Meteor Storm

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.

Even the action flicks are becoming chick flicks. We have a hero with what looks like a 200 inch chest riding a motorcycle through out the film, and that just begins the clichés. Everything in the film is completely cliché. Not one fresh idea.

The plot is something about meteors showering the Earth, and some guy in the military being dense to the hero, who controls what everyone in the world thinks, by the way, and commands the attention of a news crew for no reason. A news crew that follows a hunk instead of the usual slouches that they choose 100% of the time. Yeah, what planet is this on? Director Tukacs not only dwells in every cliché, but also makes this unwatchable for guys. If there is a cute girl, he kills her off as quick as he can, leaving only the pale plain girls that women identify with, making this the ultimate chick flick.

Across the board, the acting is as poor as the directing, which lends one to think they were directed to act this horribly, and the worst takes kept for the final cut.

There is nothing good about this film, nothing exciting, nothing interesting, nothing to care about.

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.

An astro-physicist is tapped by the government to figure out why the city of San Francisco is being besieged by anti-social meteorites. BB-sized pellets crash a meteor light show stargazing event, and victims run for cover. Immediately, scientists and the military team up to repel the onslaught.

Time out for obligatory clichés: Obnoxios dumbbell TV news crew getting in everybody's hair. General wants to nuke something. Hero guy is married to scientist, and they argue a lot. Their stupid brat kids blunder into perilous locations, always at the exact time and place meteors show up. Hero guy diverts from saving the world to rescue his idiot brat kids. The ratio of cliché stuff to actual plot elements is about 70% to 30%.

The pseudo-scientific ramblings about why San Fran is being singled out are actually pretty imaginative (although ludicrous). Acting is fair. Action and CGI are fair. 99% of the budget was invested in the 500th movie depiction of the collapse of the city's most famous structure. It's done in spectacular fashion; the film's blazing glory moment. But sloppy editing also gives you glaring goofs: like light traffic in the background of a scene, during a supposed massive evacuation of the Bay area. Some evac.

As cheaply done as it may be, it's amusing enough to make it entertaining.

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.