Why they called this movie Y2K is beyond me! What starts out as promising loses a lot as the movie winds on. The plot and the acting is slightly second rate and I found that by the end the countdown did not engage the viewer. Tying the plot to a Columbian drug lord at the end was just too much. Passable.
13 Reviews
Good idea, poor execution
GFoster6 October 1999
Y2K has squandered a perfect opportunity to make a good, tense action movie. When a powerful missile activates itself on a countdown for the millenium, the usual rag-tag team are sent to de-activate it. The trailer for this movie looked good, but in the actual film there is hardly any action or violence as expected and the story plods along without creating anything interesting in the dull boring characters. Overall the film is poor and boring. 3/10.
Overstayed his welcome, which is unfortunate.
tarbosh2200014 May 2021
Warning: Spoilers
When it's discovered that Y2k will trigger a mechanism that will set off some missiles hidden in the Colombian jungle, a team is sent to prevent that from happening. General Seward (McDowell) sends computer techie Vince (Woolvett), Morgan (Gossett Jr.), who comes out of retirement for the job, and CIA head Fairchild (O'Ross) to investigate. (Morgan and Fairchild? Could that be just a coincidence?) While there, they meet the mysterious Russian agent Soljev (Chalke). Of course, they all have to face lots of pitfalls and problems, not the least of which is your prerequisite Colombian druglord and his goons. Just what any of that has to do with Y2k is anybody's guess. Can anybody stop the TERMINAL COUNTDOWN?
OMG! It's Y2k! Such was the nature of that threat, PM snapped into action with this film, originally titled simply Y2k, as did NBC, who gave us Y2k: The Movie (1999). Check out the commercial for that one on YouTube. It's pretty great. After getting off to a bang-up start, Terminal Countdown settles into terminal boredom after the movie relocates to the jungle. Not to get too technical, but it's really a forest. It really loses the plot - literally - after the drug dealers show up, but, then again, most of the scenes featuring Paco (Lauchu) really liven things up. He pulls large machetes out of nowhere and slaughters people with them. He provides much-needed interest in this largely-sloggy outing.
Not very surprisingly, all the scenes with Malcolm McDowell are gold. It's very amusing to watch him get mad about Y2k. Much like Dragonfight (1990), Terminal Countdown is one of those movies where (some of the) dialogue scenes are more entertaining than the action. During the many forest slog moments, they should have cut back to McDowell doing or saying something. That would have helped a lot to perk things up.
While this is a PM film, it feels more like Nu-Image. For example, many of the forest scenes are "borrowed" from Predator (1987). There are quite a few moments when our characters are looking at nothing or shooting at nothing - well, except Predator footage. Same with the car chase at the beginning, which was taken wholesale from Basic Instinct (1992). Yes, Basic Instinct had a car chase. And it's also in Terminal Countdown.
Now, try as Louis Gossett, Jr. Might, it's hard to help a movie about silos. Not terrorists, mind you, but silos. There is a lot of talk about silos in the film. Evil, evil silos.
But, beyond that, there's a bigger problem. A much bigger problem. That, of course, is Jaimz Woolvett's hair in the movie. It's atrocious. Remember Michael Berryman's hair from the Motley Crue video for "Smokin' in the Boys Room"? This gives it a serious run for its money. It almost single-handedly (single-hairedly?) ruins the film. Imagine, if you will, a messier Moe Howard bowl-cut, but the owner of said bowl cut said to their barber, "just shave the lower third of my head so it looks like I'm wearing a rug at all times". We get that his character, Vince, is supposed to be a dork. We also get that it came out in 1999. But still, there's no excuse for that particular haircut. You've heard of fashion don'ts? Well, this is a hair don't. Call it a cautionary tale. Even more so than the nuclear war implied in the film.
Also, we've got another problem. The 100-minute running time. What the heck were they thinking? Why the frack is some PM movie about people running around a forest trying to stop Y2k 100 minutes long? Can anyone answer this? If they just removed the Predator and Basic Instinct footage it could have been around 90 minutes. But, no, they couldn't do that.
