Category 7: The End of the World (TV Movie 2005) Poster

User Reviews

Add a Review
75 ReviewsOrdered By: Helpfulness
1/10
Yes, indeed...I smell an EMMY!!!
S W7 November 2005
Ooooooook - I read every review posted here, and I gotta tell ya, almost all are WAY off the mark. For one thing, this movie was BRILLIANT. How many other film makers have the GUTS to deliver, with gusto, a throw-back-to-the-80's-made-for-TeeVee-movie, complete with a plot and hundreds of sub-plots so improbable, you don't have to suspend your disbelief, you have to brutally murder it? What great fun! The special F/X? You mean like the PLEASE-DON'T-NOTICE-THE-STORY-LINE shots of waves destroying the Statue of Liberty, for instance? Let me just say, that without that standard-stock, must-include destruction of Lady Liberty, the film makers would have been crucified for not including it. If you're going to wipe out New York, that statue has to be one of the first things to go. Otherwise, you lose credibility on an oh, say Category 9.33 scale...

James Brolin must have been THRILLED to get that part...and electrocuting him, the voice of all things unholy about preachers, was also a default requirement. If you're gonna do a movie about natural disaster, Christians have GOT to die, and they must deserve to.

Tell you what I LOVED about the script - well - a couple of things.... First, our hero's wife seems REALLY OBSESSED over hubby having an affair....the world may be ending, Buffalo NY may be in the midst of becoming God's personal pick-up-sticks playground, but baby, we are going to talk about you and HER right now!!! And WOW - you had to LOVE the whole kidnapping angle as the families were whisked away from their Magical Mystical Tour of a collapsing NYC. Again, if you don't wedge in some utterly impossible, completely off-the-wall sub-plot like a well-organized, highly efficient kidnapping of CHILDREN that took less than a couple of hours to actually plan and pull off, you risk losing your SAG card. KUDOS!!!

***NOTE***I've sat in on a few script writing sessions for series television, and in defense of writers, I can tell you they more often than not are forced to write scripts like this one, despite their protests. So give the PRODUCERS (and the network)the credit here - it's well-earned, I'm sure.

The choppy camera work, the slow motion, all of it was in PERFECT HARMONY with the quality of work expected for this endeavor. The film crew will feel like it's virtually raining Emmy's...they, in turn, can thank the EDITORS for this gift, who can in turn thank the DIRECTOR, who like as not is right now sitting in his 7th grade drama class, wondering where it all went so wrong....

Rockets, a fighter jet with an octogenarian at the controls, and a hero who works in his garage with a bunch of high school drop outs to save us from THE END OF THE WORLD all made this a delightful film. For the finale (which I will TIVO so I can watch it over and over), I am going to wear my double knit polyester disco clothes, mute the sound, and spin up some Bee Gees for my own musical score.

