From the NY Daily News, by David Hinckley

NBC's 'Meteor' falls through bleak space: Certain doom was never so boring

Let's hope that when the world does end, we can come up with more compelling drama than you'll see on "Meteor," the two-part miniseries that starts this Sunday and finishes next Sunday on NBC.

That's a shame, too, because the premise has a certain urgency: The giant asteroid Kassandra has been knocked out of its orbit and is hurtling toward Earth.

Its advance shower of meteorites is already knocking out hospitals and airplanes. More critical, Kassandra itself is somewhere between 24 and 48 hours from a direct hit, which will be what scientists succinctly term "an extinction event."

"We will all go together when we go," as Tom Lehrer once sang, and would that anything in the script of "Meteor" were so melodic.

Instead, we get predictable and clunky.

In the opening scene, two scientists are charting galactic activity. Imogene O'Neill (Marla Sokoloff), the loyal and plucky assistant, sees some figures that don't seem right and she brings them to her boss, Dr. Lehman.

Lehman is played by - surprise! - Christopher Lloyd and he is - surprise! - a mad genius.

They ring up bigwig government scientist Dr. Chetwyn (Jason Alexander), who fired Lehman because he was nuts, and try to convince him this big rock is en route.

At first, he doesn't believe them, but soon the government and military realize that if they don't act fast, Kassandra will be the checkered flag for planet Earth.

Meanwhile, good L.A. cop Jack Crowe (Billy Campbell) has an even more immediate problem. His corrupt ex-partner, Calvin Stark (Michael Rooker), has announced his plan to sadistically murder Jack's whole family.

"Meteor" eventually weaves these two diverse stories together - the rush to save the planet, the desperate scramble to stop a guy who becomes more like Freddy Krueger every minute.

The viewers' problem is that even the most casual TV watcher has seen almost everything that's about to happen, from the false euphoria when the military thinks it has solved the Kassandra problem to the elementary necessity of making sure bad guys are as dead as they look.

The formulaic story also limits what the actors can do, though Sokoloff slides nicely into the plucky reluctant heroine role.

Wonder if the end was this prosaic for the dinosaurs.

Reminds me: When is "armageddon" coming to bluray escecially since the dvd isnt even anamorphic ? :confused:

Appears to have been written by a high schooler; horrible. Had to turn it off after about 15 minutes or so. It's pure crap.

Appears to have been written by a high schooler; horrible. Had to turn it off after about 15 minutes or so. It's pure crap.

I made it 10......

It's an interesting mix of "Naked Science," "Seinfeld," "Back to the Future," and "Friday the 13th."

In the next episode they build a DeLorean and go back in time to save Doc Brown.

It makes Impact looks like Masterpiece. Obviously the writers never paid attention in high school physics: If we blow up a rock, all the mass disappears! I think Christopher Lloyd was lucky to be killed off early.

It reminded me of a theatrical movie that came out in the late 1970s, also called "Meteor," if I remember correctly. I was in grad school (physics) at the time, and a bunch of us went out to see it. The plot was so lame and the special effects were so cheesy that we joked about it for weeks afterward.

This time around the special effects are better, and hey, it's in HD, but the plot is just as lame as before.

Yeah, this is a cheeze-ball, it's still better then the bore-fest known as Impact. It's also fun seeing some of the B-list actors in this B-movie. A fun summer showing.

it was a great movie... who couldnt take a believable jason alexander playing a scientist...

As Dan Ackroyd would say, “Exquisitely bad!” And damn, I was waiting for the hot tub scene...

Appears to have been written by a high schooler; horrible. Had to turn it off after about 15 minutes or so. It's pure crap.
Only slightly less viewing time here. Painful. Some SyFy-channel drivel is more creative--although it looked like they'd shelled out plenty for computer graphics special effects. -- John

it was a great movie... who couldnt take a believable jason alexander playing a scientist...

He's the master of his domain.;)

I liked it better than the ABC Movie a couple weeks back about the Moon falling apart. The writing had more edge than your typical movie of the week. As for the science I'll suspend belief but the idea that the one scientist fired the other because he thought he was nuts is not uncommon in the field. I thought it was good that the writer threw in some twists. The problem is there were too many of them. Almost every scene had a twist and I think some should have played out without one.

