Flood (2007)

Although Tony Mitchell's 2007 film, "Flood," begins well and promises to be a serious warning about the dangers of global warming, this low-budget disaster epic soon descends into a maelstrom of stock characters and Irwin-Allen-inspired clichés. A super storm devastates the Scottish town of Wick, and, after weather "experts" initially dismiss any subsequent danger, the powerful storm hugs the eastern coast of Britain and sends a storm surge up the Thames at high tide. The surge renders the Thames barrier ineffective and floods an area the size of Ireland. Unfortunately, the special effects are low-tech, and the made-for-TV film plods on seemingly forever with evident padding and freeze frames that indicate commercial breaks intact.A decent cast of British actors is largely wasted, although they acquit themselves well and manage to retain straight faces and stiff upper lips, while reciting inane dialog and facing preposterous situations. Tom Courtenay plays the scientist whose initial warnings were dismissed; Robert Carlyle plays his estranged son; Jessalyn Gilsig is the requisite strong female and love interest; David Suchet is the deputy minister, who is supposedly in charge while the Prime Minister is in Australia; Joanne Whalley is a commissioner and the requisite worried mother; and Tom Hardy plays a slightly daft underground worker. Initially, the veteran talent and inter-woven stories hold viewer attention, but, eventually, the characters over-stay their welcome, and the unexpected perils fail to elicit either sympathy or suspense; many watery scenes evoke "Titanic" and "The Poseidon Adventure," but without the suspense or technical skill. Although the seemingly inept government leaders express surprise that any Londoners survived the disaster, viewers will be wondering why everyone did not just climb four stories up and ride out the storm; all the elaborate evacuations could have been avoided, not to mention the superfluous histrionics in underground stations, parking garages, flooded streets, stranded boats, and chaotic hospitals. Many crowd scenes look like footage from unrelated events edited into the storyline.At more than three hours, "Flood" is overlong, often ponderous and self important, and lacking in state-of-the-art special effects that might have raised the film's entertainment quotient. Viewers will wade through a dozen implausible situations and one of the most outlandish and coincidental reunions on film before the end credits roll. Only die-hard fans of Tom Courtenay or Robert Carlyle may enjoy this massive disappointment or possibly Tom Hardy complete-ists, who want to see Mad Max before he donned his mask; others should be-forewarned and, unlike the clueless meteorologists in the film, realize that "Flood" is not a perfect storm.

I was wide awake and ready to enjoy a movie when I put this 2 part tele movie on. 20 minutes into it and having trouble staying awake. The repetitive, monotonous muzak, the annoying, pointless twaddle passing for dialogue, and the 50 gazillion camera angles (someone's desperate attempt to add drama??) and the constant use of freeze frames of actors with utterly expressionless faces...as if they needed to slow the pace even more? As if emphasizing how bored the actors are? my only motive for staying awake and watching to the end was to be able to properly pan this digital Stilnox. But I gave up halfway through part 2. So maybe it suddenly got much better after that. From what I saw, apparently the British response to flood disaster is to 1. show no emotion 2. state the obvious repeatedly "there are millions of people" (5x) "we need to get out of here" (12x) "we need to get to higher ground" (21x) 3. run around pointlessly at street level 4. go and make a cup of tea. I gave it a 2 instead of a 1 because it was mildly and briefly interesting to see Nigel Planer (Neil from The Young Ones) in a military role.

I love a good disaster movie and this one had a lot of potential. A massive flood in a major world city, a virtually unique opportunity to demonstrate the Thames Barrier, and decent but not outstanding special effects.Unfortunately the movie gets bogged down in some very contrived, drawn out, and stultifyingly uninteresting romances and family "crises". These add nothing and detract from the pace of the movie. This is initially an annoyance but by the end of the film, the cheesy subplots completely take over and actual action nearly grinds to a halt.Taking about 30 minutes out of the film may have turned his from a D grade drama into a B grade disaster movie. Unfortunately it's a bit late for that.

I was struck by the awful acting and script for this movie. All the characters seem rendered immobile by personal issues - rather like deer in headlights. They dither around whining and moaning about their emotions when decisive actions need to be taken. I found myself yelling at the TV screen trying to wake them up to their situation and DO SOMETHING! The plot line is implausible. Every time there is a key decision to be taken by a lead character, one of the other characters has to bring up all the problems with the obvious decision as though to further render the decision more difficult - it is a tried melodramatic ploy and just wants to make you groan. Clearly the import of the decision is obvious - you don't need to treat the audience as idiots. Overall - there is just too much emotional melodrama in the whole movie.