Seraherrera The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity

Lidia Draper Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.

Ginger Very good movie overall, highly recommended. Most of the negative reviews don't have any merit and are all pollitically based. Give this movie a chance at least, and it might give you a different perspective.

Darin One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

SnoopyStyle The premise of this mini-series is the world is harnessing the oil from a carnivorous slow-moving plant for fuel. They have these plants that blind people before eating them contained in farms. Then comes the solar flares that blinds everybody who stares at them. Apparently everything wants to blind us. There are some survivors who didn't get blinded played by Joely Richardson, Dougray Scott, Jason Priestley, and Eddie Izzard.The premise has two sci-fi creations. That's usually one too many. And that's before Eddie Izzard survive a plane crash by piling a bunch of floatation vests in the washroom. How he walks away is pure make believe. And what about the rest of the world? I'm sure there are whole sections of the world that was sleeping through the event. The problematic setups do pile on. If you're willing to forget all the problems with the setup, then the movie is acceptable apocalyptic TV fare. But that's asking too much for me.

rain-46 Two stars for effort of the cast with such a poor script. Started off OKay with a similar premise as the book, but totally, completely lost-the-plot early on. It turned into a very silly comic-book horror story full of very old and very tired clichés.The book was never meant to be a 'horror story' about man-eating plants, but about us, about humanity, or a commentary on "Human Nature". For example, even when faced with a common enemy and such destruction, 'Man is still his own worst Enemy', is just one of the many themes explored in the book.I will stick with the 1981 TV co-production version, which remains the best adaptation of this classic literary science-fiction novel.

TBJCSKCNRRQTreviews Britain, present day. Oil from a genetically altered walking carnivorous plant saves the world from the harmful use of fossil fuels. We take advantage of them, however, and when the majority of our planet's population is instantly blinded, these Triffids escape and we now have to deal with both them and this sudden(perhaps too much so?) collapse of society. This focuses on Dr. Masen(Scott) who studies them(just as his parents did until his mother died and he lost contact with his father), the reporter Jo(Richardson) and the mysterious and pragmatic Torrence(a nicely menacing Izzard). We see how the military, the religious institutions and regular people react to this turn of events, and how some sighted are willing to give up everything to save those who are not, while others frown upon that. I have not read the book, nor watched another version of this... I hear that it is smarter than this lets it be. This does still comment on things and have compelling themes, such as cynicism, balance with nature and naiveté. It takes off right away and keeps to a good pace, and is consistently interesting and entertaining. The acting and the cast are great. FX are marvelous. The production values are very nice, it's filmed well with effective use of hand-held camera and sharply cut. There is tension and suspense, and the chaos is convincingly rendered. One complaint I hear that I can understand(I get that this is also not the same as the original, but I don't know what the changes are) is that it is too flashy, too Hollywood. British apocalypse fiction is more about the day after than the event, unlike the American ones. And this is listed as action(among other genres), and it really shouldn't be. The decision was undoubtedly because it's easier to sell, and it's unfortunate. Still, if this sounds appealing to you, the time investment of three hours may feel worth it. It does to me. There is a bit of bloody violence and disturbing content in this. I recommend this to those looking for a "end of the world" story that has you thinking somewhat. 7/10

siderite I started with all possible good intentions: it was a BBC production and I am a fan of Doctor Who and even Torchwood; I have seen the original Day of the Triffids and I liked it (even if I thought the premise to be pretty hard to believe) and I was prepared to enjoy it as a holiday release, with not much substance in it.This being said, I really enjoyed the start, even if clearly beset with budget issues. I replaced the set in my mind and went on. The premise was a bit ridiculous, but that was in the book, so OK. Then Joely Richardson entered the scene and it all went bad. I have seen her in other movies and she was a decent actress. So either my memory plays tricks on me or the director messed it up. Badly! All her lines were out of place, her behavior like taken from a blond girl joke and her acting appalling. Eddie Izzard did a decent role as the psychopath trying to take over London, the rest of the stars just played average and mostly pointless roles, roles which could have been played by any other actor.The ending was a chaos of irrational behavior, bad acting, predictability and pointless narration supposed to "open our eyes". The ending really messed things up, both from the standpoint of character development and end feeling.Bottom line: decent effort, but ultimately a failed one.