It wasn't horrible... but it did have enough plot holes to drive a meteor through! :)

In the last half hour I found myself wondering how this was going to have a 2nd part next Sunday... then the not-so-dramatic revelation at the end... and I have a feeling like part 2 almost has to be a lot like part 1 was.

One thing struck me, though, as I watched... and I wonder if that isn't how such movies get birthed in the first place...

"Meteor" actually watches a lot like someone had written a bunch of unrelated short stories and couldn't figure out how to make a movie.

The woman who gets separated from her mentor who tragically dies and she has to endure many hardships on her way with his important info...

The guy who has a strained relationship with his daughter but also has a mortal enemy ex-partner who now is out to get him via his daughter...

The woman who is a doctor and a mother, has to choose her priorities when faced with a danger to her patients AND her son...

It's like... someone took a bunch of incomplete stories, and stitched them together with the meteor-plot as a wraparound reason for jumping from story to story.

Doy!!! Biggest meteor EVAR going to hit Earth. Let's not even bother talking to other countries about doing a coordinated missile launch. They never even bothered to think about that. First thing I would do is give Russia, China, Kazakhstan, India etc a call and try getting them on board. I think faced with world destruction they'd more than agree.

it makes you wonder...who gives projects like these the green light? I mean seriously, these movies cost money--who would invest in this and why would ANY actor want to be associated with it? It screams "I RAN OUT OF MONEY AND WILL DO ANYTHING". It's just something I've been wondering for years and years.

Appears to have been written by a high schooler; horrible. Had to turn it off after about 15 minutes or so. It's pure crap.

LOL ... After awhile I started thinking of it as a spoof of the genre. But yeah, it melts your brain.

Whoo! No more space in the fallout shelter!!! I can't walk 15miles there with my child and new baby!!! Just so happens there are three hot babes ready to give up their space, and a room with a hot tub nearby...:rolleyes::D

it makes you wonder...who gives projects like these the green light? I mean seriously, these movies cost money--who would invest in this and why would ANY actor want to be associated with it? It screams "I RAN OUT OF MONEY AND WILL DO ANYTHING". It's just something I've been wondering for years and years.

Did you think that network execs were geniuses? I think they live so out of touch with the populace they really have no idea of what to program other than looking at ratings and focus group results. Most probably never watch ANY TV.

This made-for-tv movie sure flunks basic science. A comet hits Kassandra
and sends it to Earth in less then 48 hours? The real life Kassandra
asteroid is in the Main Asteroid Belt between Mars and Jupiter, Haley's
Comet in 1985-1986 after a slingshot around the sun took 2 and half
months to get close to Earth, in Meteor Kassandra seems to be moving at
half-light speed.

Like other movies the makers chose to blow up the asteroid after it is
well past the moon, at that close a meteor with a planet killer mass, it
does not matter how many nukes you shoot at it, kiss your ass goodbye.

Nukes are not designed to destroy mass several times larger then the
biggest mountain on Earth, they are designed to radiate people to death.

On the opposite extreme that woman scientist drives around Mexico at a
snail's pace and seems really stupid, she could of stayed put and phoned
the data in.

One thing I kept asking is why are they counting on just Costanza, is
NASA and JPL on holiday? They plot trajectories for a living.

On the opposite extreme that woman scientist drives around Mexico at a
snail's pace and seems really stupid, she could of stayed put and phoned
the data in.

You only got this one partly right.

The guy in charge at the bunker ordered for her to be delivered to the bunker "by any means necessary"... so that's why she was on her way.

HOWEVER... Apparently in their world, "by any means necessary" for a VIP in an earth-cataclysmic situation means... have the VP call up the local sheriff and have him drive her there personally. No military escort or anything.

If nothing else, you'd think a national guard unit would have been ordered to send a couple of jeeps to escort her there to make sure nothing else happened along the way.

You only got this one partly right.

The guy in charge at the bunker ordered for her to be delivered to the bunker "by any means necessary"... so that's why she was on her way.

Actually that was after she very slowly drove out of Mexico by a few feet and about one and half hours (or more) into the movie.

Why would they stop anybody from entering the U.S. from Mexico with the entire planet about to be destroyed?

The trajectory story made no sense to me. You only need the approximate trajectory before launch and then you make mid-course corrections, and you have sensing instruments on your missile to home in on the target.

