The movie opens with a faulty nanotechnology experiment that results in a massive, deadly explosion. The company's CEO manages to sidestep blame by framing a meddling young reporter (Katherine), who now holds the only surviving evidence needed to expose the truth. All the while, the dangerous nanoparticles - having escaped from the explosion into the stratosphere - threaten to destroy nearby cities with wildly destructive weather patterns. Among the chaos of the storms, and on the run from the authorities, Katherine must - with the help of a young scientist - get the evidence to the government to enlist their help before it's too late…and the deadly disaster turns worldwide. With one exception (the movie "Lost Voyage"), the Unified Film Organization film company has not exactly been churning out quality B films. Neither has the film division of the Sci-Fi network. "Path Of Destruction" was made both by UFO and the Sci-Fi network! So my expectations weren't exactly high when I sat down to watch it.<br/><br/>Actually, it was a bit better than I expected. The special effects were above average, for one thing. True, there are some shoddy CGI shots, but there are also some that are pretty impressive for a low budget. Some non-CGI effects are also pretty good, such as depiciting the bad weather and the destruction it causes.<br/><br/>The movie also starts off in an intriguing way… but soon things collapse due to a poorly written script. Among other implausible things, the heroine never goes to the press with the information she has on CD, nor gives it to the military later on. The script has clichéd characters like hard-to-convince authority figures, sneaky corporate types. It also has a character who is killed but miraculously turns up alive later.<br/><br/>Nothing new here, either script-wise or film company quality. "Path of Destruction" could have been a first rate suspense disaster movie. Too bad, the SciFi channel threw this one away with cheap theatrics and ludicrous plotting.<br/><br/>From her IMDb biography, it is clear Danica McKellar's a genius mathematician. Why not have Danica play the scientist and Chris Pratt play the crusading reporter? Then, at least, including her in the Icarus flight crew would have made sense (What is Icarus? Ah, that requires spoilers).<br/><br/>WARNING: SPOILERS Icarus is a prototype EMP-hardened, stealth heavy bomber. Actually, all military aircraft, particularly the stealth variety, are EMP-hardened; but, then we wouldn't have a story, would we? Actually, we would, but not the kind to which the junk food addicted audience of the SciFi channel is usually accustomed. Deleting a few minutes of mindless chase footage would have allowed Danica to dazzle us with her brilliance as she calculated and presented data of the precise trajectory for which the Icarus to deliver the EMP device. This would have also explained why the Titan missile could not have been modified to deliver such a warhead.<br/><br/>END OF SPOILERS Instead, most of the two hours consisted of trite, unbelievable situations (Just what is Danica doing on that oil rig?), stock characters, tired exposition, and unconvincing perils. Oh well, at least we get to see Danica bare midriff, in tight jeans and flashing a little cleavage. All we lost is the chance to witness a thought provoking movie about a very serious (and, potentially, very dangerous) subject.<br/><br/>I give "Path of Destruction" a "4".
Yasmglyn replied
295 weeks ago