Meteor Storm

SyFy movies are never going to win awards with their limited budgets and their hastily-written scripts, I realize that. Still, I think that if they had approached this project with some smarts, it could have been a decent time-killer. As it is now, it isn't. For a Canadian production, it looks decent (it doesn't have that "Canadian look"), but it still has a made-for-TV feel to the visuals, and the various British Columbia locations simply can't be passed off as San Francisco. Some of the special effects are okay, but they mostly look cheap and unconvincing, which is probably why long stretches of time go by between special effects shots. But it's the script that really sinks this movie. It's long and drawn out, which is why there is no feeling of tension, and the characters aren't really fleshed out enough. Director Tibor Takács has made some good movies in his career, but "Meteor Storm" is not one of them.

Yes, it is yet another disaster movie about an asteroid threatening our very existence of Earth. Like we haven't seen that story being told in movies like dozens of times before.

So what sets "Meteor Storm" apart from the other movies of similar character on the market? Well, nothing actually. I has all been seen before. From the storyline, to the characters and to the bizarre way how disaster and meteoroids seem to be tailing and chasing the protagonists of the movie wherever they go.

One thing that is over-the-top-stereotypical in a movie like this, is how one of the lead "heroes" always manages to get to a scene and rescue someone (be it from a burning helicopter, burning car, or crumbling skyscraper) just in nick of time before it explodes or collapses. That was just antagonizing to watch, because it is such ludicrous crap.

Anyway, moving on to the story. The basic layout of the story is as it is in most other Asteroid disaster movies. A massive asteroid is speeding towards Earth, it manages to wreak some havoc, and then... well, the ending is (without giving it away) a typical Hollywood ending that includes a nuclear missile. Yeah, indeed!

The acting in "Meteor Storm" wasn't actually too bad, but it wasn't any award-winning performances either. Fairly average stuff to be seen here.

In overall, then "Meteor Storm" is good enough entertainment for an evening if you got nothing better to do, and if you are a sucker for natural disaster movies.

Before any one watches this movie they have to understand that it is a SyFy production, which means no academy awards, modest budgets, and fictitious science used to explain what is happening.

As a fan of the SyFy movies (mostly as they are the only regular source of science fiction on TV now days)I would have watched it regardless, but this film was a pleasant surprise.

The cast was surprisingly good based on the type of film, all science fiction regulars led by Battlestar alum Michael Trucco, Invasion and Covert Affairs beauty Kari Mitchell, Kyle XYs Kirsten Prout and Smallville and Flash Gordon star Eric Johnson, all of whom are playing to their strengths (eg Johnson as a cocky, arrogant reporter). All performed well, though Trucco was a little stiff.

A typical weakness in SyFy flicks are the CG effects. Fortunately, as the story really only called for meteors falling from the sky the cost would have been limited allowing for some generally decent effects. The first meteor storm was very well done.

Another typical weakness of SyFy films is the script/ dialogue. While there are some cheesy lines 'That might explain the Bay Area's historically bad cell phone service', there are some good lines too, my favourite being when Michelle is being asked to go with the army person who says 'Say yes while I'm still asking, Michelle'.

This is a decent flick for a wet Friday night. Certainly not a blockbuster, and there a holes in the plot and the science of the film, but if you can ignore them and just watch the movie as escapism and entertainment there are certainly worse films you could watch instead.

I am a fan of disaster movies and sci-fi movies, unfortunately this was not good at either. Whilst the storyline has been seen before I thought the story unfolded reasonably well, however there was not much substance to it - or science for that matter.

The acting was fair, except I found myself never quite believing the actors - their reactions to situations etc did not fit. I don't know if that is the actors fault or the director but something wasn't quite gelling.

Certainly not the worst film I've seen and worth watching if you need to kill a couple of hours.

Does anyone really think that the local director of and emergency management agency would be able to do their job during an emergency while they were spending most of their time getting family members out of emergency situations? Would the responses of the other people involved in that emergency to a director of an emergency agency doing this be as supportive as in this movie? Whoever wrote this plot has no understanding of the difficulties encountered in emergency management and didn't do any research on it.

The 'science' was rubbish. Electrostatic attractions are only effective over short distances, they do not have an 'frequency' associated with them (as implied by the 'static' part), and like charged substances repel, rather than attract. Even if the authors couldn't pass high school science they should have done the research on this.

The saving graces of the movie are the special effects and, to some degree, the actors. The director and technical staff also seemed to be competent. The writers do not appear to have been competent.