Nobody would dare look up at the meteors because you never know when one might explode with blinding light equivalent to an H-bomb and you'd be blind. Certainly a scientific genius like Doc Brown would not have looked up.

At least the bad science was consistent. Once you accept that a shoulder-fired weapon can make a small meteor completely disappear, you can also accept that a nuke can make a big meteor disappear.

Fox reruns clobbered NBC during the first hour, and then NBC took first place after Fox went off the air. I guess that is NBC's strategy. :)

At least the bad science was consistent. Once you accept that a shoulder-fired weapon can make a small meteor completely disappear, you can also accept that a nuke can make a big meteor disappear.

I was thinking about mentioning the shoulder-fired missles myself but listing every bad science moment in the movie in one post would be longer then this entire thread.

Come on, this was in the "so bad it's good" category. Well, almost anyways. The type of TV we clearly all like to pick out the nits. I'm sure The Storm will be just as bad, if not worse.

At least Merlin is halfway decent.

Actually that was after she very slowly drove out of Mexico by a few feet and about one and half hours (or more) into the movie.

True.

I did find myself wondering just how far into Mexico they were when they started. Actually, at the beginning of the movie it wasn't clear to me they even were in Mexico! I had to decipher that along the way.

Why would they stop anybody from entering the U.S. from Mexico with the entire planet about to be destroyed?

As much as I hate defending the plot :) This one *might* be plausible if they had not made any national "this is the end of the world" announcements as yet. They were telling people to take shelter, so they might close borders to keep down an influx of people trying to go where they already didn't have enough room.

The trajectory story made no sense to me. You only need the approximate trajectory before launch and then you make mid-course corrections, and you have sensing instruments on your missile to home in on the target.

I didn't buy all of their logic here either... but, they did make a point of showing some satellites getting knocked out of commission, so they might not be able to make long-term course corrections.

BUT, that kind of gets shot out of the water when it looks like they keep waiting until the rock is in the atmosphere to shoot at it anyway.

I think it would be like Katrina where many law enforcement officers disappeared. And that's what usually happens in the science fiction stories about large-scale disasters that I have read. People stop performing their normal job which means no food for sale anywhere, and the lack of food is the immediate problem that everybody has to deal with.

I think it would be like Katrina ....People stop performing their normal job which means no food for sale anywhere, and the lack of food is the immediate problem that everybody has to deal with.
That whole market scene was pretty lame, come to think of it... the whole thing was pretty lame :D:D:D
Stacey Keach... What rock did they dig him out from under?

I don't plan to watch part 2, I'd rather clip my dogs toenails....

I watched this movie and I kept wondering if it was the worst science-fiction movie ever? How could so many people be involved in such an utterly implausible story. I was going to start listing all the mistakes that were made but it's just too many to count. What I really wanted to know was how could so many highly talented people make such a movie? Doesn't anyone respect the viewer? Is there anyone in charge of a studio that has any respect for the intelligence of the people who watch these stories? So many people, so little sense. And to think they stretched it into two weekends. Incredible!:(

I am sure the 2nd part of this tv movie will be much better.
Besides the acting and dialogue becoming great maybe they will reveal this is in fact another dimension where the laws of science, not to mention logic, are strangely different.
Or maybe it was all a dream Christopher Lloyd had.

I am sure the 2nd part of this tv movie will be much better....
Well that's the thing with multi-part movies, etc... isn't it?
If the first part is good and gets positive buzz- it will pick up viewers via snowball effect. On the other hand- if the first part sucked as badly as part one of this thing did- who on earth is going to stick around and see if part two sucks any less :D:D
As others have posted- how were well known actors duped into playing in this dreck? Are they just collecting a paycheck? Jason Alexander should have wads of cash from 174 episodes of Seinfeld. I don't get it??

As others have posted- how were well known actors duped into playing in this dreck? Are they just collecting a paycheck? Jason Alexander should have wads of cash from 174 episodes of Seinfeld. I don't get it??

It was Jason Alexander's chance to do a breakthrough role and be considered a 'serious' actor in Hollywood.
Mind you it has been known for decades on Broadway that Alexander is a great actor, but that doesn't count in La-La-Land.

There are plenty of actors who have done worse crap than this for a paycheck.

