It really wasn't that good. It wasn't -bad-, per se, but I don't have any interest in buying it on dvd. That's usually a good watermark, I think.
I have a variety of general complaints, as follows.
I think it's a stupid idea to make the first few frames of your movie a spoiler of the end.
I realize the idea behind the opening part was to establish the characters in one of the only ways available if you're gonna use the hand camera feel exclusively, however the way it plays out is VERY VERY much like watching someone you don't know's home movies. Read: Boring as shit. By the time things finally started blowing up, I was actively looking for a way to fast forward the rest of home movie time.
I think it's too soon to blatantly rip-off 9/11 footage for the sake of a monster movie. That was really the only part of the movie that made me feel ill.
It was pretty much a typical monster/slasher movie, as opposed to a horror or thriller. There was lots of bad dialog (though there were moments that were pretty good), and lots of people making decisions that made you think 'Well hell, you just deserve to die now, dumbass.'
Also, I've seen the Statue of Liberty in person. I'm pretty sure the head would have to be bigger than that. I suppose I could be wrong, but I remember the toe was pretty f'in big. Maybe it's a forced perspective thing...
Oh and *edits in* ... Personally, I would have dropped that damn camera on the roof. Scott pointed out (as did one of the characters) that in the media culture we live in, other people would probably think what the character did - that it should be documented (and probably sold to CNN at some point). I concede that he has a point; I've certainly seen a lot of people risking themselves unnecessarily to get cool tornado footage. But -I- still would have ditched the freakin' camera.