Then, mercifully, about the time the requisite speech from someone begins about the ills of SUV's, my alarm will go off, and I'll awaken to the sound of thunder....
73 out of 95 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
I see cows...........
leorican13 November 2005
OK sorry wrong movie......that was "Twister"....and this movie had more than its share...Global warming has sprouted global storms of gigantic proportions and its FEMA to the rescue with the help of a few other folks as the storms head for Washington. Gina Gershon leads the cast that includes Shannon Doherty and Randy Quaid reprising his role from "Category 6" in which his "Tommy Tornado" character was swept away in a twister....and yes he lived to tell the tale...I gotta say the first half of this movie was a loud, shaky fast cut editing mish mash that left me with a headache. Filmmakers can you please leave the "NYPD Blue" shaky camera style alone already!!!!That is the most annoying style of film making and I guess they felt it was just right for this disaster flick but it just became a distraction for me. Now what surprised me, aside from the fact that I actually watched the second half, is that the second half actually entertained me with its storms of doom in almost every frame and our heroes running about in the mix of it all. Another pleasing factor was Andrea Lui who I suspect could be Lucy Lui's little sister who gives us a little bit of her take on "Charlies Angels" as she rescues her boy toy from the perils of the storm. That had to be a wink from the makers. All in all the 2nd half was better for me than the first and thats not saying too much. Geez if you ain't gotta nothing better to do then just sit back and watch the world end...well kinda, sorta, and don't expect too much...
17 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
Obviously no hurricane experience
vlee-314 November 2005
Having suffered through four hours (if you count commercials) of one of the most ambitious, yet disappointing disaster movies of recent times, I have but one observation to make: It is obvious that none of the writers, directors, or producers have ever experienced a real hurricane. I was okay with the tornado mega-storm stuff, even though that was all a stretch, but the "Category Seven" event produced by the combination of the super cell and Hurricane Eduardo (or whatever) was laughable, to say the least. Honestly, you would think that in a year when we have seen the devastation of Katrina, Rita, and Wilma, the writers would have at least picked up some real-world hurricane facts by watching the Weather Channel! First, as racerx70 pointed out in a previous posting, they couldn't even get something as simple as the wind speeds right. They said the hurricane had winds of 150mph, which is definitely a Cetrgory 4, albeit a strong one. A "Category 7," however, even if that rating existed, would probably have sustained winds in the 200mph range, and no one would be able to move around DURING THE STORM like those people did. Secondly, where was the rain? Other than what looked like someone driving through a car wash as the hurricane was approaching, the streets were dry in all the subsequent shots. A "Category 7" storm composed entirely of dry air? (Maybe the winds were so strong the rain evaporated!) Third point: How about all the untaped, unboarded, unshuttered glass windows that survived a "Category 7" hurricane without so much as a crack? I loved that part! There were so many shots of the Senator in his office during the height of the storm with the intact, uncovered windows behind him, not to mention all the ones in the laboratory that were equally unprotected and unscathed. (I guess it was a UN-directional hurricane.) The last point that convinces me the writers have no idea of what goes on in a hurricane: The heroes were concerned about talking the powers-that-be to shut off the electricity in DC to rob the storm of fuel. Like they had a choice!!! Do you people (writers, producers) have any idea of what "150 mph" winds do to utility poles, lines, trees, etc., and how quickly power is one of the first things to go when a hurricane hits? Imagine what winds gusts in excess of 200 mph would do? Bottom line: I enjoy a good disaster flick, even ones as far-fetched as this one (and The Day After Tomorrow), and I know something like this requires a great deal of imagination and creativity, but at least do a little research before selling something this big to a major network to broadcast over two nights! (I wonder what the people in Florida and along the Gulf Coast thought of this, assuming that they have power from the last hurricane.)
17 out of 21 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
5/10
"We're not talking Category 6.... we're talking Category 7!"
racerx707 November 2005
Dialog such as this turns what CBS was hoping to be a grand spectacle of disaster into a comedy of disastrous proportions. This is filled with numerous technical errors that speaking as a weather hobbiest, can give non-informed people the wrong impression of the true power of nature. Take for example a TV weatherman reporting a "Category 5 Hurricane with gusts up to 150MPH". 150 MPH windspeed is considered to be Category 4 strength on the Saffir-Simpson hurricane scale and gusts of 150 MPH would indicate sustained winds of around 135 MPH. Category 5 winds start at 156 MPH (sustained) and go up from there. Hurricane Wilma, for example, had sustained winds of 175 MPH with gusts over 200. FYI, there is NO Category 6 or F6 classifications for storms for good reason. 5 is considered top of the scale, period. But CBS (or any of Big Media) won't let the facts get in the way of some good sensationalism. The rest of the story consists of standard disaster film clichés. I'll likely watch the conclusion, as this is like watching a train wreck... you just can't turn away. Rated 5 out of 10 for the unintentional laughs and for Randy Quaid (Cousin Eddie the "twister chaser") :-)
25 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Spend your time better - go watch some paint dry...
skard426 November 2005
Just terrible. A total waste of time. There were a surprising number of actors and actresses that I had previously thought were at least half-way decent, but for each of them, this is clearly their worst performance. Sadly, though, as bad as the acting was, it was the best thing this "movie" had going for it. This is doubly bad, as I am pretty sure the producers were banking on special effects to save the movie. But they were very disappointing, despite being the obvious focus of the film. In addition to their technical flaws, they fall into the recent trap of thinking that every big disaster scene must have some famous landmark in it. One or two can give you a sense of setting, constantly using landmarks gets really annoying. Worse, the special effects were poorly used, distracting one from the story, instead of adding to it. Which might have bothered me if the story wasn't so weak. The plot had holes you could drive a Mack truck through. And the worst part of the whole thing was the stupid lines they had. One prime example was one where a meteorologist was saying that he used to be able to count on certain things, like the fact that anything above a Category 5 storm was impossible. Well duh! The category 6 and 7 hurricanes that he talks about are impossible. You don't even have to know a thing about science beyond what the classifications are to know that. Category 5 hurricanes or tropical storms are anything with wind speeds above 155 mph. So no matter how strong the storm, it's still only Category 5 by definition. This is but one example of the bad dialog in the film. It's also an example of the science in the movie that is as bad as "science" in the presidential reports on global warming that this movie seems to be trying to satirize. An easy target, but it manages to fail miserably. Almost makes you wonder if they have the opposite agenda...
27 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
A perfect disaster...of a movie
TheScience_Geek7 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
WOW. That was, without a doubt, the worst movie I have ever seen. The plot line follows our heroine, the (obviously democratic) new single, stay-at-home supermom who can deal with anything and a meteorologist who was apparently fired because the white house didn't like the implications of a report he wrote, etc. The movie was, as an amateur scientist, truly appalling from a factual point of view. Blatant factual errors noted:

