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 (...
See full summary »
A horror comedy that spoofs the narcissistic film director whose delusional vision of her badly written three page treatment (a direct ripoff of The Blair Witch Project), pages she feels ... See full summary »
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. Written by
When the guy at the lake is setting up a tent and talking to the kids about making breakfast, the kids are fighting over playing with the Game Boy. One of them is already playing it and you hear the sounds but when they show the back view of it there is no game in the system. See more »
Biochemicals or little micro robots (good start) are released in a corporate accident and combine with Alaskan storms to rain havoc on West Coast America, or will the unlikely couple of a reporter (Danika McKellar) caught in the middle of the disaster and a 'weatherman' (Chris Pratt) prevent this catastrophe.
First of all, this is a low budget TV movie so of course it was never going to be a masterpiece.
My reason for asking you may ask. Well, I'm a big fan of Chris Pratt from Parks and Recreation so was interested in some of his earlier work.
Now to the film, the CGI is terrible. It looks like it was made in the 90's and surprisingly it is a 2005 production. Slightly better is the acting, but considering the pit falls of the CGI this is no accolade. Chris Pratt and Danica McKellar are the only mediocre highlights as they showed some chemistry. Other than that it's very to script and ticks off a lot of disaster movie clichés.
There are many better disaster movies out there so stick to them if that's what you're looking for. But one positive aspect is it was better than my first impressions and there are plenty worse out there.
0 of 0 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?