User reviews

It's the same plot to TWISTER (1996) with many borrowed elements (unsigned divorce papers, rival teams, unique earthquake prediction model used correctly by one team and not by the other, and a third-wheel fiance) mixed with the usual bureaucratic government obstruction seen in every impending disaster film since JAWS (1975).

The special effects are surprisingly okay in parts, and not-so-much in many others. Jessica Morris does a decent job with her role, as well as a handful of others, but no one is helped by the scriptwriting. While it's not exactly SyFy movie bad, it very much feels like they were shooting off of a first draft that no one bothered to proofread.

-- SPLITTING HAIRS:

So with that out of the way, there are some mistakes I noticed while watching. Unlike the surprising majority of the other reviewers, I'm not from the state of Missouri yet I still couldn't help but notice something off with the use of locations in the film (not with their pronunciations as I didn't know, notice, and couldn't tell so that didn't bother me).

But rather then explain the oddity I have time-coded each mention of locales as they appear (with accompanying dialogue) for anyone reading to just see for themselves...

• (@ around 05 mins) TITLE CARD: New Madrid
• (@ around 08 mins) TITLE CARD: Sikeston. Mobile lab where the main characters operate out of is located at a small airport hanger here. Latest earthquake epicenter is "Two miles south of New Madrid." -
• (@ around 11 mins) Latest earthquake epicenter is in "New Madrid, south of Marston." **
• (@ around 28 mins) While the team is driving toward Marston to access the ex-husband's helicopter, Finn says, "Quakes are centered from the south, near Marston." .... "The epicenter is in Marston. Your sensor is sending you to the wrong spot!" -
• GOOF (@ around 30 mins) The location of the ex-husband's helipad in Marston is the EXACT SAME location the film used (@ around 08 mins) for Sikeston. -
• (@ around 32 mins) TITLE CARD: St. Louis. Team 1 plants the first sensor. -
• (@ around 42 mins) TITLE CARD: Sikeston. Brett's government response team lands to start drilling. -
• (@ around 43 mins) TITLE CARD: Nashville. Team 2 plants the second sensor. -
• GOOF (@ around 45 mins) TITLE CARD: Nashville. Team 3 plants the third sensor in what is supposed to be Memphis. -
• (@ around 54 mins) After successfully triangulating their censors they now know the epicenter is south of New Madrid. ***
• (@ around 1h 00 mins) Cami says, "Have Brett meet us in New Madrid." Why did she say that? -
• (@ around 1h 01 mins) Dan asks Cami, "How was New Madrid?" But when was she back in New Madrid? She was just in Jefferson City talking to the Governor and before that in (what was supposed to be) Memphis (even though the TITLE CARD said Nashville) -
• (@ around 1h 06 mins) The epicenter "...is at the fracking site in Marston, not Sikeston." ...Okay so sounds like it's in Marston again. ***
• (@ around 1h 06 mins) "We gotta get to Marston and stop Brett." But they have said repeatedly that Brett is in Sikeston. -

(** New Madrid is actually northeast of Marston. *** Unless you knew that Marston was located about 7 miles south of New Madrid, suddenly stating definitively that the epicenter is "south of New Madrid" just makes it sound like a whole new location.)

--- SPLITTING HEADACHE MOMENTS:

Right after each of the 3 sensors are planted there is a last minute mad scramble to run out and grab something just as the ground starts shaking. Three times. The movie does this same exact scenario three separate times, back-to-back-to-back: they plant the sensor, get to safety, a sudden earthquake knocks stuff over, then they run back out to save the sensor or retrieve an item scenario.

--- A BANANA SPLIT MOMENT:

LOL, a helicopter pilot is warned that they are about to fly into some telephone wires and he puts his arms over his head to brace himself before deciding to actually try piloting the chopper away from them.

===-=== -- MY RATING SCALE -- ===-===

• 1. Reserved for Poorly Produced/Amateur Video
• 2. Utterly Terrible
• 3. Really Bad
• 4. Mediocre
• 5. Perfectly Average
• 6. Surprisingly Entertaining
• 7. Very Good
• 8. Incredibly Good
• 9. Exceptionally Great
• 10. Reserved for my Personal Favorites.

As another Missourian, and someone who's traveled, please learn how the locals pronounce the town at least. It's like how Kansans know the river is pronounced "Ar-kan-zis" when it's within our borders, but our local news guy, who's been here for decades, still calls the town south of Wichita "Ar-kan-saw City."

Low budget, special effects are not that special. And the plot is literally the same as in the movie Twister. Same sorta-divorced couple, who used to work together, suddenly working together again on an invention to help predict earthquakes. Only difference is she's supposed to be getting married instead of him and they have 2 grown children.