-During a conversation in Washington D.C., a satellite photo in the background shows a Hurricane (probably 2004's Isabel) hitting North Carolina and moving north almost over them...but it's sunny outside.

-Radar imagery of the killer storm is really of a joe-average cold front.

-The Arc de Triomphe in Paris, which is entirely stone, shot out sparks when hit by a tornado.

-A fairground haunted house face continues cackling even without power and thrown through a window.

-Category 6 tornadoes...Tornadoes are not rated by categories.

-They fly into the superstorm with a Navy spy plane which barely seats 2, and apparently modify it to pick up weather information in a day.

-A mobile home snaps clean in half when it hits a wooden telephone pole, just because our heroes are behind it

-Coordinates mentioned for two people "30 miles south of Detroit" were in New York State.

-After mentioning a new superstorm developing in the Caribbean, marks are made on a map over the Bahamas (which are not in the Caribbean)

-"This is a definite Category 5 storm - winds have got to be gusting 150mph" - Category 5 hurricanes are 156 mph and up, and gusts don't count.

-Footage of a Category 5 hurricane hitting Florida was stock of the Category 2 (at the time) Hurricane Rita hitting the Florida Keys.

-"Chunks of Mesosphere" are supposedly falling from the upper atmosphere. Not only is this completely impossible, but they manage to also forget the two layers of atmosphere in the way.

-Category 7/8 storms are mentioned, the scale only goes up to five.

The story could easily be called "How all the evil republicans in the white house and churches are killing us all". The Kyoto treaty is mentioned, and the evil Chief of Staff remarkably resembles Cheney.

I'll watch next week just to laugh at it. Unless you desire to laugh at pathetic disaster movies, though, find better uses for two hours of your time.
12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Totally waste of time
nanyucao13 November 2005
It is so unrealistic that it looks like a series of jokes. People are running around all the time when the wind is blowing. Hijackers care more about the children's safety then themselves. When they finally decided to kill them all, they hold their shots until good man shot them dead. Hurricane destroys everything but that shabby weather computer lab. Weather chase man using a SONY camera, shoot the hurricane from a big building's parking lot. But the most funny one, all computers black screened, because of the INTERNET connection is lost. I cannot hold my tears when I am laughing. Also the music makes me dizzy.
30 out of 46 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
This was really, really bad
moysant26 February 2006
I watched this on TV last night - yes the whole mini series was shown in one block on Australian TV. The script was like ten different scripts thrown together (from the high winds perhaps?), and there were too many special effect disasters in the first 10 minutes, so there were no suspense built up over the next 3 hours. Jerky and hectic camera work and slow-mo in the middle of dialogue scenes does not create energy and excitement guys. It lacked any bridges between scenes, with people in Paris one second and then Washington DC the next. How many days/months/years was this set over? The lighting and makeup made every female character looked like she had acne and pre-mature aging, but surprisingly the males looked young and clear skinned. In fact it had a music video feel to it - but I don't want to watch a music video for more than 5 minutes. And some scenes were low budget copies of The Day After Tomorrow.

The only reason I wouldn't give this boring and nonsensical mish-mash 0/10 is that it had Cameron Daddo (an Australia ex-TV host) and Shannen Doherty in it. And which ever actor played the male preacher was a hoot. Oh, and it is funny to here the FEMA director outline how the department is the only one to save the day (made pre-Katrina).

Without spoiling it for you if you do end up watching it - the way they 'resolve' the climate change disaster that is threatening to destroy civilisation is just lamo.

