NOTE IMDb
3,4/10
1,1 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueIllegal experimentation accidentally rips open a previously unknown hidden magma reserve directly under Manhattan!Illegal experimentation accidentally rips open a previously unknown hidden magma reserve directly under Manhattan!Illegal experimentation accidentally rips open a previously unknown hidden magma reserve directly under Manhattan!
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
William S. Taylor
- Mayor
- (as William Taylor)
Avis à la une
This movie should be banned and the editors/producers blacklisted; the use of 9/11 footage to represent the volcano is both offensive and unprofessional. I love the "no animals were harmed" line at the end; apparently it's okay to show 3700 people, some of whom I knew, dying, apparently.
There are at least three scenes I saw where 9/11 footage was used; if the special effects look fake, they're made for the movie; if they look real, well, that's our friends and family members dying.
BUT that's not why it should be banned. It should be banned because it's actually **lamer** than the usual schlock Sci-Fi puts out... not quite down to the level of "the Langoliers" or "Dragon King" but darn close. Somebody clearly watched "Volcano" and "24" while writing, filming, and editing this movie, since its obviously trying to emulate them. I can forgive the bad circa-1985 special effects; everything else is so bad it's not even funny to laugh at.
There are at least three scenes I saw where 9/11 footage was used; if the special effects look fake, they're made for the movie; if they look real, well, that's our friends and family members dying.
BUT that's not why it should be banned. It should be banned because it's actually **lamer** than the usual schlock Sci-Fi puts out... not quite down to the level of "the Langoliers" or "Dragon King" but darn close. Somebody clearly watched "Volcano" and "24" while writing, filming, and editing this movie, since its obviously trying to emulate them. I can forgive the bad circa-1985 special effects; everything else is so bad it's not even funny to laugh at.
Have I seen worse than Disaster Zone: Volcano in New York? Yes I have. Is it good? No, in fact it is really bad, at least in my opinion. The only reason why I haven't rated it any lower is that the acting is a little above average, though nothing great, especially from Michael Ironside. Everything else however was a mess, I was shocked at how bad the camera work and music were. The camera work was very distracting, almost as though it was trying to show off how many camera techniques it could do rather than compliment everything else, and I felt very dizzy watching it. The music isn't much better, very overbearing, in-your-face and completely devoid of any subtlety. The script is cheesy and forced more times than not, the story was decent enough in concept was very predictable and suspense-less in execution and the characters are no more different than the stereotypes that are here, there and everywhere in SyFy's movies. All in all, a near-disaster of a movie, where both my eyes and ears were feeling sensitive by the end. 2/10 Bethany Cox
Someone should write a book on how to make a Sci-Fi original movie. And Disaster Zone: Volcano in New York could be chapter one.
First question to the film makers: there were two fairly good Hollywood volcano movies in the 1990s. They weren't classic suspense / disaster films, but they had some ripping moments, good popcorn stuff. Did you really decide to make DZ:ViNW inferior to those films in every category? I mean, it must have been a conscious decision because that is the end product. It succeeds on not a single level.
Second question: since you have no inkling of how to build suspense, can't you admit that to yourself and give yourself an education; couldn't you at least hunker down with a dozen Hitchcock films and study how a master does it? He doesn't hit you over the head with LOTS of shouting of inanities ("It's going to blow," "We've got to get out of here," etc.) or have music hitting EVERY SINGLE MOMENT with some scene-to-scene scoring? Music is a spice, not the whole meal. DZ:ViNW's use of music is like chewing gritty pepper.
Did I mention "hitting"? My eyeballs were hit and hit and hit again with the most "look at me" use of photographic annoyances extant. Jiggle zoom in. Jiggle zoom out. Jiggle pan. Jiggle. Jiggle. Jiggle. And do it all every single second. It doesn't look like hand-held, either. It looks like the camera was attached to a rock polisher, a cake mixer, a pile driver whatever was handy that could make the viewer queasy, annoyed, and distracted. So much for mounting tension.
And the poor actors (actually some pretty good actors). This brings me to question three: why not make it a silent picture since you have no ear for dialogue or how people actually speak and act in dramatic situations? Seriously, the best actors in the world can't make lead look like diamonds. Of course, caring about these actors in their roles is a joke. No matter how close they are to searing death, no matter how precarious their emotional circumstances, I could only chuckle.
To summarize: DZ:VINW is really no worse, no better than the other under-shoe feculence of the Sci-Fi Channel (not counting it's rather good series, Stargate and Battlestar).
I'm sure the film makers are nice people and will do good work elsewhere. But there's something about the Sci-Fi Channel that contractually forces talent to make dreck.
First question to the film makers: there were two fairly good Hollywood volcano movies in the 1990s. They weren't classic suspense / disaster films, but they had some ripping moments, good popcorn stuff. Did you really decide to make DZ:ViNW inferior to those films in every category? I mean, it must have been a conscious decision because that is the end product. It succeeds on not a single level.
Second question: since you have no inkling of how to build suspense, can't you admit that to yourself and give yourself an education; couldn't you at least hunker down with a dozen Hitchcock films and study how a master does it? He doesn't hit you over the head with LOTS of shouting of inanities ("It's going to blow," "We've got to get out of here," etc.) or have music hitting EVERY SINGLE MOMENT with some scene-to-scene scoring? Music is a spice, not the whole meal. DZ:ViNW's use of music is like chewing gritty pepper.
