I wouldn't know where to begin. I'll just say if it was a made-for-TV thing, shot in like 1984, over a 2 week stretch - then I might say it was somewhat well done.
shareAdmit it: you were entertained by it.
Let's say no to homophonia. We all sound the same inside.share
if they had explained how the sensors work, i might have enjoyed it
so many movies, so little time
I knew it when I watched the film at 9. Didn't need an explanation. They study fluid flow (speed, density, direction, and pattern the angle of trajectory). Basically, everything Bill could see with his instinct, but not know the figures just the flow motion.
shareAgree. The special effects are laughable and don't come close to what a real tornado looks like, moves like, or sounds like. And Dr. Jo is an infuriating twit. If I was Bill Paxton's character, I would have tossed her into the tornado at the beginning of the movie. "I gotta see it!"
Her character is just as stupid and annoying as Tom Cruise's son was in War of the Worlds. "I have to see this, Dad."
It was weak cheese back then and is today. 3/10
Too bad they didn't make it an adaptation of Sterling's Heavy Weather. In that, they are afraid of a Cat 6 storm that threatens to be a permanent storm formation like the spot on Jupiter. Plenty of interesting slight-future tech and Illuminati sub-plots.
It does remind me of an 80's action adventure film. I think as long as you don't take it seriously it is entertaining enough.
share