Tempête de Météorites

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.

Of all the films I have seen of Syfy and on the Syfy channel, Meteor Storm is not one of the best, though I have yet to see a Syfy movie that I would deem good. But it is not as bad as Titanic II, Mega Piranha, Shark Attack and that Moby Dick movie they did. To be honest, Meteor Storm is nothing to rave about, but unlike the movies I have cited the acting while again not award-worthy was tolerable, particularly from Michael Trucco. The film is not visually stunning by any regard as the editing is rather slip-shod and the effects are largely inconsistent, but there are much cheaper productions out there. Despite these, there are a lot of things in this movie that I don't like about Syfy in general. A major problem is the plot, if I had to sum it up in one word, it would be nonsensical. The ideas put forward are somewhat imaginative and intriguing, but explained and executed ridiculously. The script is clichéd, illogical and just plain bad really, the characters are cardboard and I didn't really connect to them, the pace is uneven with a dull middle section and the less said about a vast majority of the direction the better. All in all, there have been worse, but this is not really something to savour on repeat viewings and such. 2/10 Bethany Cox

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.

I don't need to repeat everything other reviewers noted, but maybe a few:

1. Every disaster flick cliché ever imagined was included. 2. Soldiers, even airmen, don't salute civilians -- except those in direct line of command like the SecDef and the CINC (President). 3. The science is pure hokum. Radio frequencies don't cause attraction or repulsion. If you're gonna blow up stuff in outer space, do it before it starts to heat up from atmospheric friction.

And then a couple no one has as yet mentioned:

4. Brigaders are about as high up the food chain as amoebas. A BG who gets the President on the phone is a joke. 5. I think that element 120 should have been named unbelievium. 6. Toward the end, Keri Matchett who plays the professor (the one who does qualitative analysis by looking through a microscope for Pete's sake) spends the last reel, rather than looking scared, concerned, or dispirited, with a sly smile on her face, as if she knows something none of the rest of us do. Well, she was wrong. A lot of us realized just how silly this whole thing was.

Like 95% of the original programming on "Syfy" (I have to put that in quotes as I still cringe when I see that spelling), this movie was another complete waste of time. The only reason I actually watched it all the way through was because I was doing something else in my living room at the time and it was convenient to have something on that I didn't need to concentrate on to follow it. It never ceases to amaze me with "Syfy" movies that a no doubt well-intentioned screenwriter, crew and actors spent months of their lives, and doubtless millions of dollars, to make something as bland as this. The plot is not even worth recounting since you've seen it many times before - a meteor is heading towards Earth, threatening to destroy it, and some scientists have to figure out a way to stop it, while incidentally saving their marriage in the process. Suffice it to say that there is not a single even remotely original or interesting moment in the entire movie.

The only reason I even gave this movie two stars is because of the acting. All of the acting, especially poor Michael Trucco (who must have had trouble keeping his lunch down, having to do this on the heels of "Battlestar Galactica" - I hope you were at least able to pay your rent, Mike!) and Kari Matchett, is as good as it possibly can be considering what they were given to work with.

It would be great if the executives at "Syfy" would decide to make fewer movies and focus their budget instead on making some quality films. Surely making a few halfway-decent films each year, rather than just turning out one piece of garbage after another, would help to improve their reputation.