2/10
15 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Avoid serious watching at all costs
mwoodfin16 November 2005
This is just another diatribe of global warming theories, as I expected. Filled with a number of television or washed up actors, this terrible script and equally horrible special effects is to be avoided. I especially laugh when the TV preacher (James Brolin) spouts Biblical principals as: "God helps those that help themselves" which is no where in the Bible or "There is nothing to fear but fear itself" which is Franklin D Roosevelt. I don't remember FDR being a part of the Gospels. There is a slight attempt to show lack of professional ethics with the media, however it is so far fetched that it cannot be taken seriously. The creators cannot seem to stay away from past success stories in movies by allowing, or requiring, Randy Quaid to recreate the same character he played in Independence Day and irritate us all over again. Chalk this one up for another quickly assembled movie, on the heals of a normal yet terrible hurricane cycle, that insults our intelligence or at the very least wastes our time.
25 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Worst "movie" I'v seen yet
Jimbo19848 November 2005
This is by far the most awful made for TV movie I have ever seen. I will put this under the comedy category in my books. I laughed more at this movie than I took anything seriously. As corny as movies get, this one takes the cake. It is a mockery of science in every possible way, and makes the general government look like a bunch of idiots. (no pun intended) - The advertisements in this movie are more noticeable than the plot itself. I have seen SO many movies in my lifetime, and this is honestly the stupidest, most boring, and scientifically disgraceful movie I have ever seen. I knew this was going to be a horrid movie just by the title. "Category 7, The End Of The World" What in god's name is a category 7, and when was this made official? I know of Category 5 hurricanes and F5 Tornadoes, but making up new categories in the name of a terrible movie... thats just wrong.
16 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
4/10
Disaster Porn
phaedrav6 November 2005
"Category 6" was arguably the worst TV mini-series I ever forced myself to watch. "Category 7" is a worthy successor. It crassly capitalizes on recent tragedies. The acting is up to the level of the writing.

"Category 7" avoids being boring. There's some good camera work. The destruction of life and property is good clean fun for the whole family.

Does it have a message? No. Is it worth watching? Not unless you're really hard up. If you're watching the news some evening and real life leaves you wanting more mayhem without the sense of loss or suffering, this could be just what you're looking for.

It does remind me what I'd love to see some day is a screen adaptation of John Barnes "Mother of Storms".
19 out of 36 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
oh my God
naeandalan7 November 2005
From the director who brought you "Atomic Train", "A Horse for Danny", "Kenny Rogers as The Gambler"," Kenny Rogers as The Gambler: the Adventure Continues"," Kenny Rogers as The Gambler, Part III The Legend Continues"( my prediction-this director and Kenny Rogers get along swimmingly) comes "Category Seven. (not to be confused with "The magnificent Seven). Trust me folks there is nothing magnificent about this piece of dog crap. Actually I could only stomach about fifteen minutes of it so maybe I'm being a little rough on it. It started out with some sort of storm and a lot of shaky camera work. ( It surpassed "The Blair Witch Project" on the shaky meter). Then followed by shakier acting and a movie that appeared to me to be going back and forth between color and black and white every two seconds. I guess the "director" or "producer" may have wanted the cool "Sin City" look. Whatever.
10 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
5/10
Category 7 -- Laugh out loud funny!
Benee14 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Category 7 -- The End of the World is one of the best comedies I have seen in quite some time. I had to rewind my TiVo several times to view the hilarity again and again. After I dried my tears, I was left wondering if it was CBS's intention to make people laugh. Some of the scenes were outrageously far-fetched and completely defied the laws of physics. Scenes with cinder blocks breaking over people's heads, people instinctively knowing where to find loved ones without being given information or directions, and tornadoes selectively picking people out of buildings to suck them off into space was almost like watching a Three Stooges episode. Scenes were also disjointed and made no sense. For instance, Randy Quaid's character was in traction in the beginning of the movie, with screws in his skull, a broken neck, two broken legs, and various other broken bones. He then receives a phone call while he is in this hospital saying he is needed to chase storms immediately. The next scene, Quaid has one crutch but is otherwise completely healed. The next scene, he is running from a tornado. And FEMA saving the day? That is a joke unto itself!
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
2/10
What?!!
jouiskc14 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
I love disaster movies. They are cheesy, clichéd, and above all a simple passing of time. Most are populated with characters that we never really get to know, much less care about. But this one, it has so many characters, I couldn't even keep track of who belonged to whom.

Now, I knew going into this that there would be some half-baked global warming cause for these terrible storms. Fine, I can live with that. But shutting down the storm by turning off some electrical power! And just in the nick of time? What caused these storms to gain in intensity over unpopulated areas in the first place. Rapid City South Dakota isn't exactly thermal warming central.