There are enough cool and funny moments to sustain an 80 minute movie here. There really are. But 100? That's pushing it. Just the 90's computers, CD-ROM screens, Paco, and even the egregious green screen moments - plus Malcolm McDowell, of course - are sufficient to entertain an audience for a limited amount of time. But Pepin overstayed his welcome, which is unfortunate.
Y2k Productions, the production company for this film, should have produced more movies. They should have flooded the market with more Y2k movies than we could handle. If nothing else, Terminal Countdown - besides being yet another "Terminal" movie for us - is a nostalgic look back on a hyped-up threat that was slated to kill us all on January 1st, 2000. That was an idea exploitable enough for a company like PM to work with. But Pepin should have stuck with the vibe going in the first 20 minutes of the movie. Then we'd have something. As it stands, we can only really recommend this film to die-hard Y2k buffs. If you're out there, let us know.
OMG! It's Y2k! Such was the nature of that threat, PM snapped into action with this film, originally titled simply Y2k, as did NBC, who gave us Y2k: The Movie (1999). Check out the commercial for that one on YouTube. It's pretty great. After getting off to a bang-up start, Terminal Countdown settles into terminal boredom after the movie relocates to the jungle. Not to get too technical, but it's really a forest. It really loses the plot - literally - after the drug dealers show up, but, then again, most of the scenes featuring Paco (Lauchu) really liven things up. He pulls large machetes out of nowhere and slaughters people with them. He provides much-needed interest in this largely-sloggy outing.
Not very surprisingly, all the scenes with Malcolm McDowell are gold. It's very amusing to watch him get mad about Y2k. Much like Dragonfight (1990), Terminal Countdown is one of those movies where (some of the) dialogue scenes are more entertaining than the action. During the many forest slog moments, they should have cut back to McDowell doing or saying something. That would have helped a lot to perk things up.
While this is a PM film, it feels more like Nu-Image. For example, many of the forest scenes are "borrowed" from Predator (1987). There are quite a few moments when our characters are looking at nothing or shooting at nothing - well, except Predator footage. Same with the car chase at the beginning, which was taken wholesale from Basic Instinct (1992). Yes, Basic Instinct had a car chase. And it's also in Terminal Countdown.
Now, try as Louis Gossett, Jr. Might, it's hard to help a movie about silos. Not terrorists, mind you, but silos. There is a lot of talk about silos in the film. Evil, evil silos.
But, beyond that, there's a bigger problem. A much bigger problem. That, of course, is Jaimz Woolvett's hair in the movie. It's atrocious. Remember Michael Berryman's hair from the Motley Crue video for "Smokin' in the Boys Room"? This gives it a serious run for its money. It almost single-handedly (single-hairedly?) ruins the film. Imagine, if you will, a messier Moe Howard bowl-cut, but the owner of said bowl cut said to their barber, "just shave the lower third of my head so it looks like I'm wearing a rug at all times". We get that his character, Vince, is supposed to be a dork. We also get that it came out in 1999. But still, there's no excuse for that particular haircut. You've heard of fashion don'ts? Well, this is a hair don't. Call it a cautionary tale. Even more so than the nuclear war implied in the film.
Also, we've got another problem. The 100-minute running time. What the heck were they thinking? Why the frack is some PM movie about people running around a forest trying to stop Y2k 100 minutes long? Can anyone answer this? If they just removed the Predator and Basic Instinct footage it could have been around 90 minutes. But, no, they couldn't do that.
There are enough cool and funny moments to sustain an 80 minute movie here. There really are. But 100? That's pushing it. Just the 90's computers, CD-ROM screens, Paco, and even the egregious green screen moments - plus Malcolm McDowell, of course - are sufficient to entertain an audience for a limited amount of time. But Pepin overstayed his welcome, which is unfortunate.
Y2k Productions, the production company for this film, should have produced more movies. They should have flooded the market with more Y2k movies than we could handle. If nothing else, Terminal Countdown - besides being yet another "Terminal" movie for us - is a nostalgic look back on a hyped-up threat that was slated to kill us all on January 1st, 2000. That was an idea exploitable enough for a company like PM to work with. But Pepin should have stuck with the vibe going in the first 20 minutes of the movie. Then we'd have something. As it stands, we can only really recommend this film to die-hard Y2k buffs. If you're out there, let us know.
