Two points I began considering when my attention wandered: One, the only other Omnimax movie I remember seeing is The Polar Express, awful in more ways than I can say. So I don't know if it's my inexperience with the medium that lead to my queasy but delighted disorientation, for, say, the first fifteen minutes of the 45 minute film. I thrilled to the rain, the approaching tornadoes and the zooming-in on the Mad Max-like storm-chasing truck. But after a while, the screen simply looked big, and I felt less like I was experiencing the weather and more like I was watching a movie. (Richard fell asleep.)
My second point might be related to my first. Through most of the movie, we go along with stormchaser-filmmaker Sean Casey as he seeks to plant his truck (which has these cool extensions that grip the ground) right in the middle of a tornado. With aid of radar and other Science, he gets close, closer, but the storms either die down or dance off in another direction. The funnels--gestating, growing, twisting--are awesome to see. But when he does get himself inside, at the end of the movie, it's a letdown, just a blur of wind and rain and white noise. It turns out tornadoes are a lot less interesting (visually, anyway) from the inside than they are from without. Bill
My work-related conclusion concerns our now-reflexive expectation that an "insider's view" is always better, and more "authentic," than an outsider's when it comes to a book 's cultural context. I know people aren't weather. I know outsiders looking in can "get stuff wrong." But I'm guessing that if tornadoes had people living inside them (hey publishers! a new hook!), those folks would have no clue about what their home looked like from the outside--and it's a spectacular view. Inside, it just looks like rain as usual. Now, it is true that Sean Casey's journey into the storm promises to give us new knowledge about tornadoes, and who's not for that? Let's just not automatically dismiss the view from the outside as one not worth seeing.