I read one comment about this movie and...
The poster is right about ONE thing. Joan van Ark act is excessive, thus not believable enough.
But if you know America - and I mean REALLY KNOW - then you must have come across town mayors that really behave quite similarly to what she portrays. If you know America, you know that in some towns/areas/professions one is not allowed free speech, and people like van Ark's character really use their powers to silence people or news.
Special effects wise, this movie is quite good, though it is obvious that its budget was very small. Tornadoes are shown with solid, firm, believable special effects.
The characters are solid (exception made of van Ark's and perhaps of the Storm Chasers leader) and are engaged in real world problems.
Plot is, perhaps, the main problem. It's as if this movie was made by a group of scientists or storm chasers who vowed to put on screen their troubles related to: - chasing and predicting tornadoes - and, probably, the funds for their activities.
It is a VERY SIMPLE plot.
And because of this, it is predictable AND believable at the same time. Some people watched this as if they were watching a Discovery Channel's Storm Chasers big episode with a more intimate, behind-the-camera closer look at the main players.
Acting is...a mix.
Gerald McRaney is OK, quite solid in his portrayal of a discredited scientist.
Steve Braun is a good surprise. A timid, sensitive and wise young scientist/student. Good acting.
Thea Gil swings back and forth between convincing and non-committed acting. Good actors are known to be convincing throughout the repertoire or their characters - and that's what separates them from the average actors/actresses.
David Millbern's act was not convincing, hesitant, foolish at times. I have seen better from him, I'm sure.
The rest of the cast is good enough, though Joan van Ark's actions seem exaggerated and unbelievable.
In terms of the science behind it, this movie is one of the few that portrays the "attack" of tornadoes as they really are - short, loud and violent. The physical content (cloud formation, wind speeds, debris hurling, sky colors, pressure gradients, etc) is pretty much spot on.
Is there something that differentiates this movie from others of similar vein? Yes. Simple, dry and direct plot and the crude atmosphere of small towns and tornado attacks.
It could have been better, sure. But the striking thing is, it could have been MUCH, MUCH WORSE.
