# Armageddon (1998)

### reviewed by
David Thiel

WARNING: SPOILERS abound in this review. If you don't want to know what happens, skip it.

    ***

The more I think about this movie, the less I like it.

"Armageddon" compares very unfavorably to this year's *other* asteroid opus, "Deep Impact." That film excelled by using its spectacular special effects sequences sparingly, and allowing room for its characters to ponder the reality of the End of the World.

There's no time for pondering--or even rational thought--in "Armageddon." The film bangs, booms and thunders at warp speed, with herky-jerky editing that at times makes it impossible to tell which of Our Heroes has just been impaled by a piece of flying space debris.

Just like "Deep Impact," "Armageddon" deals with the discovery of an enormous asteroid bearing down on Earth, and involves a mission to land a team of astronauts on the rock, plant a nuclear device and blow the space bogey off-course. However, whereas "Impact" sent an efficient, well-trained group of specialists into orbit, the makers of "Armageddon" thought it would be more fun to charge a crew of incompetent oil-drillers with this all-important responsibility.

According to the film, Bruce Willis' gang of unruly drillers is supposed to be the best of the best, but we never see them in that fashion. They dork about with the equipment during training, break a lot of stuff and--the night before the Mission to Save All Life on Earth--they get plastered at a strip club and are arrested. Most of what they accomplish during the course of the film has more to do with blind luck than skill.

Actually, most of the characters in this film are incompetent in their own ways. The Russian space station is a floating deathtrap run by a slightly crazed Cold War stereotype. The astronauts attempt to land their shuttles on the asteroid like aircraft, despite the lack of a runway--real astronauts would make a soft landing ala the moon missions. The President of the U.S. decides to detonate the nuke before it's been properly inserted in the core of the rock, despite knowing fully well that a surface explosion would have no effect at all. The mission commander, when attempting to defuse the bomb, doesn't know whether to cut the red wire or the blue wire--absurd, considering that the bomb is one of *ours*. And on and on.

While I normally hate it when folks pick on the science in science fiction films, this one got my dander up because of its present-day setting and its use--for the most part--of existing technology. There are such howlers as a pair of space shuttles rounding the moon in what appears to be a matter of moments, rather than days. The asteroid itself is a bizarre, spiky landscape which bears no resemblence to its real-life counterparts. And if the deadly rock is the size of *Texas*, as this one supposedly is, how would a single nuke cause sufficient damage? If you drilled an 800-foot hole into Texas soil and dropped in a bomb, could you split the Lone Star State in half? Any why 800 feet? Near the end of the film, there's a big hoo-ha about reaching the magic 800 foot depth. Wouldn't 797 feet have sufficed?

No one in the film seems concerned that if one could split an asteroid the size of Texas, pieces the size of Dallas/Ft. Worth would likely rain down on our heads. And what of the other house-sized rocks that appear to be flying in the wake of the big one? Apparently, they're just for show.

The characters aren't much to care about, and indeed, they don't seem to care much either. With the end of humanity in the balance, there's never a sense that Our Heroes are worried about anything other than their own skins (or the prospect of never having to pay taxes again). In the big climax, with just seconds left to the Point of No Return, Bruce Willis' character takes time out from popping the nuke to make a lengthy, allegedly touching speech--never mind the fact that we've seen plenty of examples of sudden death in the hostile asteroid environment. What if, mid-speech, a flying chunk of gravel took his head clean off? I don't think the population of Earth would be happy about that--though at least it'd get him to shut up.

Oh, it's not all bad. There's some funny dialogue, most of it coming from the ever-buggy Steve Buscemi. (However, there's a shot angled up inside Buscemi's snaggly mouth which gave me the willies.) The destruction scenes--though all too obviously computer effects--are nicely realized.

But when all was said and done, I found myself strangely unmoved--neither thrilled by the out-of-this-world heroics nor relieved at the ultimate survival of the species. Even a selfless sacrifice in the film's final moments didn't affect me in the same way as a similar sequence in "Deep Impact."

The short of it? If you want to see an asteroid movie and haven't seen "Deep Impact," do so while it's still on the big screen. "Armageddon"'s effects benefit from the theater experience as well, but if you wait for home video, you'll at least have a fast-forward button.

David Thiel / Champaign, Illinois 1:1 E-mail: d-thiel@uiuc.edu WWW: http://www.prairienet.org/~drthiel/homepage.html

The review above was posted to the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due to ASCII to HTML conversion.

Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews