Home
search
more | tips
IMDb > Spill (1996) > IMDb user comments

IMDb user comments for
Spill (1996) More at IMDb Pro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 9 comments in total 

7 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
WHY!!!!!, 5 April 2000
Author: Sébastien Jean (General Chaos) from Le Gardeur, Canada

...In my entire life so far, I never saw a movie that worst, NEVER. The story is so awful and illogical. ie: There is a biochemical agent developed by the government that has been spilled in a river but NO ONE has any suspicions. The hero(us president's ex-bodyguard who was a quarterback in the NFL) is immune to the weapon because he has the flu... RIDICULOUS!!! And there is the double car explosion thing: The car jumps over some rocks(don't ask me why but that make it explode), and after a couple of barrel roll... yes, it explodes again... no comments And did I talk about the music? ...Horrible, inhuman, childish, worst music I ever heard...

Still, you must see this movie because after seeing it, you will enjoy every movie. Nothing can be worst than that...NOTHING!!!!

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
B A D A C T I N G, 5 February 2002
Author: apw420 from NYC

This is the CHEAPEST movie I've ever seen in my life.

Thermal Wells National Park in Oregon?

And I don't get why all of a sudden, every Park Ranger is carrying a semi automatic rifle shooting at KEN FAIRCHILD. CHEAP!!!

And did you notice that once these people are exposed to the virus, they just kinda start bleeding and die? I don't get it.

And how about the drunken truck driver? If he knew he was carrying the worlds most toxic biological weapons in the back of his truck -- why was he pounding beers and housing pills the entire ride??

I've seen better film on teeth.

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
The lowest point in Bosworth's career..., 20 December 2006
1/10
Author: Frank Markland from United States

Brian Bosworth stars as a government agent who is sent to stop the outbreak of a deadly virus which has been dumped, also there are guys trying to steal to use for an assassination on a politician or something(It's never made clear) add in a lame subplot about Bosworth being an ex-football star as well as dull love interest subplot and you are in for an excruciating 90 minutes. Candian actor Chuck Shamata probably gives the best performance but his scenes are few and far between, also his overall character is hilarious since (as others have pointed out) that he comes off as Columbo and his death scene is hysterical, in that he does an exaggerated fall. Also the beginning is also hysterical in that it's so over the top it becomes hilarious. Sadly these are the only elements in an otherwise awful film, which is dull and horrible. So don't see it. After all there are far funnier disaster movies, and certainly much better made than this fiasco.

1/2* out of 4-(Awful)

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
If it weren't so bad, it might be funny, 19 January 2002
Author: Lost_cow from Canada

As others here have commented, this movie is horrible. I mean really really horrible.

Story line is almost inexistant, Special effects are of lower quality than a high school theatre production, and I've seen better acting from the folks on "Americas funniest home videos".

The only thing which somewhat redeems this flop is the fun you have spotting the inconsistencies and errors... from the folks bleeding right thru un-punctured hazmat "moon suits" in the lab (figure that one out!) to the amazing inconsistent plot jumps this is a real gem.

My 2 cents worth... but I doubt your mileage will vary much :)

Moo

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Nice effects shame about the story, 1 March 2007
2/10
Author: alicespiral from Blackpool England

Its one of those sort of films where the hero does the lot-he kills people he steals a motorbike,he steals dynamite from the armoury,he slugs people left and right he blows up a stream which is travelling underground -belive it or not to the very area where the President is giving a speech-and in the end Saves The World!! The only thing he can't do is fly but he probably could if he donned a Cape! Its real lowest common denominator stuff which had over 500 people work on it nevertheless. The distributors must have been bribed with a big consignment of drugs-I mean people have difficulty getting films released which have turned out winners at the box office eg the biopic of Ray Charles was 15 years in the planning and making stages

Was the above comment useful to you?

2 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
Boring, below all standards action, 7 January 2006
1/10
Author: tomimt from Finland

What to say about this movie? Well, it's unoriginal, predictable, boring and all that. It's badly directed and acting can't be even mentioned in a same sentence with this movie.

So the great story of the movie goes somewhere along lines deadly virus stolen, me brave presidents bodyguard will save the day. Me kill the terrorists and so on.

What comes to action, one scene has burned itself on my mind: a car driving off the cliff and exploding in midair without any reason at all. Blasted cars... they are sneaky that way.

This movie is probably one of those, which are sold along those good movies every TV station wants to show, so it's quite possible to catch it from TV from once in a while, but don't go and buy it, because it really isn't that bad it would be funny. Spill is just that bad, that it's bad and the worst of it, it really is boring.

Was the above comment useful to you?