Jason Alexander gets no royalties from the "Seinfeld" reruns. Zero. Zip. He gets standard SAG residuals. And he negotiated a small payment for the DVDs by threatening not to participate in the special features.

He did get about $1 million per episode during Season Nine. But that was his only big money year.

Jason Alexander was a great jerk in "Pretty Woman"... so I'd seen him do more acting before his stint on Seinfeld. As good as he was being funny on that show, he'd probably do better in serious roles if he were ever offered them (Meteor notwithstanding).

I assume the actors don't actually see the finished product before it airs? That would explain some things :eek:

It makes Impact looks like Masterpiece. Obviously the writers never paid attention in high school physics: If we blow up a rock, all the mass disappears! I think Christopher Lloyd was lucky to be killed off early.


I thought Impact made Meteor look like a masterpiece.

best movie on TV right now...

loved it !

I'll probably watch pt. 2 just to see how they get themselves out of the corner they've written themselves into.

I may have to change channels, though, if another chick runs her Ford out of gas.

I'm kinda hoping Rooker turns into an alien slug. It's almost the same character.

I agree it's better than Impact. I couldn't get past the meteor being twice as heavy as earth. Wouldn't the earth have started orbiting the moon?

Jason Alexander was a great jerk in "Pretty Woman"... so I'd seen him do more acting before his stint on Seinfeld. As good as he was being funny on that show, he'd probably do better in serious roles if he were ever offered them (Meteor notwithstanding).

I saw Jason in the Cone Heads movie which was before Seinfeld, so yeah he got small parts in the past but I suspect he wants bigger parts now.

I thought Impact made Meteor look like a masterpiece.+1. I can hardly wait for the gripping conclusion that will also be so full of errors that when I point them out my wife will tell me to STFU!

I noticed during last Sunday's episode there was a trailer for yet another end-of-the-world (target L.S.) mini-series coming soon. Can't remember what it was called though.

"The Storm" and it will be the following two Sundays after the Meteor finale.

http://www.nbc.com/survival-sundays/

Reminds me: When is "armageddon" coming to bluray escecially since the dvd isnt even anamorphic ? :confused:

Alas, not for a while.

The conformed master was apparently destroyed in a fire at Disney a few years back, so when it's redone for Blu-Ray they will have to go back to the original camera negatives.

If you missed part 1 or you want to see it again:

http://www.hulu.com/watch/82594/meteor-part-1

Can't wait for tonight ! THIS is the best movie of the year !

They showed a guy lifting a piece of the meteor that should have weighed at least 4,000 pounds.

And we're just beginning. :D

lol all this time I thought their command center was in an underground fortified location...oh well! This is sooooooo bad it's embarassing...and the previews for the storm look just as silly.

omg...worst acting ever

I predicted last week it would be like "Friday the 13th" meaning that the killer would come back from being dead multiple times. I nailed it!

I deleted it after the dust storm on the moon that wiped out the lunar lander and the astronaut's footprints. Since when did the moon get an atmosphere? There is just too much bad science in these made-for-TV movies.

omg...worst acting ever

I wanted to like this. But the acting was really bad.

I did however set my DVR to record the Storm next week.;)

I could accept much of the bad science. I have a book on celestial mechanics that says you would try to use nuclear weapons against an incoming asteroid if the alternative of doing nothing was certain disaster. Plus the fact that a more scientifically accurate story of how to detect and deflect asteroids would be much too boring for a movie.

But I could not accept a scientist performing all the necessary calculations by typing random keys on a laptop keyboard. That was going too far. You could see her fingers were hitting the same two keys over and over as fast as she could hit them. That's totally absurd. That's not how scientists work.

In other words, they were successful in getting me to suspend disbelief, but then they repeatedly ruined it with bad acting and a bad script in many different scenes.

Not so good. :eek:

The concept could have been a sound one with about eight hours rather than "four" in order to develop the plot and provide realistic transitions.

The acting of several characters was just beyond the high-school stage. :(

Discovery had a semi-realistic movie called "Comet Impact" a couple of years ago. As I recall, it was mostly about evacuating people from the impact site. Rather boring and I don't remember any of it except that people on the last plane to leave had a lot of turbulence.