We got to the point of making a lot of fun over the script. The actors who "died" must have been relieved when their role in this mess was over. The camera work was dreadful. Please tell someone over at CBS a good script makes us care about a character or situation, not cheesy freeze frame or slow motion effects.

I am not hard to please on a Sunday evening. Just don't completely insult my intelligence.
5 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
3/10
lame
wytt13 November 2005
I just watched "Category 7: The End of the World". I was disappointed. Despite the excellent cast and an interesting subject matter this program is just plain lame. The overwhelming number of errors in the underlying science along with the occasional total departure from reality was almost too much to watch. I watch a movie like this and wonder why we can't just have a good old disaster movie. Why do the writers find it necessary to have teenagers kidnapped or being attacked by a pack of wolves to convolute the story? Maybe time would have been better spent getting the main story line right, rather than wasting time on a second story line. I also found the Randy Quaid and Shannen Doherty match up strangely disturbing. I watch movies for entertainment and as such don't require that they be 100% accurate. I do want them to be plausible.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Who are they kidding?
fuzzypony36 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Why did they even bother making this stinker? Awful special effects, lousy acting and poor writing make this even worse that "10.5". CBS looked like it was trying to capitalize on the plethora of hurricanes this year to get a few viewers. As usual, the networks are trying to grind out quantity instead of quality. This is one of the reasons their rating keep finding a new lower level.

Would it have been too hard for CBS to have either held this movie back-or better yet--shelving it completely after the horrors that have visited Florida, Mississippi and Louisiana this year? If CBS keeps making movies like this just to fill up airtime, they might as well give up now.
5 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
Empty your mind and open your spirit
fromwalking14 April 2007
This film is not as bad as everyone says if you empty your mind first. OK, the special effects are terrible, but that's the result of low funding I guess. But if you look at it in an artistic point of view like you should with every motion picture, it's not a bad movie. The makers, writers, actors and everybody else who worked on this film worked hard and believed in it! So in that angle, even if there were a few flaws in the scientific details and perhaps critics on other levels where viewers themselves exceed in? I have no knowledge of weather forecast or tornado's or any of that. I'm an economic by education. But like I said, if you rest your mind and view this for recreational purpose (as you always should) it's OK, I even thought the story was plausible, about the heat of the cities and so on (I don't want to write a spoiler). And I liked Randy Quaid in here! He's always funny! And as a surprise to me (I didn't study the cover closely when I rented it) there was Shannen Doherty. Good looking' and I think she is a good actress!

Just watch this on a rainy hang-over Sunday and free your mind.

Oh yeah, I rated this film a 10 to pump up the average. My personal vote would be 7.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
Talk about good television...
Brett Hertel7 November 2005
How often do you see the statue of liberty get crushed by a giant wave, then its arm falls right on the main characters? THEN, you see the main characters alive for the second part of the mini series! Oh, and how can you not love a Shannon Doherty sighting? This is just one of those fun TV flicks that you have to be in the mood for.

If you love death, destruction, unexplained weather patterns, Gina Gershon, and of course the Golden Globe Award Winning Randy Quaid, this movie is for you. I, personally did not sit down to watch this movie expecting anything but to be entertained, isn't that all you can ask for from a made for TV movie?
8 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
7/10
This was meant to be a parody of disaster films.
Todd Mason7 January 2006
I think that that was obvious from the beginning, and while it was a pity it was broadcast around the time of Katrina, it's production was started well before the disaster that was to befall New Orleans: the utterly inept FEMA and other response to the broken levies overshadowing even the actual storm damage. As Gina Gershon put it in her interview on THE LATE LATE SHOW, you can tell the film is fictional because, in her role as the head of FEMA, she actually does her job. I'm not sure why so many of the other commentators here couldn't see that this was not meant to be taken as a serious film, as opposed to a not-quite-camp goof, but they do seem to be damning it for not being THE BATTLESHIP POTEMKIN...when, as at least one other reviewer has hinted, one could well be glad it wasn't a theatrical release of the inept, meant-to-be-serious, more or less, variety of THE DAY AFTER TOMORROW or the dread remake of HURRICANE a few years back. And KRAKATOA, EAST OF JAVA, among so many others, before that...
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
As Stupid as it Was, Never Doubt that there is a Real Agenda Here
baylor8513 November 2005
I am reading many comments about the bad science contained in this truly awful film, but I submit that it should come as no surprise. 95% of the arguments that further misguided efforts such as this one to prove impending disaster due to human environmental tampering are based on bad science, and in some cases downright dishonest motivation. Can we agree that any project featuring James Brolin in its credits has at least tacit approval from Babs? I suspect she reads all scripts and offers for him first and ultimately decides which ones he will and won't do. I'll bet she loved this one!