Brilliant title infers a film with hundreds of possibilities, and they chose this one?
Os Davis3 November 1999
Brilliant title infers a film with hundreds of possibilities, and they chose this one? everyone's into Y2K, it'll be an anagram associated with the year 1999 and let's face it -- it's *&^&^%^%ing spooky, eh? so what do we get? a half-baked testosterone fest with godawful dialogue poorly acted.
the "movie" bearing those dread three characters Y2K is supposedly about a U.S. missile in South America -- "We had missiles here?" the computer geek of the piece asks. "Duh," respond audiences. -- that gets a little bit kooky when it fritzes in response to 2000. (absolutely every other piece of technology seems to be functioning 100%, however.)
until an ending that takes forever to reach (you won't believe the one character's justification for his actions), we suffer through sheer stupidity.
if apocalypse does come with the calendar's turn, i think the time until then could be better spent in millions of ways.
the "movie" bearing those dread three characters Y2K is supposedly about a U.S. missile in South America -- "We had missiles here?" the computer geek of the piece asks. "Duh," respond audiences. -- that gets a little bit kooky when it fritzes in response to 2000. (absolutely every other piece of technology seems to be functioning 100%, however.)
until an ending that takes forever to reach (you won't believe the one character's justification for his actions), we suffer through sheer stupidity.
if apocalypse does come with the calendar's turn, i think the time until then could be better spent in millions of ways.
Basic Instinct, They used the care chase from BI in this movie...
mcpartlins9 May 2007
OK how can they do this...
The car chase in this movie is the same car chase from Basic Instinct. I mean I was watching this movie on mute while on the phone and thought I was watching Basic Instinct.
I've watched that movie (basic instinct) a lot so I knew I was right. I had comcast DVR so I re winded and checked it out further. Yup, it's the footage from Basic Instinct. So does Paul V get a residuial check for his footage showing up in another movie?
Hey isn't that stealing or plagerim or something like that? Has anyone seen anything like this before?
How can they get away with something like this?
The car chase in this movie is the same car chase from Basic Instinct. I mean I was watching this movie on mute while on the phone and thought I was watching Basic Instinct.
I've watched that movie (basic instinct) a lot so I knew I was right. I had comcast DVR so I re winded and checked it out further. Yup, it's the footage from Basic Instinct. So does Paul V get a residuial check for his footage showing up in another movie?
Hey isn't that stealing or plagerim or something like that? Has anyone seen anything like this before?
How can they get away with something like this?
Low budget but worth watching
Tenacity5 April 2003
The movie was obviously low budget which doesn't bode well for an action flick. However, the motivational premise of the movie surrounding Gulf War vets was unique enough to make this worth watching on a rainy afternoon (or late night). Acting by both Louis Gossett, Jr. and Sarah Chalke were notable. Good job on both parts.
Bizarre, Ridiculous, and Rates a One
sbox21 November 1999
Normally, when a film rates this low, I find other things to like about it. Namely, its silliness. To say I didn't laugh throughout this film would be a lie. This movie provides a great many laughs. Its just. . . well, this is not supposed to be a comedy.
Even so, I enjoyed other awful attempts at seriousness. Examples include Disney's, "Epcot: The Celebration," and Ed Wood's "Plan 9 From Outer Space." The difference with "Y2K" is that they are exploiting real fears. Similar to "Reds," the subject matter is deadly serious. "Reds" ranked a one in my book by candy coating a serious subject, in a ridiculous movie formula. The same goes for "Y2K."
The only thing these films have in common besides their poor rating, is the fact that they highlight fiction. On the one hand the fiction of the great communist movement, and on the other the fiction of the great threat to our times, the year 2000 computer problem. Give me a break on both fronts.
Even so, I enjoyed other awful attempts at seriousness. Examples include Disney's, "Epcot: The Celebration," and Ed Wood's "Plan 9 From Outer Space." The difference with "Y2K" is that they are exploiting real fears. Similar to "Reds," the subject matter is deadly serious. "Reds" ranked a one in my book by candy coating a serious subject, in a ridiculous movie formula. The same goes for "Y2K."
The only thing these films have in common besides their poor rating, is the fact that they highlight fiction. On the one hand the fiction of the great communist movement, and on the other the fiction of the great threat to our times, the year 2000 computer problem. Give me a break on both fronts.
