The Void

2001
3.8| 1h33m| R| en| More Info
Released: 01 January 2001 Released
Producted By:
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Physicist Eva Soderstrom discovers greedy industrialist Thomas Abernathy is on the verge of creating an artificial black hole in a laboratory on Earth. It's the same experiment that killed her father years earlier, except bigger. With the help of Dr. Price, Eva tries to stop Abernathy and, possibly, save the planet

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

All Prime Video Movies and TV Shows. Cancel anytime. Watch Now

Trailers & Images

Reviews

Softwing Most undeservingly overhyped movie of all time??
Mjeteconer Just perfect...
Stellead Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful
Pacionsbo Absolutely Fantastic
accountcrapper This is not great. There is some science, some running around, a little romance and it is all very predictibull. The CGI is OK but looks pretty cheap. The sound is serviceable. The lighting and cinematography for the most part consists of bland offices and bright service areas. The acting is good TV acting in the way you do not believe these people are really anything other than actors getting paid. The general idea of the film is not great. It is basically a film speculating on media fears about the Large Hadron Collider at CERN creating a mini black hole and destroying the earth. All the characters are paper thin so it is very difficult to get any real drama out of the story. It was cheapish but I think it could have easily been done a lot better. At one point the disaster of a black hole exploding was explained as being like adding too much soap to the washing machine followed by "We've all done that." I don't know call me a hard reviewer but I think they could have tried harder - Overall I give it a 4.
vfrickey The key to a successful screenplay is creating willing suspension of disbelief. When a screenplay refers to the US Atomic Energy Commission (a government agency which was disestablished over 30 years ago when the US Department of Energy was created) as though it were still with us, that destroys willing suspension of disbelief.So does the movie's main premise that the bad guys are making black holes by colliding protons and anti-protons at high speed "to turn energy into matter." Collide matter into antimatter and you get an annihilation reaction, and the collective mass of the matter and antimatter becomes energy (apart from the possible creation of some neutrinos, possibly some pair-production events). Just the opposite of what the movie is telling us. (And the movie's premise isn't even as plausible as the far-fetched anxiety over the CERN Large Hadron Collider.)This is high school physics information we're talking about here! The writers could have taken an undergraduate physics student out for pizza and gotten the true facts for the price of the meal - or just used their good friend Google.Worse, the dialogue is predictable and the movie just creeps along in that made-for-TV-hack science fiction way. The characters are neither memorable nor very sympathetic. Malcolm McDowell, playing the bad guy-in-chief, is a BORING bad guy with none of the intensity he brought to every other film of his I've seen. Adrian Paul (of The Highlander TV series and other cheap SF movies, Dead Men Can't Dance, among others) is a self-parody as a physicist, complete with a suit made from car seat- cover fabric and glasses swiped from the set of Revenge of the Nerds. Amanda Tapping (Stargate SG-1) is hemmed in by a horrible script in her role as the helpless heroine whose nuclear physicist dad dies, bringing her into danger. They went all the way back to the 1950s for that hackneyed plot device, the "murdered good scientist's vulnerable daughter who must be rescued by the male lead". And the trip wasn't worth it. They didn't even play it for laughs.The producers did demonstrate the power of a dead script to subdue every bit of acting ability in the cast of a film. Adrian Paul has had a run of bad luck in this regard - first "Dead Men Can't Dance," then this. I hope some better scripts come his way, because he was very good in the Highlander television series.Avoid this movie as you would a rabid dog. Walk across the street from it when you see it. Find something else to do besides watch it. It's a worthy bookend to that other Adrian Paul-starring turkey, "Dead Men Can't Dance." They need to be used to keep uneven tables from wobbling at the video store, or their DVDs recycled as targets at a skeet range - maybe used as part of a mobile in a kindergarten art class. Just don't play the things.
xsgerry This film addresses a real concern of sorts, questions which were brought up about the Heavy Relatavistic Ion Collider which used a particle accellerator to smash gold atoms together in order to study exotic quarks. It was theorized that only a one in a billion trillion squillion chance of creating a particle-sized singularity (infinite volume in zero mass) that creates black holes, gravitational wells and event horizons. So much for media scares. Why actually watched 10 minutes of the film was because I like Amanda Tapping. I then watched another ten minutes because all of a sudden she was apparently geting tastefully nude. After another ten minutes I turned off again. I think it may have been a body double, but who cares. Amanda Tapping is gorgeous, no matter whose breasts were on the screen. The film? Ah. Well, if it was made with a big budget and heavyweight hollywood actors, say, Harrison Ford and Susan Sarandon, it would be considered worthy, though provoking material. A shame a proper, real science story has been let down by poor budgeting, and the fact that Amanda Tapping is marvellous, but not well known enough for film work. On the other hand, nice breasts.
Rachel Cobleigh A friend of mine picked this up on a whim in the bargain box at a local video store, upon seeing the two stars' names together. We decided to watch it and skewer it, keeping expectations with the IMDb rating of (at the time) 3.7 that it had. Instead, we were pleasantly surprised at the a) consistent and correct science mentionedb) evident chemistry between the two leadsc) several bits of fun dialog (both actors have a talent for understated comedy)d) redemption of the arch-villians at the end (unexpected!)e) the refreshing lack of the scientists-turned-superheroes motif usually found in these moviesf) passable SFXg) the sexual tension despite the fact that it was never unresolvedIt's not a stunner of a movie, by any means, but for a fun and refreshingly intelligent little diversion, it's definitely worth watching. I thought the second sex scene was unnecessary to the plot or the characterizations, but that was my only quibble. Otherwise, settle in and have a good time watching two fun actors from two different and strong sci-fi/fantasy shows play together in a new universe. Very enjoyable! :)