Home > Science Fiction >

Zodiac

AD:This title is currently not available on Prime Video
Free Trial
View All Sources

Zodiac (2014)

August. 16,2014
|
3.3
|
NR
| Science Fiction TV Movie
AD:This title is currently not available on Prime Video
Free Trial
View All Sources

Global disasters begin to occur after archaeologists unearth a 2,000-year-old astrology artifact. A rogue scientist is the key to deciphering the artifact to avert the end of the world.

...

Watch Trailer

Free Trial Channels

AD
Show More

Cast

Similar titles

Reviews

Redwarmin
2014/08/16

This movie is the proof that the world is becoming a sick and dumb place

More
SanEat
2014/08/17

A film with more than the usual spoiler issues. Talking about it in any detail feels akin to handing you a gift-wrapped present and saying, "I hope you like it -- It's a thriller about a diabolical secret experiment."

More
pointyfilippa
2014/08/18

The movie runs out of plot and jokes well before the end of a two-hour running time, long for a light comedy.

More
Yazmin
2014/08/19

Close shines in drama with strong language, adult themes.

More
clarkmick33
2014/08/20

Watched this movie while on my exercise bike and I am not sure what was more painful - my burning thighs or my burning eyes. Signs of why it should be called DISASTER! - Signs of the coming poo storm 1. The whole movie looks like it was shot in rural Canada - you want me to believe you are in Peru try not have Canadian Pine trees in the scene behind you. 2. The graphics were rendered by Community College students. 3.The actors and actresses all play typical one dimensional characters. Teenage soon - aggressive hates his Dad, Dad loves his son but can't communicate to him. 4. Roping in Christopher Lioyd to play none other than a scientist - and a drunk one at that! I reckon he was really drunk for the roll once he realized what a crap movie he was on. Oh the things we do to pay the bills dear Christoper.5. Plot holes filled with poo 6. The so called Dept of Defense unit act as though they are managing an order at McDonalds. 7. Car out runs a tsunami!!!!! 8 The Dept of Defense leader goes in ALONE!? in the final showdown and tells the heli piolt to f off like he is some badass then he proceeds to fight like a school kid. While the main lead scientist who is suppose to be a big nerd seems to fight like he was a pro wrestler when the time comes for it. 9. Most "events" involve using giant fans to blow lots of dirt around - waiting for when poo would hit the fan. Tornado can suck up a woman but cant lift a truck or anything around them.. 10. Syfy channel funding.I can see the ambition but its better to pool some more money to make a better movie (please spend more money on FX) than produce little poo storms :-)There is a scene where they threw in a saying from Back to the Future "Great Scott" Dr Emmitt Brown says this on the classic "Back to the Future"I think the actors all knew this was one big joke of a movie and where to busy trying to impress Christopher Lloyd than worry about the poo storm of a movie they were on.

More
TheLittleSongbird
2014/08/21

Considering that he is the most well-known and most experienced actor in the cast by some distance you'd think he would be. Lloyd really gives his all and the eccentric kind of character is one that would have suited him perfectly. Unfortunately Lloyd's screen time is far too limited to save the movie and while he is fun in places- more than his trashy material deserved- he badly over-compensates in others, which really sticks out like a sore thumb. The best performance In Zodiac: Signs of the Apocalypse actually comes from Joel Gretsch, he is a commanding lead and certainly doesn't look at any time look like he's confused or in pain. And Ben Cotton is pretty endearing and makes a real effort to make Marty likable; in fact Marty is like the bright spot when it comes to the characters. Unlike the rest of the cast they actually try to act.That's very much it for things that redeemed Zodiac: Signs of the Apocalypse a little. Gretsch and Cotton are good and Lloyd tries but the movie on the whole is very badly acted- Emily Holmes attempts at being frightened or emotional came over as forced, Andrea Brooks is so annoying to the extent you want to reach into the TV and slap her and Aaron Douglas doesn't even try to act as the very stereotypical and painfully forgettable villain. Everybody else looked stiff and bored. The cardboard cut-outs passing for characters are as thin as paper, with only Marty showing glimpses of colour, and the actors are further disadvantaged by a clunky script, with a number of lines so cheesy that it makes the cheesiest cheeseburger seem tasteless, that gives off the sense of parody without the humour(got a laugh out of Sophie's line about her homework but that was not in a good way). As well as a story that is filled to the brim with so many clichés(with nothing fresh done with them, characters and situations) that the intense predictability severely dilutes the suspense and fun, also the further the movie wears on the sillier and more tedious it gets.Production values are not much better at all, in fact one of the worst things here was the special effects which were half-baked at best and laughably amateurish at worst, the disaster scenes are ruined by how cheap they look and how much unintentional humour they cause. It was abundantly clear that more effort went into the making of the promising DVD cover than to the special effects, the DVD cover at least showed some professionalism whereas the effects were borderline hack-job. The colourless and one-dimensional camera work and lacking-in-crispness editing don't fare quite as badly but they don't improve things either, while the whole movie whether in the un-thrilling disaster scenes or the heavy-handed drama suffered from some rather characterless under-directing. The sound effects have a booming sensation but not in a way that thrills, in fact some of it's headache-inducing, while the score is over-bearingly melodramatic and monotonous. Overall, Zodiac: Signs of the Apocalypse is nowhere near the worst SyFy has done, but aside from two performances and the efforts from Lloyd it just doesn't work. 3/10 Bethany Cox

More
Vampirekiwi25
2014/08/22

The whole plot to this movie was well thought out and rather interesting, even though it was predictable... In short the story was intriguing but the graphics were disappointing. I have seen older movies with better graphics, if they had just spent more time on making it a bit more realistic it would have been more enjoyable. Most of the effects looked plastic. But for the acting, it was impressive for a homemade movie, especially since they didn't use the most attractive actors for main characters. Gives it a bit more of a realistic view cause to me, movies like that make it seem like only the perfect people get to be the main characters. In short: Story was wonderful. Acting was good. And the graphics were disappointing.

More
panther_husky
2014/08/23

I give credit to the director for trying but don't expect much. The storyline is like any other disaster movie, only difference is how the disasters come about. The special effects are terrible and you can see clearly they are computerized and transfered - hardly believable. Some of the characters got under your skin, and Christopher LLoyd - maybe it 's his age but a disappointment from his days in Back To The Future. The actors did do a nice job carrying the movie but the special effects just didn't seem to help it - in fact it made you cringe at the way some of the effects appeared. A made for TV film for a rainy Sunday afternoon.

More