But I could not accept a scientist performing all the necessary calculations by typing random keys on a laptop keyboard. That was going too far. You could see her fingers were hitting the same two keys over and over as fast as she could hit them. That's totally absurd. That's not how scientists work.
I would like to know what kind of battery that laptop was using to last that long without being recharged.

I would like to know what kind of battery that laptop was using to last that long without being recharged.

I want to know what the case was made of, and what kind of suspension the hard disk used, so that it could survive a car crash. :eek:

I want to know what the case was made of, and what kind of suspension the hard disk used, so that it could survive a car crash. :eek:

solid state hard drive....

Not so good. :eek:

The concept could have been a sound one with about eight hours rather than "four" in order to develop the plot and provide realistic transitions.

The acting of several characters was just beyond the high-school stage. :(

Now, you see, you've just insulted all those hard working high school actors and actresses.

I thought the casting and the writing was atrocious. However, I did watch the whole thing.... :p

I would like to know what kind of battery that laptop was using to last that long without being recharged.

I just liked the fact that it kept Maria Sokoloff on screen.

'Impact' (ABC) which wasn't that great looked like an Oscar-winner compared to 'Meteor.' This was really bottom feeder dreck (though the asteroid SFX were decent.) The only decent character was the Sheriff whom I liked. I mean the deaths of Lloyd (car hit n run) and totally non-believable character scientist Jason Alexander (beware the giant plasma TV!) were just...so stupidly shocking they were actually funny. The subplots were ridiculous. I mean did they have jr high students write this? And hundreds of nukes going off under a HUGE asteroid DEFLECTS its decent path...I mean like by 45 degrees?!?!?!? Nevermind the fact you're in a (mostly) vacuum and no air pressure blast to push against the asteroid. This isn't even at the level of junk science but stupidity at its best (worst?)

... Nevermind the fact you're in a (mostly) vacuum and no air pressure blast to push against the asteroid...

Vacuum is OK. Neutrons travel through the vacuum unimpeded and impact the asteroid with tremendous energy. Scientists have even calculated the optimum height above the asteroid to detonate the weapon.

It wouldn't be like the movie depicted it, but I'm willing to give them a little slack on that.

'Impact' (ABC) which wasn't that great looked like an Oscar-winner compared to 'Meteor.' This was really bottom feeder dreck (though the asteroid SFX were decent.) The only decent character was the Sheriff whom I liked. I mean the deaths of Lloyd (car hit n run) and totally non-believable character scientist Jason Alexander (beware the giant plasma TV!) were just...so stupidly shocking they were actually funny. The subplots were ridiculous. I mean did they have jr high students write this? And hundreds of nukes going off under a HUGE asteroid DEFLECTS its decent path...I mean like by 45 degrees?!?!?!? Nevermind the fact you're in a (mostly) vacuum and no air pressure blast to push against the asteroid. This isn't even at the level of junk science but stupidity at its best (worst?)

I think it was just the opposite. Meteor had better special effects and was easier to watch than Impact was.

But like all fictional shows, they have absolutely no bearing on real life, from shows like ER to 24, they are far from real. That is why it's fiction, and it has always been this way. This is nothing new with TV.

Vacuum is OK. Neutrons travel through the vacuum unimpeded and impact the asteroid with tremendous energy. Scientists have even calculated the optimum height above the asteroid to detonate the weapon.


Though isn't this scenario for an asteroid intercepted VERY far out where nuclear blast (not hundreds) could alter its trajectory slightly but enough to bypass earth? Hundreds close by given the scenario in 'Meteor' would IMHO either 1) not create nearly enough energy/pressure for observable deflection 2) shatter the thing into millions of pieces which doesn't help the cause either.

In reality, you'd be dealing with probabilities. Scientists would estimate the probability of the asteroid hitting the earth. They would consider that the use of nuclear weapons might increase or decrease the probability of the asteroid hitting the earth, depending on the accuracy of the missiles and other factors. You would have to balance one risk against the other. There would be many unknowns. We have no actual data about what nuclear weapons do to real asteroids. We don't have nuclear weapons that are specifically optimized for deflecting asteroids. The incoming asteroid would have an unknown composition.

So, in reality, you would not be able to say with certainty that you saved the earth even if you were totally successful in deflecting the asteroid further away from earth, because you were always dealing with probabilities. This would be boring in a movie. It might be appropriate for a documentary on the Science Channel but not for a big budget network movie.

