CALIFICACIÓN DE IMDb
3.2/10
1.1 k
TU CALIFICACIÓN
Agrega una trama en tu idiomaFollows prodigy vulcanologist Antoinette Vitrini and her sister Emily as they attempt to blow the whistle on an illegal oil drilling scheme before it sets off the eruption of a super-volcano... Leer todoFollows prodigy vulcanologist Antoinette Vitrini and her sister Emily as they attempt to blow the whistle on an illegal oil drilling scheme before it sets off the eruption of a super-volcano directly beneath Miami.Follows prodigy vulcanologist Antoinette Vitrini and her sister Emily as they attempt to blow the whistle on an illegal oil drilling scheme before it sets off the eruption of a super-volcano directly beneath Miami.
JD Evermore
- Dr. Brad Turner
- (as J.D. Evermore)
- Dirección
- Guionista
- Todo el elenco y el equipo
- Producción, taquilla y más en IMDbPro
Opiniones destacadas
Sometimes you just want to watch a terrible TV movie sci-fi romp, you know? The average SyFy feature is roughly on par with anything The Asylum produces, whether they're specifically involved or not, and so the quality generally ranges from "half decent" to "abhorrent." This isn't to pointedly denigrate the work of anyone involved; recognizable, respected names and faces often become involved with such fare for an easy paycheck, and the effort they turn in will match the broad tenor of the project. The details hardly even matter, for we know exactly what to expect, and with rare exceptions it's exactly what we'll get: weak acting, ham-fisted scene writing and direction, questionable dialogue, trifling characterizations, antagonistic figures more or less responsible for or complicit in the course of events, a loose foundation in real scientific concepts that then blithely goes off the rails, special effects that raise a skeptical eyebrow, music that can be easily copied and pasted into any similar title, and action, violence, or otherwise tense sequences that are less than wholly convincing or meaningful. To this add admirable themes of extreme capitalist malfeasance and corporate corruption, and mismanagement and destruction of the environment, that are surely not treated well by their connection to such a picture. I could just as easily be talking about one of dozens or even hundreds of other films aside from 'Miami magma,' but here we are.
I don't think this is abjectly terrible. In the very least, I've sadly seen far worse. But at best this is largely indistinguishable from countless other low-grade sci-fi romps. Moreover, so very much of this is outrageously forced and contrived, in many ways, dampening the basic entertainment value and the worth of its best ideas (e.g. Secondary dangers of gas, chemicals, and steam, and the idea that's barely touched upon of awful people enlisting in the military). That's to say nothing of how the screenplay feels fundamentally imbalanced between the central conceit of volcanic activity, and the additional facet of individuals with culpability in the course of events; despite the name of the picture, it doesn't seem to come into play as much as one would assume. The end result is still marginally enjoyable, a baseline satisfactory diversion for those who are receptive to the most ridiculous of B-movies. Yet even the greatest generosity one could muster can't paint over the substantial deficiencies and inelegance that are built into the feature like debris laid into the foundation of a building; there's a select audience who can in any way appreciate this, and even then it will be a matter of hate-watching more than anything else.
I'm glad that this at least put dinner on the table for the folks who participated in its creation. If you're looking for a movie of this nature, you could do worse. Maybe it's for the best if earnest assessment of 'Miami magma' begins and ends there.
I don't think this is abjectly terrible. In the very least, I've sadly seen far worse. But at best this is largely indistinguishable from countless other low-grade sci-fi romps. Moreover, so very much of this is outrageously forced and contrived, in many ways, dampening the basic entertainment value and the worth of its best ideas (e.g. Secondary dangers of gas, chemicals, and steam, and the idea that's barely touched upon of awful people enlisting in the military). That's to say nothing of how the screenplay feels fundamentally imbalanced between the central conceit of volcanic activity, and the additional facet of individuals with culpability in the course of events; despite the name of the picture, it doesn't seem to come into play as much as one would assume. The end result is still marginally enjoyable, a baseline satisfactory diversion for those who are receptive to the most ridiculous of B-movies. Yet even the greatest generosity one could muster can't paint over the substantial deficiencies and inelegance that are built into the feature like debris laid into the foundation of a building; there's a select audience who can in any way appreciate this, and even then it will be a matter of hate-watching more than anything else.
I'm glad that this at least put dinner on the table for the folks who participated in its creation. If you're looking for a movie of this nature, you could do worse. Maybe it's for the best if earnest assessment of 'Miami magma' begins and ends there.
This was a very fun movie to watch, full of action. Dumb science, but not bad. Certainly it's not awful science, more like "implausible." Even if one supposed there might be a volcano in Miami, the special effects were not in accordance with what one might expect a true volcano to do. Also, I found the final scene of the movie startling. If it's what I think it was, then it was the final, most implausible special effect of all. On the other hand, if it were plausible, then it wouldn't be much of a movie, more like a docudrama perhaps.
