Catastrofe dal cielo

This is one of those movies that is so bad it's good. Some writer somewhere heard the term "positive lightning" and decided to create a whole script around it. A great drinking game would be to take a chug every time someone says, "Positive lightning." I especially enjoyed when lighting would follow a pole or wire slowly enough that people could react and jump out of the way. Or better yet, slowly enough that someone could outrun the lightning and push someone else out of the way. The science in this movie is so awful I really would not know where to start. I did not catch much of the human drama, because I was laughing too hard at the cheesy special effects and mangled physics. (Someone really needs to tell these scientists what a Faraday cage is.)

I was a little put off right at the beginning when the movie jumps right into the story with not even a bit of introduction. That was followed by a story that was entirely unoriginal combined with the fact that to me at least it didn't seem to flow very well. The acting was at best OK; the performances from a little known cast a little too wooden in my opinion. The basic storyline - the earth being threatened by massive lightning storms that somehow threaten the start of a new ice age, with the climatologist Valery (Joana Pacula) being the only person who understands what's happening, but who can't convince anyone in authority of it - had some potential, but was burdened with the introduction of far too many "soap opera" elements. The most obvious of these was the entirely superfluous subplot, which was never well developed anyway, about the return of Valery's sister from prison. The science was also pretty weak. Everything seems to happen in a matter of a few hours, which seemed far too short a time to devise a solution for the storms and then to implement the solution, and then there was the reference to the last ice age having begun "about 2 million years ago." What? As far as I know the last ice age began about 100,000-120,000 years ago and lasted for about 100,000 years. Not a very good movie at all - but I have seen worse. 2/10

For what it is, it's not bad. I watch a lot of these sci-fi channel movies and this one is probably middle of the pack. No, it's not very believable, but there are some good reasons you might want to watch: There are no really boring parts. It's sort of like Day After Tomorrow except done with lightning. Joanna Pacula's accent is very sexy. Her assistant is Crystal Buble is really cute. A couple of the scenes are funny: Slighlty built Pacula sees obese security guard on a pay phone and rushes to knock him down to save him as lightning strikes a junction box? She is faster than a speeding bullet? And at the joint chiefs of staff meeting, Kim Hawthorne notes that "The American people will want answers" if they can't watch their favorite television programs! There is real cause for concern though when a fighter jet mission is scrambled to dispatch of our would-be heroes at the north pole. Will the young man's plan to save the world even work at all? And will he save his mother? What will happen??? You will have to watch for yourself and find out.

this movie is too melodramatic at times and gets bogged down in dialogue and subplots that don't really advance the story,in my opinion.the acting is not bad,especially from Noel Fisher who plays Jeremy Landis,the teenage son of the lead female character Dr.Valery Landis(Joanna Pacula)a weather specialist.there is at least 1 positive thing about the movie,and that is the scenes involving the lightning storms.the effects are fairly well done, int his regard.i certainly didn't hate this movie,but i do wish it had focused more on the storm aspect than the family issues.it kind of felt like 1 of those 'Lifetime' channel movies.if you don't mind that kind of movie,then you will probably like this 1.if not,you might want to avoid it.i'd have to say this movie is average,so 5/10 seems fair.

This Canadian sequel to the 2001 American Lightning: Fire from the Sky is an underwhelming affair from start to finish and feels so very unnecessary.

What I mean by that is, a sequel......to THAT?! Really!? I mean the first was better but still just your generic Scyfy channel-esque movie. It wouldn't be so bad if there was a connection between them but this is an entirely new tale.

Starring underrated Joanna Pacula and overrated Nick Mancuso this hops over cinematic release, fails to be a straight to DVD and gets relegated to regular repeats on the free channels.

It tells ultimately the same story, a "Super" storm is coming and an expert in the field of erm....lightning has to save the day. Trouble is nobody believes her! What shall she do?

Well she leads a very boring film that manages to pale in comparison to the already mediocre first movie. Full of overwhelming volumes of pseudo science, a generic script and instantly forgettable sequences this is a bit of a mess.

A weak addition to the library of even the most hardcore disaster movie fan.

The Good:

Joanna Pacula

The Bad:

The "Nobody believes them until it's too late" trope is really tired

Too much pseudo science

Whole thing just comes across very phoned in

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

Jiffy gas should be a real thing

The movie industry doesn't like Big Ben