"Meteor" cheated by changing probability to certainty. They cheated by greatly exaggerating the effects of the weapons used. The asteroid was too big and the distance was too close. They cheated because, although we do have technology to hit incoming objects, that technology would not be installed on ICBMs intended for land targets. But they were reasonably consistent. Once you accept the basic rules of the movie that are required to make a dramatic story, the rules aren't violated.

There was a loose connection to real science because nuclear weapons would be our only option (besides doing nothing) that could be used against an asteroid discovered late, and there would be a choice of exploding them on the surface or exploding them above the surface with different types of results. And we do have actual experience sending a projectile into a comet and landing a spacecraft on an asteroid. The movie doesn't completely disregard science. It cheats, but we understand the logical reasons why they had to cheat for dramatic affect.

But "Impact" was different. That movie had no connection to real science. And the bad science was contradictory, they kept changing the rules. It was a total mess.

'Impact' (ABC) which wasn't that great looked like an Oscar-winner compared to 'Meteor.' This was really bottom feeder dreck (though the asteroid SFX were decent.) The only decent character was the Sheriff whom I liked. I mean the deaths of Lloyd (car hit n run) and totally non-believable character scientist Jason Alexander (beware the giant plasma TV!) were just...so stupidly shocking they were actually funny. The subplots were ridiculous. I mean did they have jr high students write this? And hundreds of nukes going off under a HUGE asteroid DEFLECTS its decent path...I mean like by 45 degrees?!?!?!? Nevermind the fact you're in a (mostly) vacuum and no air pressure blast to push against the asteroid. This isn't even at the level of junk science but stupidity at its best (worst?)

And here I thought it was just me. What a piece of manure, indeed!

I'd have already penciled in "Meteor" as the worst network TV show of the year -- except for the knowledge that NBC has "The Storm". another two-parter, awaiting our disapproval Sunday at 9.

Though isn't this scenario for an asteroid intercepted VERY far out where nuclear blast (not hundreds) could alter its trajectory slightly but enough to bypass earth? Hundreds close by given the scenario in 'Meteor' would IMHO either 1) not create nearly enough energy/pressure for observable deflection 2) shatter the thing into millions of pieces which doesn't help the cause either.

LOL, yes. The force of several nuclear blasts o nthe surface of an asteroid could be enough to deflect it, but you are right, this deflection would be at most 1-2 degrees. If you did this early enough, this would be enough for the asteroid to go from certain impact to just missing earth. Obviously, once the asteroid hits that atmosphere it is WAY too late. First, a deflection of 1-2 degrees would just change where the asteroid struck, not change the fact that an impact is certain. Second, this asteroid was moving slower than any asteroid EVER! Ridiculously slow! It takes 10 SECONDS for an asteroid moving at 11 km/sec. (normal velocity for an earth-crossing asteroid) to go from the space/atmosphere interface where you actually start to see it glow, to an impact on the surface. Again, if you see the asteroid hit the asteroid, it is TOO LATE.

Anyways, at least this movie wasn't as stupid as "Impact", but it made Armageddon look like it was written by a genius, and "Deep Impact" the best movie ever made.

I will say this though. I only watched Part 2 of this mini-series. When I saw that big chunk hit that atmosphere, despite all the stupidity I had seen before (like a meteor pull a 90 degree turn JUST so it could hit the space station), if the writers had the guts to have the thing impact, this mini-series would have surpassed Armageddon in the pantheon of asteroid impact movies. But they didn't. They instead relied on an asteroid moving slower than molasses (seriously, does gravity exist in their dojo?) and produced even more stupidity. BAH!

... (normal velocity for an earth-crossing asteroid) ...

Except it wasn't a normal earth-crossing asteroid. They never said it was normal, if it was normal they would have seen it many years in advance.

Except it wasn't a normal earth-crossing asteroid. They never said it was normal, if it was normal they would have seen it many years in advance.