As I watched with great amusement this latest feeble offering from Hollywood in the "Bad Conservative, Good Liberal" mode, the stupidity piled up at a record pace.

1) Having nothing to do with politics, the choice of Greg Brady look-alike Cameron Dado to play one of the leads is quite comical. Come on mates, can't we at least find a good old-fashioned American-born Yank that can deliver more than three lines without breaking into an incongruent Aussie accent. It got so bad that I must confess I quit listening to what he was actually saying in favor of how he was saying it. This may explain why I sent my son out during the show to pick up a bloomin' onion and some shrimp-on-the-barbie from our local favorite. Wasn't there even enough budget to let him try a few lines over to Americanize them. Sloppy but fun.

2) Back to the "Science": As has been mentioned, there is no such thing as category 6, much less category 7! And even more annoying is the fact that they frequently refer to tornado intensity in categories at all. Tornado intensity is measured in "F" factors such as F0 (very mild) to F5 (catastrophic). Dr. Fujita invented the scale and the strongest F5 tornado ever empirically measured topped out at 318 miles per hour - the top of the F5 scale!

3) Hurricanes are measured as "Category 1" through "Category 5". In one, the Hurricane baring down on the southeast was described as a "Category 5 hurricane with wind gusts to 150 MPH." This is actually factually errant as real hurricanes must reach sustained wind velocity of 155 MPH to be classified as a category 5 hurricane. Such storms regularly also carry wind gusts in excess of 175 MPH!

4) While the "Big Apple" was dealing with its bevy of multiple vortices, a huge tidal surge was suddenly, and without warning bearing down on the coastline. Where did this thing come from? The building tropical system was still far to the south and tidal surges from hurricanes occur just prior to and at the time of landfall. I think 4 or 5 tornadoes at one time was probably threat enough. What was the need for this nonsensical overkill.

5) Tornado Tommy (who incidentally survived being blasted up so high into the Chicago skyline by a massive twister that he could " look down on the Sears tower") had the uncanny ability to sense impending tornado formation right down to the exact trailer park location it would strike, and the exact minute at which it would arrive. Hmmmm? Real life experienced storm chasers whose jobs it is to track, film, and study real tornadoes are only rarely successful in divining such information, and never with such accuracy. And they have at their disposal all of the tools and collective wisdom of the National Severe Storms folks. If Tommy were really this talented, he'd be sitting in the clubhouse at Churchill Downs picking ponies and sipping mint juleps.

There simply is just too much hogwash to recount in this fairytale to keep an audience here on this board, much less in the movie. Why then does Hollywood find it so necessary to completely suspend scientific credulity? I believe it is because so much of their audience is completely ignorant of the true facts, both where natural science is concerned, and where politics are leading them by the noses. Movies like these should include fact based disclaimers with frequency because this same crowd will in many instances find their way to the voting booths where they can inflict truly catastrophic damage. Yes Folks, this is not just an escapist fantasy meant for public enjoyment, but a calculated effort by the liberal Hollywood political machine to aim a rocket of ignorance directly at American sensibilities (or lack thereof) for purposes of political persuasion. persuasion
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
Not too bad, really
vchimpanzee11 November 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Just weeks after a 'Category 6' storm nearly destroyed much of Chicago, Paris is struck by what one witness calls an even worse storm. It is so bad the Eiffel Tower falls over and a giant clown's head slams into the building the witness is watching from.

Only one meteorologist predicted these storms and where they would hit, but even he didn't know how bad they would be. Dr. Ross Duffy doesn't want to work for the government any more, but he is persuaded by Melody, who works for new FEMA director Judith Carr, to work 'under the radar'.

George Washington and the Sphinx both lose their heads in new storms. The Mall of America gets shut down by the Mount Rushmore storm (reused footage of the Chicago mall?). A monster storm in Egypt causes predictions of the end of the world, especially after poisoned frogs get loose in a Washington museum (what is this, 'Vampire Bats'?) and a plague of flies attacks the Capitol.

Forecasters see signs of a new storm in Michigan--even though the weather is calm. For once, they know in advance where a storm is going to form.

Buffalo is the next target, if the storm continues course, and New York City could follow. Meanwhile, if that's not bad enough, Edouard, a Category 5 hurricane, is headed for Miami.

