La Colère du ciel

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.

"Lightning: Bolts of Destruction" has enough good science to hook me for it's two hours (including commercials). Unfortunately, that's just about all it has going for it. While Ellen Dubin makes the most of her small, tritely written role, the only other memorable acting comes from the unnamed named actress that plays Joanna Pacula's assistant. She's pretty hot to boot, a sensuous combination of beauty, intelligence and charisma. Too bad Pacula's such a cold fish in this one. One longs for a little over-the-top acting to fill out the character, often described as crazed, crusading, brittle and a control freak; "Janine Turner: call your office". The story boasts too many coincidences. Pacula's husband "just so happens" to be working at an experimental power station. Pacula's son "just so happens" to be a high energy physics genius working on the very experiment which could save the day. Worse, the director fails to capitalize in the slightest on the suspense. The movie plays out by the numbers.

Still, there's enough here to give "Lightning:..." a weak ^6".

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.

Interesting concept, tho a lot of time was wasted on the usual academic in-fighting and the sub-plot of Pacula raising her sister's son was not really necessary to the plot and, in my opinion, distractd from it.

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.)