Countdown: The Sky's on Fire
Countdown: The Sky's on Fire
PG | 15 July 1999 (USA)
Countdown: The Sky's on Fire Trailers

The ozone is depleted and as a result of this all sorts things are happening like lethal insects flying around. A scientist tries to warn everybody about this but no one seems to believe him. When his predictions come true they now turn to him for help.

Reviews
GamerTab That was an excellent one.
Organnall Too much about the plot just didn't add up, the writing was bad, some of the scenes were cringey and awkward,
Aubrey Hackett While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.
Zandra 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.
jurgen200 I'm one of those people who really enjoy schlocky B-movies (I thought Category 6 was a good film) but this is an insult.For a start, the movie grinds to a halt in the middle and features 10 minutes of nonstop riot footage.An infinite number of interesting subplots and ideas are thrown out, and it really feels like the production ran out of money at the end! Watch it, as soon as the jet takes off, the money runs out.The plot is absurd, and not good-absurd either. It's BAD-absurd!! The characters make bad decisions just to build some suspense, for example: if your house is overrun by bugs, lock yourself in the closet and wait in there for the bugs to come in and bite you. The same shot of the sun is repeated at least 15 times, and "deadly atmospheric firestorms" are little more than (over)actors writhing in bright light.
donald_rose Provided your belief is suspended about 60,000 feet above sea level (in-joke) this is a brainless, harmless way to spend 90 minutes. It isn't great science so don't expect too much.Some of the actors are really quite good and it is fun to see them out of their normal milieu. Bradley Whitford is a smooth, skilled, understated actor with just enough quirks to make him always interesting. John Billingsley is always delightful although it would be nice to see him stretch outside his typecast and nearly trademarked nerdiness.Corbett is quite competent but not in Billingsley's or Whitford's class. The other leads are jobbing actors, good enough, but without the high skill level to make something interesting from their cardboard characters.Keep your belief well suspended and don't be too critical of the science and this is a way to spend 90 minutes of a boring, rainy day.Anyway Billingsley's always fun to watch with his weird mannerisms.
alarchdu I watched this film by accident (a slow Monday afternoon is my excuse). Overall, it doesn't make even B-grade. I've never condemned a film because it is cliched, but in this case I will make an exception.My only question is: did the producers run out of film and shoot the last third on video? That is the only reason I can think of for the change in film quality.
Sycotron Just saw this movie which ABC showed last night. I liked this better than I liked another recent TV-movie about the earth caving in beneath New Orleans. Both are dopey but this one was a lot of fun. Preposterous? Sure but that is the kick in all of these movies. Everything keeps moving and we see the usual scenes of bureaucratic incompetence, animal panic, people panic and various and sundry calamities. All in all a good entry in the TV-movie disaster genre.