Lightning: Fire from the Sky (2001)

While this film was somewhat entertaining at times, it completely lacked plausibility. For starters, lightning doesn't travel slowly. It travels at nearly the speed of light and it doesn't take five minutes to jump around a school hallway and zap the principal. Also, two merging storms wouldn't create a huge surge of lighting and the storm wouldn't go on forever if left alone. They all dissipate their energy eventually. The film also suggested that an explosion at a small refinery could dissipate a storm that stretches across the entire state of Missouri. That is completely ridiculous. The characters in the film also think that if a fire burns off all of the oxygen, a vacuum is left in its wake..... Just because there is no oxygen, it doesn't mean that there is a vacuum. Other gases exist (CO2, Nitrogen etc.). As far as acting goes, Stacy Keach and John Schneider did fairly well given the movie they were in. In the end, if you like terrible movies that are not well acted or researched, this film is for you.

I bought this movie because it was inexpensive and I love disaster movies especially ones about weather.I knew it was a low budget movie that was possibly made for TV but I enjoyed it.There were parts that were stupid like when the mayor(played by Barbara Crampton)was driving in the storm and her car goes off the road.Her performance was terrible.It was soap opera type acting in some areas.Barbara you should have stuck to your former gig on the young and the restless where you played a really campy,funny role.No offense,but this movie should have casted someone who could have portrayed the character with more professionalism. Excellent performance by Jesse Eisenberg playing the 14 year old playing the weather expert in that small town.Obviously this would not really happen in reality since the experts should have detected it and warned the public,but this is just a movie and was fun watching it. And as always,excellent and believable performances by John Schneider,Michelle Greene,and Stacy Keach. The whole idea of 2 giant storms on a collision course wreaking havoc on a city or town is an interesting idea and I wonder if it's ever occurred for real.Or maybe it's not possible i'm not sure. I enjoyed this movie because it was about a regular storm with thunder,lightning and rain and not another goddamn movie about tornado's.Twister was a good movie,but there were tons of other movies(mostly made for TV)made after it which were basically all the same including one called night of the twister also starring John Schneider in a similar role. I would love to see a big budget feature film about the same kind of storm in lightning:fire from the sky terrorizing a large city with an all star cast with better special effects making the storms look more real.When are the makers of these movies gonna realize that thunder happens after the lightning flashes and not at the same time.This is why a lot of the storms in movies look fake(especially the older films).Some of the newer ones i've seen in the theater have made them look and seem real.

This film would be perfect. Even without commentary, it's so stupidly hillarious it's worth watching. Clearly directed by some kind of partially trained monkey and edited by his cousin. While it starts a bit slow, it quickly kicks in with various scenes of lightning mischief. Who ever know lighting could go so slow!? Highly recommended!

This movie is quite unrealistic. Obviously the story writers didn't bother collect information on weather phenomena. The big problem with colliding weather system isn't lightning but torrential rains accompanied with floodings, and strong storms, even tornados. It is also obsolete that a boy would find out more about the weather than the weather forecasting organisations like the NOAA and others. There are so many exciting scenarios for weather-related disasters--so why did they choose something so unrealistic?