WHY!!!!!, 5 April 2000
Author: Sébastien Jean (General Chaos) from Le Gardeur, Canada

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

Warning, spoiler ahead...viewer's discretion is advised ...Of all the movies I've seen so far, this is, and might remain, the worst movie ever to be seen in a lifetime.

1-Childish plot (The US president's ex-bodyguard is immune to a secret military biological weapon because he has the FLU... no comments)

2-Awful special effects (at some point in the movie, a car jumps over some rocks and explodes[for no reason], not that bad beside the fact that the explosion comes from underneath the car. After a couple of barrel roll, it explodes AGAIN...Ridiculous)

3-Inhuman sound track I prefer the soundtrack in "blairwitch project"(there is no music in blairwitch project). Listening to it made me have headache. It is so awful that I laughed in part that were supposed to be dramatical. Need I say more?

If you haven't seen this movie I recommend that you rent it and pay attention to every aspect that i mentioned . After that, every movie you see will be a good movie compared to "Spill". (I'd like to mention that I've endured this movie 3 times to prove to my friend's that this is really the worst thing they can see)

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
Someone clean up this mess!, 30 October 2007
Author: vchimpanzee from North Carolina

At a Prodichem chemical plant in New Jersey, there is an accident involving a secret biological warfare project. Only Alex Bur survives, and he contacts Leo Burns of the New York Tribune.

Alex is soon dead, but not before announcing he has a plan whose details are unknown.

At a press conference, President John Lawrence Wheeler and adviser Eric Black deny everything, but Black is actually in charge of the project, which President Wheeler knows nothing about.

Secret Service Agent Ken Fairchild, who showed his talent when the President appeared threatened at the press conference, is assigned to check out Thermal Wells National Park in advance of the One World Conference the President is attending. Fairchild ends up being a bumbling idiot in the great outdoors and must be rescued by veterinarian Dr. Larraine Keller. This is the first of several comic moments with these two.

Meanwhile, Ripley has been hired to transport a shipment from Prodichem. He is either drunk or crazy or both, and it is the same dangerous chemical from the accident earlier in the movie that he is delivering.

Can you guess where Ripley will end up?

There are some positive qualities in this movie. The scenery at Thermal Wells is beautiful, and that's with no snow at all. There are no camera shots from a distance with snow. Camp David is also beautiful. Most of the leading actors have a few good moments, but no one delivers a consistent performance. Daniel Kash as Ripley, Leah Pinsent as Lorraine and Chuck Shamata as Leo come the closest.

The stunt players do a good job, especially the one(s) playing Ripley. One sequence involving Ripley and his truck is actually quite well done, though far short of the gold standard of "Breakdown". I am curious about why the film quality is so different in part of the sequence; it's as if the rest of the film is videotaped and these shots are filmed. But it's effective.

And there is some excitement involving the truck and toward the end. It's actually enjoyable to watch our heroes work toward their goal, if you're not too picky about details and quality. The writing is halfway intelligent (geology experts might disagree) toward the end.

The real evidence that quality was not a priority: inconsistency. At Thermal Wells, everything is covered with snow in one scene, and the snow is still falling heavily. Then there is only a little snow. Then no snow has fallen at all. Then there is a little snow on the ground. then everything is covered again. Then the sky is perfectly clear and no snow has fallen anywhere. Oh, and let's not forget this: if a man and a woman are on a motorcycle, regardless of what has happened anywhere else, there MUST be just a little snow on the ground. This is explained (when nothing has happened yet that I can see): at high altitudes the weather changes quickly. One apparently doesn't need to travel far in this territory for drastic changes to take place. No one should have scheduled the One World Conference for someplace like this.

And then there are the medical inconsistencies. In the first scene, people die a gruesome, bloody death. So others can experience the same illness, appear dead, and end up recovering as if nothing has happened? Again, this is explained away.

If one doesn't get too picky, it is still possible to enjoy this movie. If for no other reason, to laugh at all its problems.

Was the above comment useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following comment useful :-
There should be a new law in this country: no more bad films featuring good actors, 7 June 2003
3/10
Author: Raleon



What do David Fox, Leah Pinsent, and Eric Peterson have in common? They're all great actors stuck in a bad movie with other actors with only a quarter the talent and skill they have. But that's not what turns me off. What turns me off is the fact that the plot isn't interesting at all. Even those three are bored with it! And what can they do? It's not like every producer in the country is after them for their next movie break. It's not like we have much money to spend furthering their careers either. They deserve more. I only saw this movie because they were in it. I just hope they appear in a much better movie, with more integrity than this one.

Was the above comment useful to you?

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings External reviews
Plot keywords Main details Your user comments
Your vote history