From my favorite movies..

Excellent adaptation.

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Tells a fascinating and unsettling true story, and does so well, without pretending to have all the answers.

SOLAR ATTACK is an extremely dull would-be disaster movie starring everyone's favourite low-rent action hero, Mark Dacascos. In it, solar flares threaten Earth and the usual team of scientists and government types have to team up to discover a way to combat the impending doom.Unfortunately this is dry and stilted beyond belief, with no attempts made at realism. They don't try to engage the viewer's attention once. The actual disaster elements are limited to a couple of scenes of burning fireballs striking a handful of American cities but such moments, despite being entertaining, are few and far between leading to lots of inactivity and dull dialogue.Cast-wise, Dacascos is the dashing hero but unforgivably doesn't even get the opportunity to kick any martial arts ass - he has one fight scene which is over in approximately two seconds! Elsewhere we get a tired-looking Louis Gossett Jr. playing the US President, and lots of to-ing and fro-ing on board a Russian sub during the supposedly thrilling climax, which is about as thrilling as me cutting my toenails. I think they were going for a HUNT FOR RED October style vibe but it falls flat, like the rest of this terrible movie.

Again earth is in severe danger and needs to be rescued - so far, so good. Again the rogue scientist is up against the establishment... well you know the rest. All this could make up a good movie, but as all normal, unlikely disasters have already been put on screen, a new event needed to occur... Put short: I would fire the scientific adviser (if there was any at all) - science fiction usually does not need to care much to obey existing science but when a story is being formed around known scientific processes, errors in logic hurt the educated viewers ears and eyes.Some of the flaws (taken from the German version, maybe some are just translation problems?): No methane has ever burned without oxygen - certainly not in 80 miles altitude with a partial oxygen pressure in the range of that of a normal (not a high) vacuum on earth... No ozone layer ever has saved earth from any coronal mass ejection, nor could it ever do that, nor does it have ANYTHING to do with the effects described in the movie (it "saves" earth from EM UV radiation, nothing else)... No magnetic (->Van Allen) belt is located below the altitude the MAV ever obtained... and so on. The list of obvious factual errors is endless, very disturbing for any sci-fi fan who has an interest in real science, rendering the "PhD" guys in the movie to clowns.

This is a poor remake of Irwin Allens poor disaster movie Voyage To The Bottom Of The Sea. All the same ingredients but done in a totally soulless way. The acting is so wooden it would not look out of place on Gerry Andersons Thunderbirds. I thought that they stopped making rubbish like this back in the 70's. Obviously not! IMDb says I must post at least 10 lines of text in this comment, but its difficult to type anything that is just not negative about this movie.Basically I just cant be bothered its not worth it! so! Rubbish! Rubbish! Rubbish!Waste of time!

Solar Attack is about a large coronal mass ejection (CME) from the sun that threatens to ignite the atmosphere and kill everyone. The president must try and make the right decision and he only has one chance. The scientists and advisors are split, but the president errs on the side of caution and authorizes some dangerous operations. While this film deals with a lesser known extinction level event, the science is still dubious as presented. For the most part, the performances aren't convincing and seems rushed. I think this has more to do with the directing rather than the acting. Dialog is common with little snap. I doubt that even big name actors could have pulled this out of the C+ range. Special effects were nonspecific, general, and unrealistic.