I'll admit that having heard all these negative things about this 2 part movie, that it wasn't all that bad. It certainly wasn't as bad as I had expected but it also really wasn't too much good either.

The movie is filled with many stupid silly plot-lines. They are so all formulaic that none of them offers any surprises. On top of that, the dialog in the movie is absolutely horrible. At times it even manages to become laughable. This is the sort of typical dramatic disaster movie that features many characters in it, of which none really ever work out as an interesting or engaging one.

This movie isn't about natural disasters, this is about people and their personal problems. Now is that anything new or interesting? I mean, I've I wanted to follow a story like this I would watch a soap opera in stead. It's the sort of mistake "Deep Impact" and disaster movies in general often make. The movie at times tries to put in morale in about the environment and global warming and such but all those things come across as forced and look silly because of that in the movie.

It seems to take for ever before the introduction and build-up in the story stops. There is a lot of talking about natural disasters but not enough of it gets actually shown on the screen. The movie is too long on its drama.

The use of news archive material of bad weather conditions and tornadoes is too obvious. It makes the movie seem even more cheap and silly.

There are some good actors in the movie but even they can't make the movie work out fully- or the dialog. Randy Quaid, Dianne Wiest and Brian Dennehy are no small time actors. Guess they also regret being in this, looking back at it.

But the movie does a good job at keeping the pace high, even though when nothing is happening. For a made for TV production this really wasn't all that bad. I mean, I have seen far worse attempts. The movie was overall good looking, despite of the weak and cheap special effects. But I don't really see what's the big deal about it, since the special effects get never featured that prominently in the movie. I therefor also feel that some of the negativity toward this movie is for most part unjustified. Not that it deserves raving criticism but its a decent attempt that does not bore but just becomes too silly and unlikely in parts.

5/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Fist of all don't listen to the negative critics here this movie was made for TV and was the highest rated Mini-Series in 2 years for CBS (because it was good)Part 1 had 19.4 million viewers, Part 2 17 million. If you've seen some of these wackadoo Sci-Fi Channel movies this is not one of them. Area51 FX used a combination of actual stock footage blended with cgi and LightWave3D Modeling to create the FX with a budget close to $15 million. Keep in mind of just over a thousand reviews on IMDb 12.5% give this movie a 10 over on Amazon of 34 reviews it scores a 3.5 out of five. Not to shabby some people just like to pick fun movies apart as if this was meant to be Shakespearean its not its meant to be what it is a DISASTER MOVIE. Some movies with larger budgets have their flows to like 2012 which had a monster budget and awesome FX had a single family plot line while all heck breaks loose around the world same for DAY AFTER TOMORROW. This excellent TV-movie gives us several characters, some better than others and while I liked the other movies mentioned so much so that I bought them on Blu-Ray I just ordered the sequel CATEGORY 7 on Blu-Ray after watching this one on Sci-Fi channel over the weekend. Great fun, Very Good Special FX, some funny and interesting characters, likable acting and actors for me these days with some lame movies on TV this was a cut above 8 out of 10 stars for keeping me seated the full 3 hours.

A wasted effort. On the surface it's a typical disaster movie: we're involved in the lives of a few people who get caught up in the Big Event. However, the script is so awful and there's so much explaining of the characters' background within the dialogue that we feel we're being treated like morons. Even Sesame Street didn't explain the origins of Mr Snuffleupagus or how Mr Hooper died: we can work it out. Someone thought that entering 'Enron' into the script would give it currency when discussing power companies. The acting is by and large bland, with the exception of the older performers (Randy Quaid, Brian Dennehy), and after the first hour, I couldn't care less about who the storms took out.

But maybe there are the special effects to watch. Sadly, no. Even on a 20-year-old TV set I could see one tractor and trailer were computer-generated—badly. Maybe there are budgetary limitations, so I can forgive that one. Footage of a plane trying to land looked pretty real, but I kept telling myself I had seen that before. This site confirms it: it was from an earlier film, Nowhere to Land.

So in summary, the only good bits are from another film, and when you see the best action sequences compressed into a 30-second network promo, it makes Category 6 look quite good. My advice: rely on your network to do some good 30-second clips, watch them, and save yourself two nights.