Even if it wasn't "normal", it was still an asteroid, that crossed Earth's orbit :p This makes it...an earth-crossing asteroid, regardless of whether it only recently became one. The only way for an asteroid to be moving THAT slowly is for the rock to have nearly the same orbit as the Earth, but from what I could tell in the mini-series, it didn't. The fact that it was a deflected main-belt asteroid indicates that it wasn't sharing Earth's orbit. Combined with the fact that the other meteors that impacted Earth crossed the atmosphere much faster (or at least close to normal speed) and the fact that Earth's gravity would accelerate the rock toward the ground, and it is still ridiculous that it would take anywhere close to that long to cross the atmosphere.

Again, nearly all asteroids that cross Earth's orbit and approach Earth, have a velocity relative to Earth of ~6-14 km/s with most having relative velocities of 10-13 km/s. With those velocities, again, the asteroid should have only taken ~10 seconds to cross the atmosphere, not 30 minutes, not long to launch missiles to deflect it (and 90 degrees of deflection?!?)

I agree it should have punched a hole in the atmosphere and impacted in a matter of seconds.

They also failed to show what would really happen after the nuclear explosions. The bombs would affect the asteroid largely by the penetration of neutrons that heat the outer layer of material and eject it beyond escape velocity, which causes the asteroid to recoil in the opposite direction. The movie showed no change in the appearance of the asteroid.

I deleted it after the dust storm on the moon that wiped out the lunar lander and the astronaut's footprints. Since when did the moon get an atmosphere? There is just too much bad science in these made-for-TV movies.
Here's an interesting website that critiques moves for their "bad astronomy":

http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/movies/

I'd have already penciled in "Meteor" as the worst network TV show of the year -- except for the knowledge that NBC has "The Storm". another two-parter, awaiting our disapproval Sunday at 9.

No, that honor goes to Rosies varitey show

I'd have already penciled in "Meteor" as the worst network TV show of the year -- except for the knowledge that NBC has "The Storm". another two-parter, awaiting our disapproval Sunday at 9.

That title goes to Impact. Meteor was better than IMpact, and the Storm seems to easily be the best of the three.

But many people also seem brutal. They really should not watch any TV or movies since every thing out there is all fantasy not resembling what occurs in the real world. meteor is no exception. It makes as much sense as pretty much any TV show when compared to the real world.

And anyone that has ever watched TV should easily realize this. It is nothing new and has always been this way. What occurs on TV is not real life.

That title goes to Impact. Meteor was better than IMpact, and the Storm seems to easily be the best of the three.

But many people also seem brutal. They really should not watch any TV or movies since every thing out there is all fantasy not resembling what occurs in the real world. meteor is no exception. It makes as much sense as pretty much any TV show when compared to the real world.

And anyone that has ever watched TV should easily realize this. It is nothing new and has always been this way. What occurs on TV is not real life.

It's true we go to TV to see an alternate view of reality. But TV should at least give us a sibilance of realty. The Star Trek TV shows were based on a reality that does not exist because it was showing life as they thought it would exist in the future. But they tried hard to give a reasonable explanation of their reality (warp drive, phaser weapons).

But Meteor tried hard to based their premise on what would have happen if a meteor came to earth? How would we react? Once you do that, you ask the viewer to try and see their vision of this alternate reality. But meteor just stretched their reality beyond all that is even remotely true. If they had made even the most half way decent explanation why they thought a meteor could be blasted just above the earth without all the fragments raining down on us like a bad storm and no one gets hurt. Or if a scientist who supposedly is the only one on the earth who has the coordinates to save the planet decides to take the slowest route to LA in a pickup truck driven by someone who cannot tell when they are running out of gas. And this scientist doesn't think to take a plane or use the internet or send an email or a fax or even a note by carrier pigeon. If you add in all the other comments everyone has mentioned before me, I have to conclude this movie was just plain bad.:(

"Meteor" had to convince a general audience that the asteroid was a genuine threat to the planet. The best way to do that is to show it being very large and very close to earth. The tiny fraction of the people in the audience who understand something about celestial mechanics know that is greatly exaggerated, but why should that alone ruin the movie?

In reality the asteroid would be outside the moon's orbit, it would be smaller, and we would have to plan ahead in advance. And we'd be dealing with probabilities instead of certainties. But those are just boring details that are too boring to be part of a movie. If you showed the truth, it would be much harder to convince people that the asteroid really threatened the earth.

And the fact that the scientist didn't have any street smarts is believable. Trying to get a ride from a stranger while waving a rifle in the air is something that a scientist without street smarts would do.