Timing of this movie is interesting. Not much info and very glossed over; it is a fast-moving movie that mostly focuses on what they could do to stop it rather than the real horror that would ensue amongst the people. Zero depth to it; not so engaging and repetitive like most disaster movies. Afterwards you have nothing to take home about it.

The plot could have shown clues amounting over the previous ten years that would point to its inevitability, then shown the aftermath of the people, how they cope, react and how the country was affected, which states got hit worse, and how they go on after the split. What they will do to rebuild....

I am from this area, been her for 47 years, so here we go. First of all, its New MADrid, as in "mad," and not ma-drid. The Mississippi river is a muddy river, not clear. We all have slight to severe southern accents, and no part of this film was done anywhere near Sikeston, New Madrid, Marston, or Portageville, Missouri. Sorry, id give this zero stars if possible. The fact that you can predict an earthquake is preposterous on its face anyway, much less a local agency carrying around warheads to stave off an earthquake. I know its a small budget film, but it was horribly done. There is a longing for many not only in our area, but all over the United States for a movie that can give a good history and a real look at what another 8-10.0 earthquake would look like here.

Can't put my finger on what it is, but I know a bad movie when I see it. Typical storyline where people don't heed warnings, predictable side stories, bad acting, pseudo-science.

My wife says she can tell by the colors in the movie that it is cheap.

Yet for some reason we still watched it because there is something about seeing things that we've never seen before that is entertaining. Like rubber-necking an accident. Stupid things like leaving the fate of the world in the hands of unqualified people, relying on rookies to fly a helicopter or handle a nuclear bomb.

This movie is the disaster.

Why the choice of little ol Sikeston? The only thing that I have seen that relates to the area is the shots of Jefferson City. Outside of that, the filming locations weren't in the areas talked about. At some point they end up in Nashville? No no no. They make Jefferson City seem REALLY close, it isn't. The CGI is cringe worthy at best. The "close calls" are even terrible. The mispronunciation of the local names was even worse. The whole movie was unrealistic.

Final assessment, do your job on making sure that homework is done to not make yourself look like a fool. Make sure you include areas in your filmmaking that are relevant to your production. And for the love of god and all that is holy and sacred, pronounce the names properly. Bonus: Better CGI/Green Screen would be fantastic.

All other reviews complain about the pronunciation. I am not familiar with that area so I didn't know better.

Another complaint is how the son could fly a helicopter. At the beginning of the film the son told his mother that his dad was teaching him how to fly a helicopter.

NOW with all of that out of the way. Yes it is Twister with earthquakes. Just by feel of the quakes, no matter where, they always know it is a 4.7, 6.1, 8.4 magnitude. The script was full of WTF & pointless interactions, dialogue & scenes. The CGI is pretty bad & the acting is, for the most part, is mostly pretty brutal...

Was disappointed 10 minutes in. The actors didn't even check to see if they were pronouncing location names correctly. And the locations looked nothing like the areas the actual towns. Marston isn't a 5 minute walk from the river, also the Mississippi River in this areas is over a MILE from shore to shore, the body of water shown in the movie was basically a drainage canal. It was maybe 100 feet across. In the first 30 minutes the only realism I saw was the drone image of the Capitol Building in Jefferson City. Let's not even talk about the rift traveling perpendicular to the actual fault. It's the worst film I've seen in years.

I have watched many disaster movies, from "Armageddon" to "Don't look up" and this is definitely one of the worst.

Who scripted this?

It's painful to watch and the plot is so worn, I can recall at least three other movies with the exact same one. Not impressed with the acting either. Overacting panic, then the opposite with no sign of urgency. Thirty seconds to get away from an exploding nuclear bomb? What?

How do they know it's an 8.3 earthquake and not an 8.2?

CGI: not impressed. You can tell it's CGI !

Some of the scenes don't make sense at all: why did the youngster have to fly the critical mission and not the experienced old guy?

Won't finish watching this.

Definitely too cringeworthy.

This movie has bad special effects, an inexplicable number of helicopters (and people who know how to fly helicopters), bad special effects, acting that is occasionally good (but often not), a man pulling up a map of the New Madrid rift zone only it's clearly a map of Southern California, a core family that doesn't look remotely alike, bad special effects, and not a single instance of any character-including the governor of the state-pronouncing the name of the town accurately. I have longed for a movie that explored the New Madrid threat in a way that was both entertaining and visually engaging. Alas, the wait continues. Also, there are bad special effects in this movie. It was, though, mildly entertaining. And I fullllly expected all of the above. 9/10.