Good concept, poorly tied to the false millenium
guest15066923 January 2000
Nice idea. A secret silo has a computer failure at the change of the year (y2k, get the title?). A skilled team is coerced to go in and fix it, but their efforts are fatigued by drug lords and internal US armed forces strife. Unfortunately the characters are hollow and the idea is poorly executed. Remove the y2k theme and the glib characters, and there might be a solid movie here. Definitely worthy of a remake! If you watch it, don't sweat the details (which aren't terrible, just bad) and try to enjoy the underlying concept. While the current version is a 'MacGyver' movie (at best), a remake could be on par with 'Force 10 from Navarone.' If you like tension, a good plot, well developed characters, and nice plot twists... wait for the remake.
Hard to watch
mozzis19 June 2009
Warning: Spoilers
Very predictable. Myra's Russian accent is really bad.
Goofs:
Vince plans to send the missile into space. Nuclear missiles cannot achieve orbit, let alone escape it.
The Marines did not respond to the attack properly, especially if they were SpecOps guys. Then did not seek cover, they did not pick their targets, they shot while standing without moving, etc.
Where did Thompson's backup crew (the ones guarding the silo while they were re-targeting the missile) come from?
Vince's character yells a lot and is a real sissy until three quarters through when he is willing to die rather than change the target of the missile.
Seward would not have the authority to order an incursion into a foreign country.
Imagery and screens on the silo computers are not at all like 1969 era displays.
Goofs:
Vince plans to send the missile into space. Nuclear missiles cannot achieve orbit, let alone escape it.
The Marines did not respond to the attack properly, especially if they were SpecOps guys. Then did not seek cover, they did not pick their targets, they shot while standing without moving, etc.
Where did Thompson's backup crew (the ones guarding the silo while they were re-targeting the missile) come from?
Vince's character yells a lot and is a real sissy until three quarters through when he is willing to die rather than change the target of the missile.
Seward would not have the authority to order an incursion into a foreign country.
Imagery and screens on the silo computers are not at all like 1969 era displays.
AKA: Terminal Countdown
FiendishDramaturgy13 May 2007
Louis Gossett, Jr., Jamiz Woolvett, Ed O'Ross. People must stop a computer from launching nuclear bombs.
This is like an odd blend of War Games and Navy Seals, though it works! The performances contributed here are all above par for a movie of this type. One does not typically expect realism from these American GI movies, as most often than not, the budget goes towards effects, high dollar action stars, and location shooting than script, props, or good performances. So imagine my surprise when I came across this little underdog.
Awesome action, with a little humor peppered throughout, and some awesome acts, this actioner walks you through some very suspenseful moments, high action sequences, and beautiful settings.
All in all? It is an enjoyable surprise if you like the military-type actioners. Otherwise, there is no reason to go here, as it's all about military action.
It rates a 7.1/10 from...
the Fiend :.
This is like an odd blend of War Games and Navy Seals, though it works! The performances contributed here are all above par for a movie of this type. One does not typically expect realism from these American GI movies, as most often than not, the budget goes towards effects, high dollar action stars, and location shooting than script, props, or good performances. So imagine my surprise when I came across this little underdog.
Awesome action, with a little humor peppered throughout, and some awesome acts, this actioner walks you through some very suspenseful moments, high action sequences, and beautiful settings.
All in all? It is an enjoyable surprise if you like the military-type actioners. Otherwise, there is no reason to go here, as it's all about military action.
It rates a 7.1/10 from...
the Fiend :.
Better than expected!
vanilabean430 March 2005
Louis Gossett Jr. is always watchable. I wasn't expecting this film to be as good and as entertaining as it turned out. I'm not saying it was brilliant, but I didn't feel like I wasted an afternoon. Mostly, I felt Gossett needs to be in better films that are up to his talents. But it was a good effort, none the less. I haven't watched it in a while, but I'm willing to see it again. I did feel the so-called "comedy" was a bit over-arched. And I like humor breaking up some dramatic moments. Done well, (like the way David Lynch does it) is nothing short of genius. But in this film it just seemed a bit silly and made to take up time. And not as character driven as it really should be.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