The Miami hurricane is headed north, and Washington is a possible target. Flooding is a definite risk, but the country is assured the government will continue operating. Terrorists take over a bus evacuating residents (did we REALLY need that?).

What happens in New York City is far worse than anyone expected, and of course the Statue of Liberty loses her torch.

And that's not all. The storm takes an unexpected sharp turn to the south--right toward the hurricane--which is also targeting Washington.

Tommy looked like a mummy with a classic street light for a head, lying in his hospital bed. But he was rarin' to go once again. Randy Quaid gave us yet another great performance, and by the time he and Faith reached Michigan with their monitoring equipment, he was like new.

Tommy must have been healed by the campy TV evangelists Donny and Penny Hall! Swoozie Kurtz gave another outstanding performance as the female half of the pair of greedy but faithful Christian leaders. James Brolin was quite good too. Hearing of the destruction in Egypt, they warned their followers to get ready. And they may have known a little more than others about those Biblical plagues.

Tom Skerritt also showed talent as Col. Mike Davis, a very courageous pilot who was willing to fly into any storm, no matter how bad.

The visual effects were okay. The best display came not in any of the big cities but in a Michigan trailer park. Very realistic, very scary. The ocean pushing its way into the streets of New York also looked quite realistic. But the Eiffel Tower destruction could have been more exciting. And the demolition of the 5000-year-old Great Pyramid didn't really satisfy. We were told that it happened but didn't really see it.

And now for part two:

The terrorists kidnap some of the people on the bus, including the relative of one of the federal officials involved with disaster preparation. This was a distraction for us and would have proved to be one for someone who didn't need it.

Ross figured out in the first half what caused the storms to be so severe. In the second half, with the help of observations from the fearless Col. Davis and from the equipment he carried, he comes up with an idea to lessen the storms' intensity. The big problem: getting people to listen to him!

Tommy and Faith arrive at a nuclear power plant in Pennsylvania just before it will likely be demolished. (This storyline never materialized.) Then they press onward to D. C., where the President intends to stay put.

The destruction of the White House proved more satisfying than a similar scene in 'Independence Day' because it happened so gradually here. Still, we were mostly told what happened; it was kind of a letdown not to see it. Amazingly, the promised flooding never took place; all the destruction came from wind. And it must have been from tornadoes produced by Edouard, because the New York storm wasn't even there yet!

The ending proved to be disappointing and satisfying at the same time. Even though these storms defied logic, one would think the movie could have a climax which was consistent with the rules established earlier.

Good news: the visual effects in the clouds seen from Col. Davis' plane were among the best in the movie.

Randy Quaid continued to impress as Tommy, partly because he showed normal behavior. Shannen Doherty also did a good job as Tommy's partner Faith.

David Alpay (Billy) and Andrea Lui (Melody) had their best moments as the storm hit. Billy stayed behind at the Extreme Weather Lab, where he designed much of the equipment, and Melody helped. Not only were the characters strong in the face of adversity, but they had a sense of humor. Lindy Booth as agnostic reporter Brigid and Nicholas Lea as a follower of the Halls had their good scenes. And Gina Gershon finally showed some real ability as the FEMA director. Suki Kaiser also did a capable job as Dr. Duffy's wife Gayle, who had an important role in carrying out his plan.

There was a touching scene as Col. Davis said what might have been his final goodbye to his family. Tom Skerritt continued to impress in that scene and when he was flying. I didn't catch his name, but the actor playing Davis' partner also performed admirably.

It wasn't a total disaster by any means. Mostly it was fun to watch.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Hubba Hubba! Beautiful Executive Woman in Scanty Tank Tops!
lepoisson-19 November 2005
And lots of camera work from above. Yeah! Take it off!

Oops. Sorry. Lost my place. I'm not in a scuzzy bar; I'm watching a network movie.

Camera zooms that pull the eyeballs from your sockets (not to mention dinner from your stomach). Cliché scripting that must have been written by teenagers. Atrocious acting. Bad government officials who won't believe anything is wrong after 3 cities get flattened. And it only gets better! We actually laughed out loud several times. I can't wait for part 2...

And then, after about an hour…what's that quiet grinding noise? It sounds like it's right here in the room with me, and I don't even have surround sound! Oh my goodness, it IS in the room with me! It's my girlfriend snoring. Apparently she uses her time more wisely than I do.

1 star.