Honestly, it's a typical disaster movie, decent enough. About a 5-6. If we're comparing this movie to blockbuster hits, it falls way short in many, many ways. But, if we compare it to truly BAD movies (Birdemic, Roller Gator, The Room, etc) it's basically Citizen Kane. Apparently there are rampant inaccuracies (especially if you're picky) most of which are easy to miss if you aren't familiar w the area. And I'm no seismologist but I'm pretty sure you can't just know a quake is a "7.4" by feel alone. Otherwise most of the sciencey stuff seemed good enough to me- passable, generally. The CGI is often goofy, but sometimes not. The plot is somewhat predictable but not totally. Nobody has an accent & Towns aren't pronounced right. Blah blah blah blah. There seemed to be an honest attempt at making a good movie and for that I'll give credit. I thought a lot of the disaster footage was actually pretty good. Also It kept me guessing as to how it would end. Will the US split into 2 countries? Will liberals take the West and normal people the East. Maybe this is the scenario that saves us all? Anyhow, not a bad movie.

If you're going to make a film about an area, you could at least pronounce the name the way the locals do. It's not New "ma Drid", it's New "MAD rid", Missouri. I used to work in the Southeast Missouri, Southern, Illinois, Western Kentucky area. I visited the New Madrid Earthquake Museum and had customers from that area that did business with the company in Memphis where I worked. I have never heard any of them pronounce it New ma Drid. When you have have an opportunity to grab supporters for you project by filming or basing it in the area of their homes, you don't slap them in the face by pronouncing it wrong. Everyone in the Western Kentucky, Southern Illinois area were proud when "US Marshalls" was filmed in their area and they call that film their own. When they filmed "The Firm" in Memphis, it was the same, a film they could call their own. Next time, research the area the film is about and get the details right for what could be the biggest fans of the project, the people of that area.

I mean, it's mildly entertaining. The acting is lukewarm. The story is derivative. The drama is room temperature. The CGI is good in some places, medium in some, and atrocious in some. How does that kid know how to pilot a helicopter? Not sure, but he's suddenly an expert. How did that bundle of nerves become governor? Not sure, but she's governor. Why does the cocky rival seismologist have a face you want to slap? Not sure, but he does. Why did the producers and the director make this movie? Not sure, but they did. Why did I watch this movie? Not sure, but it's probably because I did. Why are dogs so cute? Not sure, but they are.

I'm well traveled and a geography / news nerd. It looks to me -- the movie profile here does not say -- that the stock footage of the earthquake damage comes from eastern Ukraine and the combat devastation there, and from U. S. F5 tornado strikes. If that is the case, shame on the producers for using human suffering to further their truly awful movie project. So I give it a 1 just for that suspicion.

But aside from that, this is a truly terrible movie. The dialog is jammed with techno- pseudo-science mumbo jumbo that makes no sense. This is one movie where some exposition would actually help. A map maybe. A diagram of a slip-thrust fault.

There are no locals running around, fleeing the magnitude 10.2 quakes (budget problem I suspect).

The potential disasters are ridiculous, e.g. The entire country will be flooded by a tsunami, all caused by some fracking. And the idea that Missouri of all places has nuclear weapons and is authorized to use them... Well show me the plausibility of that. That's up there with the idea that the governor -- as usual, a total caricature of a right wing denier of everything -- can declare a "national emergency." And where are the feds? Washington? Always staples in these sort of mega-disaster films.

Additional problems: the "romantic" subplot makes no sense. The geologist woman is apparently having some sort of relationship with her meek assistant -- he has a breakdown of sorts -- and then, I guess, her hubby, an evil oil company employee, forces his way back on to the scene. Hubby has filled for divorce in, LOL, federal court! (A no fault divorce?) Hope he got a refund from his lawyers.

I also hope the owners of this awfulness can sell it to Riff Trax. It is primed for parody.

I like disaster films. I like to be on the edge of my seat while watching them. I was excited to see this come up on Hulu today. I can't even get through it. The acting and directing are painful to watch! I was able to get through 44 minutes. I'm sure this wasn't a cheap film to make. I kept thinking about the casting agent and why they hired these actors. So much goes into making a film. I've no doubt there was love and passion behind getting the film produced. But, hire a better director, better actors and better writers. It could have been a contender. Hate to write such a negative review. Ho-hum.

Well, when you put the words disaster movie and The Asylum together in the same sentence, then your first thought isn't going to be 'stellar entertainment'. Yet, I still opted to keep on watching "Continental Split" even after the opening logo displaying The Asylum.

And yeah, "Continental Split" is every bit as generic, laughable and low budget as you would expect it to be. Just like the majority of disaster movies out there actually.

The storyline that writers Gil Luna and Joe Roche put together was textbook material straight out of the How-To-Make-A-Disaster-Movie-For-Dummies handbook. The movie is one cliché after another, and the writers didn't conjure up anything grand or overly thrilling. "Continental Split" is one of those everything that nature has to throw at you happens around a small groups of protagonists, and yet they emerge victorious in the end. And you don't even believe for a second that the main characters were in any danger. So yeah, the writers definitely dropped the ball on this one.

