Who payed the critics

Very well executed

Truly Dreadful Film

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

Okay, okay...I know my summary says it all. Another Sci Fi Channel "original." Well, wait just a minute folks; this one actually seems to have a grain of originality.I'm afraid the nanotechnology concept is where it ends, though. Bad acting. Horrible CGI. Ridiculous plot twists. Starring Winnie and directed by Flounder.But this one is so horribly bad, folks, that it's entertaining. We're not talking PLAN 9 bad, but pretty close. Another reviewer indicated that this may have been intentional, but I'm not buying it. For those of you that enjoy this kind of thing, buy some beer, turn off your mind, relax and float down stream.

I thought this movie was a hoot. Seriously. I couldn't stop watching it. I'm not sure if it was because I wanted to hear someone say "nanobots" again, or if it was to see Danica McKellar's bare mid-drift and cleavage, who by the way, has seriously grown up since her "Wonder Years" days. (Not that anyone who saw her July spread in "Stuff" couldn't attest to that already!) I thought that she and Stephen Furst were great. She provided one of the only "ties to realism" with a very real and compelling performance, and Stephen Furst provided, you guessed it, comic relief. He hasn't lost his touch since "Animal House." It's a fun movie that thankfully doesn't take itself too seriously, and I recommend it- I had a great time.

Poor acting, mediocre CGI and technical ignorance abound in this time filler. Some of the plot points don't hold up to even the barest scrutiny. They draft a bimbo reporter to serve as bombardier when they have an entire base of Air Force personnel to pick from? They push for an EMP bomb over a nuclear blast (the biggest EMP bomb there is, BTW) because radiation is too non-directional like shotgun pellets? Dental braces attract lightning? Come on. And why are molecular disassemblers causing storms and hail anyway? Even the bad acting and video game quality CGI could be tolerated with a little technical competence. The underlying concept is OK but the execution is pretty bad. Trying to guess which eastern European country is substituting for Alaska (and the winner is...... Bulgaria!) was fun. And David Keith and Stephen Furst chew the scenery in amusing if one-note performances. Any time you can completely and totally describe a character with two words, like horny yokel or corporate greedhead, you're in trouble.I've watched worse, though. And can't David Keith get any better roles than these second rate Sci-fi channel crapfests? Every month he's in at least one (two this month) of these celluloid WMD's. He used to be somebody. Maybe he figured, "Hell, I'm already in Bulgaria filming Epoch 2, I'll just knock another one off while I'm over here". Maybe the beer's cheap. Who knows.

"Path of Destruction" seems to gently mock sci-fi horror movies, although it took nearly an hour of the movie for me to discover this. The characters are generally almost caricatures: the geeky scientist who can't talk to women with his boozing, unreliable (except when it comes to danger) assistant; the Army personnel not listening to the experts but coming through in the end; the wanna-be reporter who (somehow) ends up as both a suspect (framed, of course) and as a hard-hitting network reporter.The special effects were mediocre, apart from the last shot and line of the Colonel(?), and the writers/directors certainly glossed over distances and how access (for instance, Seattle's Space Needle is not downtown, and I doubt that a civilian could just walk into a tent holding the dead with no one questioning her). Further, finding a ride out of the chaos of destruction might not be so easy.The many deaths and destruction are also glossed over—mentioned but not labored over (except for the death of the protagonist's friend). And the two protagonists are remarkably lucky, despite being in danger frequently.Still, it's a fun film, if only to see Chris Pratt play the opposite of his character on "Everwood"!