Home
search
more | tips
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 7:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [Next]
Index 64 comments in total 

53 out of 65 people found the following comment useful :-
Yes, indeed...I smell an EMMY!!!, 7 November 2005
1/10
Author: S W from United States

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....

Was the above comment useful to you?

25 out of 32 people found the following comment useful :-
Totally waste of time, 13 November 2005
1/10
Author: nanyucao from United States

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.

Was the above comment useful to you?

20 out of 24 people found the following comment useful :-
"We're not talking Category 6.... we're talking Category 7!", 7 November 2005
5/10
Author: racerx70 from SW Florida

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") :-)

Was the above comment useful to you?

23 out of 31 people found the following comment useful :-
Spend your time better - go watch some paint dry..., 6 November 2005
1/10
Author: skard42 from Twin Cities, MN, USA

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...

Was the above comment useful to you?

14 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :-
I see cows..........., 13 November 2005
Author: leorican from United States

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...

Was the above comment useful to you?

16 out of 22 people found the following comment useful :-
Worst "movie" I'v seen yet, 8 November 2005
1/10
Author: Jimbo1984 from United States

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.

Was the above comment useful to you?

10 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-
A perfect disaster...of a movie, 7 November 2005
1/10
Author: TheScience_Geek from United States

*** This comment may contain 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.

Was the above comment useful to you?

11 out of 13 people found the following comment useful :-
Obviously no hurricane experience, 14 November 2005
2/10
Author: vlee-3 from United States

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.)

Was the above comment useful to you?

11 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :-
This was really, really bad, 26 February 2006
2/10
Author: moysant from Australia

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

Was the above comment useful to you?

21 out of 37 people found the following comment useful :-
Avoid serious watching at all costs, 6 November 2005
1/10
Author: mwoodfin1 from United States

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.

Was the above comment useful to you?
Page 1 of 7:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [Next]

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Parents Guide Plot keywords
Main details Your user comments Your vote history