I wasn't familiar with the cast ensemble in the movie. And while they had put together a fair cast ensemble, the acting performances were fair, despite the fact that the script and storyline was as generic and predictable as it could get.

Visually then this 2024 movie from director Nick Lyon is an archetypical disaster movie from The Asylum, complete with very questionable CGI effects that looks like they somehow managed to escape the 1990s.

It is rather amazing that a movie like this was birthed in 2024.

I managed to sit through the entire 88 minute runtime, but weren't particularly impressed or entertained. Yeah, some of us suffered through this ordeal so you don't have to; you're very welcome.

My rating of director Nick Lyon's 2024 movie "Continental Split" lands on a very generous three out of ten stars.

Very poor over-acting, way too many "millions will die" lines, constant "hair-on-fire" scenarios.

The film takes place in Missouri yet vehicles have Ohio plates.

Film shows a skyline that says Nashville, TN, but the film footage is from a totally different city.

Governor Barber (perceived to be a conservative) gives a press conference after a damaging earthquake and is speaking with smiles and laughter.

Lead character's son and daughter break into Governor Barber's press conference and take over the mic in front of the press. Governor security is nowhere to be found. LOL!

At least try to make it "fun to watch".

This is a "fail" from all angles.

No one from SEMO would mispronounce the names of the towns. Yawn.

The town is New Madrid. It's not in Spain. It's in Missouri.

As a native Sikestonian, learn the local language before using it.

Sikeston or New Madrid aren't cities. They are just towns. The cities in Missouri are Springfield, Saint Louis and Kansas City.

The New Madrid fault line has a rich history. No mention of it. The proposed epicenters are well known.

The local accent usage is a side bar of possible update as well.

Make it believable. The Mississippi River is a huge factor in the impending quake. And it is a deep, swift and demanding river. It is no casual kayak ride. Barge workers risk their lives daily to work on it.

It's obvious whomever directed this had no accurate knowledge of the area or the situations that are prevalent and current. Someone should have spoken to the mayor's office, since it is mentioned in the movie and gotten relevant facts. They are always ready and willing to help if a movie is going to be made representing our area.

Ridiculous plot, poor acting, awful special effects, terrible script, easily one of the five worst movies I've ever seen in my life. I have to think that the actors were actually laughing or shaking their heads when they were required to recite their lines. Maybe this movie was intentionally made to be this bad? They couldn't even pronounce the names of the local towns correctly.

If there's any redeeming quality to this film at all, I suppose that in someway it might bring a little bit of attention to the possibility of a major earthquake occurring along the new Madrid fault, which could result in significant loss of life and billions of dollars of property damage.

Decent plot, decent acting, definitely a Twister knock off but since I live there, and I know the areas and am well aware of the fault line it was slightly more enjoyable for me. HOWEVER... if you are doing a movie that contains info and details of an actual place and actual possible event, PLEASE ask around about how to pronounce things. I know it is pronounced one way in SPAIN, but it is not pronounced that way in Missouri. The first syllable gets the emphasis here. Just like Cairo is pronounced CAY-RO in Illinois. If you are going to these locations and shooting onsite, and don't bother to ask anyone, it shows a lack of attention to detail and concern that shows a lack of respect for your subject material and is probably why this is on Tubi and not Netflix. *Shrug* Again, decently acted and interesting plot. Just a shame that attention was not paid to the details.

Can NO ONE make one of these cheesy disaster movies that's isn't completely predictable? Same formula over and over again.

I'm so tired of seeing the same movie with a different cast and different disaster that I could spit. Come on Hollywood, give us something new! You'd think with the thousands of writers there are in Hollywood, someone, anyone, could come up with a fresh, new idea. Bad acting, predictable plot line, cheap, totally fake looking effects. And per usual, some total, entitled twit in the government that thinks they know it all.

And setting up devices to track the disaster with no building around yet a tremor hits and a huge building, out of nowhere falls on the equipment but, it's all in scathed!! Ya, totally believable!! NOT.

Oof... I'm a Missouri native and was excited to see a disaster movie about the New MADrid fault line. This movie, at best is terribly disappointing. I have seen better projects from student film makers. While the technical writing on Earthquakes seems developed, the emotional component is lacking and dry. The government response is ridiculous especially knowing this area is over due for a major quake. Also, the travel from Sikeston, Jeff City, New MADrid, Memphis and Nashville is unrealistic. I can't believe I sat through the whole movie but was just hoping it would get better. Oh...and let's talk about a divorce in the middle of a catastrophic event. And why are the main character's kids portrayed as bratty (daughter) and apathetic (son) when they seem to be better qualified and caring workers than the two young employees?? I know this review is all over the place....kind of like the movie. 🙄