BlazeLime
Strong and Moving!
Erica Derrick
By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.
Maleeha Vincent
It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.
spirullo
Another CGI offering which leaves you wondering when the industry will produce decent material. But hey - you're an actor you do the thing & pick up the cheque!
The problem with ' made in a computer film ' is that it shows! For me technology nerd be tempered with story quality,too much ' cheap thrills ' ate sought nowadays. The actors have done better than the piffle in this offering,from Steve Baldwin to ' the smoking man ' - but there are many such heavy on the tech - low on content films at present.The most that can be said is these allow you to throw the main breaker to your brain & watch in a stupor,you won't miss much!
Moge
I had to stay up with my young son last night and thought Dark Storm looked vaguely interesting compared to the other pap on offer. No. It was the aura of car crash TV that kept me watching. A fat Stephen Baldwin acting worse than my armchair does. My word, I've never seen anyone so bad in a film. His scientist sidekick and the villain at least were professional and I could believe they were actors, but Mr. Baldwin gave the standout worst "acting performance" I have ever had the misfortune of sitting in front of. Whatever you do, do not waste an hour or two of your precious life on this utter shower of *&^%. Spend the time more fruitfully in staring at a blank wall, or cutting your toenails.
John Esche
It doesn't get much sillier than this for the serious sci-fi buff, but as low-expectation, old fashioned "Saturday afternoon matinée" diversion, it's entertaining enough.A slightly overweight Stephen Baldwin, in a follow-up to an even sillier 2006 sci-fi opus, "Earth Storm" about using bombs to put a crumbling moon back together, invents a weapon using "dark matter" (apparently a more photogenic, controllable version of anti-matter) and generatable thunderstorms. Naturally, things go awry, foolish military men make stupid, ill-considered snap judgements causing even greater problems, traitors steal the weapon and (reaching the heights of "Marvel Comic silliness") Baldwin absorbs some of the "dark matter", making himself a self-generating (but only defensive for some reason - until the villain does it) weapon! The big screen Spiderman films made as much scientific sense (why can't screenwriters give us entertainment with stories JUST as exciting that gets the science right and doesn't insult our intelligence!?) but had more consistent characters and motivations.If you can ignore the basically incredible weapon which is the McGuffin which gets the plot rolling, the piece is fun on its own terms - no worse than Disney's 1979 "Black Hole" (which famously made its title dark star a glowing whirlpool). The Disney had firmer scientific underpinnings but worse acting and special effects, so it's sort of a fair trade off.The always engaging Rob LaBelle makes a fine scientific sidekick (who actually does most of the work - not to mention acting), and Gardiner Millar as the chief villain is solid - even when the special effects have him reenacting the last scenes of the first Indiana Jones film.Undemanding fun, but keep your expectations low.
TheEmulator23
I am always at a loss of words why so many terrible films are made...this film is no exception. In every single way, this is an embarrassment. Don't get me wrong I love good ol' fashioned GOOD Sci-Fi. (Alien, Aliens, Matrix Trilogy, so on and so forth) But this is embarrassing. The plot is terrible in the worst way, all the characters are cardboard cut-outs, and I would rather watch a High school student film than this piece of garbage. I don't know if the people involved are really trying, or it is all just one big inside joke, or if they get some kind of tax break for bringing in business. I remember when Stephen Baldwin was part of a great film called "The Usual Suspects." I always wonder when actors turn to films they must know are bad going in, and yet still are part of them! I can't imagine that he is paid very well doing this, or maybe the shooting schedule is so short it is worth the money, or if they even care that this So called "Movie" will permanently be on his resume forever. I thought "Bio-Dome" was bad, but at least it was bad in a good way. There is no excuse for this ludicrous waste of space. I shouldn't have watched it, and through most of the movie I felt bad for all of the actors involved. I know they have talent. Hell the General was the great bad guy (The Cigarette Smoking Man in the X-files for many years) and yet he chose to do this ridiculous obviously cheap film anyway. I don't know if it is just the paycheck, or the promise of a theatrical release, or good special effects, or if they just want to keep on working that makes these people do this. Please everyone who reads this (hopefully you don't bother the "Movie" is that bad) why don't you stick yourself w/needles under your fingernails instead; it's less painful. I know that here on IMDb they rate on a scale to 10, but I prefer out of 4 stars. I would give it 1/4 of one star it is that bad, and I only give it that because Stephen Baldwin was so good in "The Usual Suspects" and his brother Alec is so good on the show "30 Rock." Avoid at all costs, you will be glad you did.
