Armageddon.' However, I found it to be forgivable. I liked `The Core' and found it to be fun escapism, not to be taken to heart. Disaster films have always been ridiculous, especially the greatest disaster schlock film of all, `Earthquake,' which starred Charlton Heston and George Kennedy. In recent years though, the idea of Earth's destruction from a force that mankind has no hold over has grabbed both the film industry and the public's attention, most notably with `Armageddon.' Quite frankly, I don't see why so many people loved `Armageddon' what with its stupidity, exaggerated direction from Michael Bay (`Pearl Harbor') and its dumbfounded performances from Ben Affleck and Bruce Willis. `Deep Impact' was a far superior film that was a box-office success in its time, but wasn't remembered because of mass appeal of `Armageddon.' Nonetheless, `The Core' is a decent flick that the average person can check his or her brain at the door of the theater with and veg-out to. ***

Possibly the Worst Film Ever Made

[cappados · 1/10 · 5 April 2005]

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."

This one rocks?

[Gunnar_Runar_Ingibjargarson · 6/10 · 19 June 2008]

Smarter than Armageddon and equally extreme, The Core is high-tech Hollywood hokum at its finest. It's scientifically ridiculous, but this variant of Fantastic Voyage at least tries to be credible as it plunges deep into the earth's inner core, where a formulaic team of experts pilot an earth-boring ship to jump-start the planet's spinning molten interior, now stalled by a military secret that could seal the fate of all humankind. It's a geophysicist's wet dream that only a fine ensemble cast could rescue from absurdity, and director Jon Amiel (Entrapment, Copycat) draws excellent work (and plenty of humorous interplay) from Aaron Eckhart, Hilary Swank, Stanley Tucci, Delroy Lindo, and a host of memorable supporting players, especially The New Guy's D.J. Qualls as the world's greatest Cyb-nerd. With enough digital F/X disasters to satisfy anyone's apocalyptic fantasies, this is a popcorn thriller with all the bells and whistles that its genre demands. Sit back, pump up the volume, and enjoy the dazzling ride.

This film is made of pure unobtainium

[mfisher452 · 4/10 · 6 January 2005]

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.

A more than decent escapism during my quarantine.

[juneebuggy · 8/10 · 28 April 2020]

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.

Pretty fun to watch if you aren't looking for a masterpiece

[johnsamo-1 · 7/10 · 21 May 2005]

Definitely not worthy of paying to see in the theaters, but its a pretty entertaining piece of cheesy popcorn if you don't go into it expecting a serious sci-fi film. What sells it for me is the acting. Stanley Tucci in particular comes off well. Its clear he knows he's in a cheesy movie, but rather than pull a Dustin Hoffman and try and take it seriously, he dives right in and starts chewing scenery in a big way. I half expected him to literally start gnawing on the set. The plot is pretty clever and keeps throwing obstacles in the way of the crew that they have to use their smarts to overcome.

But anyway, if you've got some bucks to spare and like a cheesy flick now and them, you could do worse.

Why?

[islatrel · 5/10 · 21 March 2020]

One sentence can describe this movie. If they knew about destini, why didn't they do that in the first place ??

'The Core' is all bad science, and that makes it viewable.

[TxMike · 27 June 2004]

What is it about free DVDs, that we will watch it even though we know the movie is bad? 'The Core' was like that with me. It's saving grace is that ALL its science is bad science, the premise that a now stationary Earth's core will somehow trigger widespread destruction and allow the Sun's energy to roast us simply is absurd. But so are all the other 'scientific' elements of the story, so we don't spend any time really worrying about it. Any more than we wonder how Superman can fly or Spiderman can shoot webs. There are even web pages devoted to a detailed analysis of all the flaws. However, I was happy to see them use the term 'unobtainium' for a new metal with super properties. In the motorcycle brotherhood, for years we have jokingly called certain parts as made of 'unobtainium', which was a way of saying that the part was so hard to find. So, the movie is just mediocre, but can be a fun 2 hours for one that is in the right frame of mind. Or, an excellent viewing for a class of physics or geology students, as a forum to discuss the bad science.

SPOILERS follow -- turns out the problem resulted from a military test of a new weapon based in Alaska. In a neat piece of movie magic, we see the sun's rays through a hole in the electromagnetic field (couldn't really happen) melt supports of the Golden Gate bridge, and we see it and vehicles fall into the bay. So this team of assorted guys and one gal plunge into the Earth's core carrying 5 nuclear bombs that their calculations show will start the core spinning once again if exploded just at the right places, at just the right times. One by one the Earthship encounters problems, crew members die in the Earth's crust, but the mission is pulled off, and the Earthship gets nuclear blast-propelled back to the surface, dodging obstacles and finding crevices, narrowly avoiding being crushed by a moving tectonic plate, and ending up on the ocean floor, where they were rescued after some whales help signal where they were. Just your typical disaster movie in the end. With funny, funny science.