The characters were what made the movie interesting, though even there, it seemed that people were acting in contradiction. One minute, a character is acting moral and wants to do the right thing, the next, they are willing to throw everything they said out the window for a cut of the proceeds. Another character has a history of being dishonest, then suddenly they have a conscience. A young woman is flaunting herself, then suddenly she becomes mature. I guess it was the inconsistencies that amused me more than anything.
Just one last comment: This movie played under the name "Swamp Volcano" on the SyFy Channel but it is the same movie.
The characters were what made the movie interesting, though even there, it seemed that people were acting in contradiction. One minute, a character is acting moral and wants to do the right thing, the next, they are willing to throw everything they said out the window for a cut of the proceeds. Another character has a history of being dishonest, then suddenly they have a conscience. A young woman is flaunting herself, then suddenly she becomes mature. I guess it was the inconsistencies that amused me more than anything.
Just one last comment: This movie played under the name "Swamp Volcano" on the SyFy Channel but it is the same movie.
Movies can be made with many purposes in mind: to entertain, to provoke, to express or elicit emotion. This movie neither failed, nor succeeded in any of these categories to a great degree.
The acting was serviceable, neither good nor laughable. The script failed to register any response or provoke any emotion. The camera work was...decent? Ok? The packing was solid though, never sticking in one place or on one scene for very long. The only parts that were enjoyable were the three or four truly schlocky moments, which are what people watch disaster movies for. Those ranged from, "That doesn't work that way." to "Yes! Hole! Through! The chest!" The effects are suitably TV movie level and thus, the most ironically enjoyable part of the film.
Neither painful to sit through, nor enjoyable enough to sit through again, nor recommend it.
The acting was serviceable, neither good nor laughable. The script failed to register any response or provoke any emotion. The camera work was...decent? Ok? The packing was solid though, never sticking in one place or on one scene for very long. The only parts that were enjoyable were the three or four truly schlocky moments, which are what people watch disaster movies for. Those ranged from, "That doesn't work that way." to "Yes! Hole! Through! The chest!" The effects are suitably TV movie level and thus, the most ironically enjoyable part of the film.
Neither painful to sit through, nor enjoyable enough to sit through again, nor recommend it.
I seem to be dredging the bottom of the barrel with these SyFy Channel TV disaster movies. I thought things couldn't get any worse than the horrible JET STREAM, and now I've watched Miami MAGMA (aka SWAMP VOLCANO) and I discover that yes, it's just as poor and almost entirely without merit. It says something when the best thing about a movie is its title.
First off, for viewers hoping to see Florida getting destroyed by an erupting volcano, you'll be disappointed: the disaster stuff is kept off-screen for the most part here. There are a few scenes of smoke clouds and flowing lava, but when I say few I mean it: they're few and far between and skipped over in favour of the usual, cheap, big-company-conspiracy plot as some oil drillers chase after a whistleblower threatening to reveal the truth about their dark dealings.
The characters are one-dimensional and the acting not much better; the only familiar face they could get on board here was Brad Dourif, playing a suited bigwig who has a handful of scenes. Add in the usual bad dialogue and poor effects and you have a complete waste of time.
First off, for viewers hoping to see Florida getting destroyed by an erupting volcano, you'll be disappointed: the disaster stuff is kept off-screen for the most part here. There are a few scenes of smoke clouds and flowing lava, but when I say few I mean it: they're few and far between and skipped over in favour of the usual, cheap, big-company-conspiracy plot as some oil drillers chase after a whistleblower threatening to reveal the truth about their dark dealings.
The characters are one-dimensional and the acting not much better; the only familiar face they could get on board here was Brad Dourif, playing a suited bigwig who has a handful of scenes. Add in the usual bad dialogue and poor effects and you have a complete waste of time.
Only in America ... The SciFi Channel turns out rubbish endlessly ... Some of them so bad they are funny ... But unfortunately most of them are just bad This is the zenith of their product ... 90 moronic minutes of complete rubbish with not one second of humour ( even unintentional ) ... This is truly one of the worst films I have ever seen ... The writing and character development must of been plotted out by one of the producers fourteen year old kids on the way to the studio The thing is about these things, when I read them, I tend to think it can't be that bad ... The person must have a humour bypass or something ... But believe me ... Don't waste even a second on this flat, stupid, badly acted,piece of digital effluent ... Don't even down load it for free ... It is just film spam
¿Sabías que…?
- TriviaUnlike other low budget films produced for the SyFy Channel, this was shot on film. It reportedly had showings overseas before its airing on the SyFy Channel.
- ErroresIn one of the shots of the aftermath of the destruction, a corpse lying in the street moves its fingers.
- ConexionesReferences El chofer y la señora Daisy (1989)
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y agrega a la lista de videos para obtener recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
- Tiempo de ejecución
- 1h 27min(87 min)
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 1.78 : 1
Contribuir a esta página
Sugiere una edición o agrega el contenido que falta