Dante's Peak

First watched Dante's Peak when it was released in 1997 and as a kid thought it was brilliant. Just watched it again and I have to say, wow. It is a great film, full of entertainment and action. Yes it is cheesy at times and bits are a bit far fetched e.g. driving over lava, but putting that a side it is a fantastic film.

More than two decades later, this is still one of my favorite disaster films, and my all-time favorite volcano movie. The visual effects are sensational - even by today's standards.

The film grips you from the opening and never lets go. The suspense remains throughout. The characters are believable and likable, and the chemistry between Linda Hamilton and Pierce Brosnan was really good. As with all disaster movies, there are a few cliched moments, but it was still exhilarating and top notch entertainment. This is an all round excellent production and a classic in the disaster genre.

Decided to view this picture only because Pierce Brosnan was starring in the film and greatly enjoyed his acting skills besides his appearing as James Bond. Pierce Brosnan,(Harry Dalton),"The Matador",'05, has a bad experience with the death of his wife during a volcano eruption and stayed in his profession as a geologist. Harry discovers from his charts that their could very well be another volcano problem effecting a small popular town. Linda Hamilton,(Rachel Wando),"The Kid & I ",'05 is the mayor and store owner of this town, who has a boy and a girl and is divorced. A romantic spark happens between Linda and Harry and the story develops into a monster of a tale. There is plenty of good action and it really keeps you on the edge of your seats. Pierce & Linda gave outstanding performances and the photography was great through out the entire picture. Very Entertaining

There is a formula for disaster movies and books. An insightful scientist sees The Bad Thing is going to happen, various foils keep him from warning people (often with sillier motivation than in this film), we get to know a bunch of average Joe characters who survive or do not survive the disaster. Earthquake movies, movies about made-up natural disasters that cannot happen, asteroid movies, even some nuclear holocaust films (like The Day After, unique in how many survive). It's a hackneyed formula, but it also works, and nothing else really does work as well for disaster plots. It was followed here.

The special effects were terrific in the day, and they still hold up very very well in 2012.

For a Hollywood film, the science was pretty good. I actually cringed back at the shots of Hawaii type basalt floes (just...no), and the ashfall cleared up nicely whenever they wanted a wide shot, which anyone in Yakima could tell you it really doesn't do, and the boat and drive-over-lava scenes were silly, and if you paddle a boat (through acid or not) with one hand, it's not going to go straight, and our heroes didn't need to cover their mouths in ashfall (meaning, IRL, the ash would turn to concrete in their lungs and they'd suffocate). However, all that having been complained about, much else was very accurate: what gets tested for by volcanologists, what monitoring stations of the day looked like, what some of the warning signs of a coming eruption might be. Most Hollywood film reviews by me on science-based movies are nothing but a list of what they did wrong, with no "however" of accurate bits to follow that list, so kudos for doing it more than half right.

A pleasant diversion, very pretty to look at.

Disaster movies can be a fun way to spend some time idle, although most are not particularly cinematically remarkable. This movie fits that description well. The action takes place in a small rural village that has just been considered a great place to live in the US, but lives in the shadow of a sleeping volcano. What no one knows is that this volcano appears to be in full swing and threatens to explode.

The movie quickly creates tension among the audience, and it serves well to grab our attention. I am not the best person to judge the script's ability to be true to the scientific facts underlying a volcanic eruption, I just accept what I saw tacitly, but I admit the possibility the film is not very true to science. The initial half is slower and the action is concentrated on the final half, which is basically a race to escape the volcano. There are some loose ends and inconsistent details, like that scene where a girl, who doesn't even reach the car's pedals, can drive off in a 4-4 jeep.

Pierce Brosnan was convincing in his starring role, while Linda Hamilton made an effort but is always in his shadow. Either way, they are the ones who leverage the movie. The volcano, as it happens in such cases, is almost a character in its own right. Technically, the film was entitled to the best sound and special effects that existed in 1997... but the quick advances in film make it look old-fashioned to many today. Personally, I liked what I saw.

It's not an excellent movie and it's far from being the life movie of anyone involved, it has a dubious script and unbelievable scenes where (as always happens in these movies) some characters escapes from death by a hair. But it's still one of the best disaster movies of the late 1990s, it's fun and entertains the public well.