I wonder what Category 8 will be like…not to mention Godzilla vs Category 9, et cetera.

****Quick follow-up after watching Part 2 (you can read the other reviews for movie details and spoilers if you can't handle the suspense):

What a blast! The corny ending was even more barfacious that we predicted. And my girlfriend fell asleep again.

I do question CBS's judgment airing this so soon after Katrina and Rita. Those still suffering may not be impressed with FEMA patting itself on the back the way it did in this movie.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
Quite Possibly the Worst Movie I Have Ever Seen
janthony21219 March 2006
To be honest...giving this movie a 1 out of 10 is generous...its too bad they don't have negative ratings. This movie is horrible. There are so many different stories going on at the same time that watching this movie you'll be sent into a tail spin. this movie is a waste of time...if you want a good laugh...go watch it. The thing is that in the previews the movie looks really interesting and makes you really want to see it. But then when you watch it...your extremely disappointed. Honestly...I think the writers of this movie were on crack when they wrote this. Watching paint dry on a wall takes more effort than the effort that went into making this film...horrible
6 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
9/10
Outstanding for a made-for-TV film
bh902126 November 2005
I see a lot of negative reviews for this movie, but I think, "Uh, all you armchair movie critics, CONSIDER THE CONTEXT!" What the heck do you expect? If the plot was fantastic with Emmy-award-winning actors, you'd be paying $10 for it at the theaters and it would have to be MUCH BETTER than "The Day After Tomorrow" to meet your outrageous expectations and criticism.

It's kind of like when I rent "Crocodile 2" or "House of Wax." You know what you're getting. So be realistic. It's free remember.

That said, here's my review on a MADE-FOR-TV disaster movie. Lighten up critics. It's just for fun. And it delivers...

So far, I'm very impressed overall with Category 7: The End of the World. The best part is the special effects just keep coming and coming. It delivers even more than what you see in the ads, which is rare. You can't leave the room for a minute or you'll miss something great. Think "The Day After Tomorrow" only with more in-your-face effects and $4 saved on the rental. Pretty amazing for a made-for-TV film.

They did a great casting job and the characters are all likable without giving you too much (boring) details into their lives. This isn't a tear-jerker "we're about to die and let me tell you how much I love you." It's just total destruction from one end of the globe to the other which keeps it entertaining and riveting. It opens with Cat 7 intensity and keeps the pace throughout. And the FX are top-notch. Nothing looks fake.

Haven't seen the second half, but definitely looking forward to it.
7 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
1/10
So vile, so pathetic, it's not even laughably bad
CelluloiDiva14 November 2005
I tuned in to "Category 7" primarily to have a good laugh at a mediocre TV network movie. I was sorely disappointed to discover that I had set my sights too high: mediocrity would have been an improvement over the fetid braindump that is "Category 7." And I don't mean "dump" in a nice way, either.

What struck me more than anything is the movie's contempt for the viewer. Story elements are presented that are beyond belief, no matter how far one might stretch one's imagination for the sake of fiction: there is a limit to suspended credulity. I could take Gershon as a scientific expert, head of FEMA, perhaps even as mother to a teenager if I didn't think about it too much. But when her character starts going on about shutting down the power to kill DC's "thermal plume," well, that was my limit. I'm used to TV productions using overly pretty people in ridiculously simplified complex characters, but this was beyond the pale. Anyone who knows even two basic rules of physics knows that the whole "thermal plume" bit was a sack of crap. It's one thing to cut corners, cut budgets, cut creativity, but f'crying out loud, don't insult your intended audience!! I could go on, but why bother? At one point, I remarked that it seemed the sole purpose of "movies" such as this, its prequel "Category 6" or similar drivel like the dreadful "10.5," is to test out the capabilities of a new generation of CGI software. Producers rip off popular movies or books, adapt them to television, then subject them to the most special effects development possible on their budgets. A live field test, as it were, of new tools to eventually be used elsewhere in the industry.

It is pointless to nitpick all the mistakes, assumptions, bad science, plot loopholes, etc. rife throughout "Category 7." Suffice to say that with its turgid, twisted "logic," heavy use of effects rather than plot devices to develop the story and that damnable, annoying reliance on camera tricks and goofy angles (as if such were supposed to be artistic and/or contribute anything to the story or mood - they aren't and they don't, tho I suspect this is how the CSI series and others of that ilk are filmed these days), "Category 7" was indeed a disaster, but not the way the producers intended. Any bets on how long it'll be before it's released to DVD?
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? | Report this
loading
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews