AniInterview Sorry, this movie sucks

MoPoshy Absolutely brilliant

Brenda The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Per Johnsen How on earth could the BBC system, that normally delivers high quality, come out with this disaster of a mini-series? There is no synopsis on the IMDb page. Maybe everyone is just too embarrassed to even try writing one. I certainly won't contribute! I did listen carefully to the radio drama from the Norwegian broadcaster NRK, made back in 1969, and that is far more exciting than this TV drama from 2009, even though one should expect the opposite. I haven't found out who has directed or produced this nonsense and I don't even care. And how could such top actors believe in it? They don't seem to be having a good time. The film is so full of logical flaws, bad acting and poor film crafting that it clearly is appropriate for use in film schools as a great example of how not to do it.

Coventry One of my personal favorite movies of all times is the cheap and often clumsy 1962 version of "Day of the Triffids". Admittedly it's a flawed and heavily altered version of the acclaimed story, but it made an everlasting impression on me thanks to the unequaled atmosphere of hopelessness (during the first half of the film) in combination with the original nature of mankind's opponent (during the second half of the film). Most of the praise should undeniably go to the novel's author John Wyndham, of course, but there's also that typical apocalyptic atmosphere that only worked effectively in late fifties/early sixties Sci-Fi movies. I haven't read the book yet, but apparently the 1962 film adaptation modified a large number of elements, which is probably why the BBC produced two much more elaborated and faithful adaptations in the form of TV mini-series. I can't speak for the 1981 version, but this newer and supposedly "technologically advanced" 2009 version only made me regret to have wasted three long & precious hours of my life and sparked the desire to re-watch that charming old movie again.Thinking back about my viewing experience now, only one day ago, I already wonder how they even managed to fill three hours of running time, as there's actually very little happening in "Day of the Triffids". Here, the Triffids (a unique species of carnivorous plants) already exist as genetically engineered organisms and their oil is used as a more than welcome alternative fuel resource. Their hunger for flesh is stilled and supervised in humongous laboratories of the Triffoil Corporation, but when solar flares blind the entire world's population, the ravenous vegetables break free and feast themselves on the poor and helpless blind. Speaking of which, the whole "world gone blind" aspect is scandalously neglected in this version. There are really a lot of people who apparently missed the once-in-a-lifetime light spectacle and there are only a few sequences of (implausible) mass hysteria in the center of London. There's also very little Triffids-horror, for that matter, and it seems that the entire film revolves solely on the dire romance between a Triffid milkman and a BBC journalist and one idiot's quest for world domination. Only one sub plot is worth mentioning, in my humble opinion, and it involves a monastery community run by Vanessa Redgrave that the Triffids don't attempt to invade for some mysterious reason. The final half hour is unendurable and nearly impossible to struggle through, as the main couple adopts two siblings and reunites with the man's father who has thought up a cross-pollinating solution. Fake sentiment and family drama is the absolute last thing I'm looking for in a Sci-Fi flick about murderous plants. As a fan of old-fashioned special effects and the power of suggestion, I also certainly cannot recommend watching "Day of the Triffids" for its lackluster CGI effects and pitiable post-apocalyptic landscapes. Please, explore and re-discover old Sci-Fi cinema … or, in my case, take the time to read a good book.

k-thomas I have read the other reviews about this movie and find them a bit harsh. I agree there are a lot of faults, but you must realize that it is science fiction. In the book the triffids were a scientific experiment and in the original movie, they were spores from a meteorite shower. What i liked most was the makers put an idea of their own and turned it into a movie, such as the fact the triffids were used for their oil. You must remember in H.G.Wells The time Machine, there is no mention of the two world wars as the book was written in the late 19th century, so the movie makers put some ideas of their own. For example in the remake they put a story line about the moon breaking. Getting back to Day Of The Triffids. Yes you had a villain called Torrence. Well that story line has been used in several science fiction stories such as the android in Alien or Dr Smith in Lost In Space. I thought the special effects were very good and considering the amount of trash that is on television these days it was a welcome piece of light entertainment. Also having two very good established actors as Vannessa Redgrave and Brian Cox appearing in it was also a nice touch. My opinion of their performances was they put their usual 100 percent efforts into their relatively small roles, which shows how professional they are and it inspired some of the younger members of the cast. No, i must say it might not go down as a classic and win lots of awards, but i sat and watched the full three hours of this movie and enjoyed it very much. Kevin Thomas.

David Phillips The makers of this two-part sci-fi mini-series, whilst bagging an iconic premise that has yet to be remade to death, must have wished they'd set their stall out to make this so much sooner. Having seen Survivors make a return to our screens and the 28 Days/Weeks later movies already capitalise on the startling imagery of a post-apocalyptic UK, this mini-series seemed to be jumping on that same bandwagon. However, the source novel ensures the originality of the plot devices to get the world into a state where carnivorous plants roam free amongst a population mostly disabled by blindness. The story is given a slightly "topical" twist. Although the original novel does mention the spread of Triffids across the world is due to its oil. This story takes that one step further and has the Triffids universally harvested for their oil as a replacement for fossil fuel. The Triffids are known to be dangerous and are therefore kept under high security conditions. Of course, all this goes to pot once the solar light display, watched by most of the world, renders anyone who watched it blind. Unfortunately, from pretty good beginnings, the show spirals downhill dramatically - almost as quickly as London descends into chaos following the blinding lights. Seemingly within minutes, the whole city is panicking with sighted people, once revealed, chased for help even if forced at gunpoint. This seemed to be an attempt to inject some frights and thrills into a slow part of the show and seemed like a direct rip-off of 28 days later. Amongst the chaos we have sighted people bumping into each other with such regularity, you might think they were blind. Dougray Scott is Bill Mason, the scientist who despite working for the Triffid oil company, spends his time trying to understand how they communicate and live. This obsession is helped by unremarkable flashbacks to the death of his mother at the hands, or should that be leaves, of the Triffids. He was having an eye operation following an earlier Triffid attack (in case you were wondering why he missed the light show). Joely Richardson is quite possibly the most famous radio broadcaster the UK has ever seen, given everyone's ability to recognise her voice (she was in a tube station, although seemingly everyone else in there died). Eddie Izzard (yes, Eddie Izzard!) was asleep beneath an eye mask on a plane. He survives the plane crashing by inflating half a dozen lifejackets in the toilet. He then harbours a rather bizarre desire to rule the UK or possibly the world. Even more bizarre is that people actually bother to follow him as their leader. What should be notable, but are actually pedestrian, cameos are:Ewen Bremner as an animal/plants rights campaigner who breaks into the secure Triffid facility. Jason Priestley as a US air force pilot who I can only think was cast in an effort to get some US network interest. Vanessa Redgrave – crazy nun. Brian Cox as Bill's estranged father – who happens to still be researching Triffids. Unfortunately, despite what on paper appears to be a good cast, the whole story evolves at a snails pace. There are no surprises or moments of tension at all. It's B-movie standard at best. It actually makes Survivors look good. I'd recommend the 80's mini-series or the original 1962 movie with Howard Keel for more thrills. see more at www.writeronthestorm.wordpress.com