Did I mention "hitting"? My eyeballs were hit and hit and hit again with the most "look at me" use of photographic annoyances extant. Jiggle zoom in. Jiggle zoom out. Jiggle pan. Jiggle. Jiggle. Jiggle. And do it all every single second. It doesn't look like hand-held, either. It looks like the camera was attached to a rock polisher, a cake mixer, a pile driver whatever was handy that could make the viewer queasy, annoyed, and distracted. So much for mounting tension.
And the poor actors (actually some pretty good actors). This brings me to question three: why not make it a silent picture since you have no ear for dialogue or how people actually speak and act in dramatic situations? Seriously, the best actors in the world can't make lead look like diamonds. Of course, caring about these actors in their roles is a joke. No matter how close they are to searing death, no matter how precarious their emotional circumstances, I could only chuckle.
To summarize: DZ:VINW is really no worse, no better than the other under-shoe feculence of the Sci-Fi Channel (not counting it's rather good series, Stargate and Battlestar).
I'm sure the film makers are nice people and will do good work elsewhere. But there's something about the Sci-Fi Channel that contractually forces talent to make dreck.
Its kind of a cross between "Volcano" and "Armageddeon". A volcano erupts in a major city and the fate of millions lies in the hands of a team of ditch-diggers. This movie was just plain awful, even for a Sci-Fi movie. The special effects were pathetic and the acting was even worse. The very plot of the movie is lost on me and the movie is just impossible. I am a huge fan of B-movies and I am very entertained by some of the worst movies of all time. This movie, however, is just plain stupid. I expected more out of Michal Ironsides (Starship Troopers) and Alexandria Paul. The cast was decent, but the plot, special FX and acting were terrible.
It's hard to say which was more toxic: the magma or the camera work in this film.
Endless dart-in's, dart-out's, dizzying pans, rapid-fire jump-cuts, unnecessary point-of-view changes, and so on. It was like some two-year-old kid was playing with a video-cam. Irritating in nature, devoid of purpose, it has become a pandemic in made-for-TV flicks.
Once the bumbling camera movement has you popping sea-sickness pills, the movie introduces you to the same old assembly-line stereotypical characters rehashed on a hundred other made-for-TV flicks. You've got some Einstein-wanna-be scientist causing the menace, a bunch of blue collar heroes that are the only ones who want to save the city, a female scientist that discovers the problem but nobody listens, politicians who are breaking the law and not listening to reason, dimwits in an anti-terrorism unit, and a few extras whose only reason for existence is obviously to be victims. Two of the above serve as the obligatory divorced couple rekindling their romance while people get zapped by lava all around them.
Most imbecilic scenes: some magma burps a skull out, landing near some horrified witnesses, it's still (no, I'm not kidding) smoking like a piece of burnt toast. A guy opens a door, and lava pours out, like storage out of an over-filled closet. A fisherman catches a fish and says--oh never mind; you'd never believe it, anyway.
Anyone with an IQ over 30 would detect about a zillion scientific plot holes. If you want serious fare, skip this movie. If all you want is a cheesy disaster flick, with a lot of unintentional camp, then this one will fit the bill. Just be sure to have sea-sickness pills close at hand.
Endless dart-in's, dart-out's, dizzying pans, rapid-fire jump-cuts, unnecessary point-of-view changes, and so on. It was like some two-year-old kid was playing with a video-cam. Irritating in nature, devoid of purpose, it has become a pandemic in made-for-TV flicks.
Once the bumbling camera movement has you popping sea-sickness pills, the movie introduces you to the same old assembly-line stereotypical characters rehashed on a hundred other made-for-TV flicks. You've got some Einstein-wanna-be scientist causing the menace, a bunch of blue collar heroes that are the only ones who want to save the city, a female scientist that discovers the problem but nobody listens, politicians who are breaking the law and not listening to reason, dimwits in an anti-terrorism unit, and a few extras whose only reason for existence is obviously to be victims. Two of the above serve as the obligatory divorced couple rekindling their romance while people get zapped by lava all around them.
Most imbecilic scenes: some magma burps a skull out, landing near some horrified witnesses, it's still (no, I'm not kidding) smoking like a piece of burnt toast. A guy opens a door, and lava pours out, like storage out of an over-filled closet. A fisherman catches a fish and says--oh never mind; you'd never believe it, anyway.
Anyone with an IQ over 30 would detect about a zillion scientific plot holes. If you want serious fare, skip this movie. If all you want is a cheesy disaster flick, with a lot of unintentional camp, then this one will fit the bill. Just be sure to have sea-sickness pills close at hand.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe footage of the disaster of the volcano is recycled news footage of the 9/11 attacks aftermath.
- GaffesA man opens the door of the house and lava, which is obviously well over five feet deep, flows. This is impossible, as, given the temperature of lava, the wood framed house would have caught fire as soon as the first bit of lava touched it.
- ConnexionsReferences E.T., l'extra-terrestre (1982)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Core: Boiling Point
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 1 000 000 $US (estimé)
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant