Disaster Zone: Volcano in New York

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.

Matt (Costas Mandylor) works in the underground pipelines of New York City, with a lot of other brave men and women. Usually, when the ground trembles, it means that the subway is passing overhead. But, one day, disaster strikes. Hot steam shoots out of some pipes and kills three of his co-workers. What is going on? Unfortunately, a misguided scientist, Dr. Levering (Michael Ironside) has been working on a geothermal experiment, at a local politician's urging. Although Levering thinks he has his bases covered, the deep drilling breaks into a magma layer, complete with fire and steam. Soon, a gentleman in Queens, who is working on his lawn, gets incinerated with a blast of flames from a sewer hole. Into the mess comes Dr. Susan (Alexandra Paul). She is a geologist and Matt's ex-wife. The mayor has asked her to look into the strange goings on beneath the earth. Natually, the two former spouses butt heads a few times, although Matt respects Susan's opinion. Will they save the city from more disaster? This film has some intriguing concepts but just a so-so delivery. Also, it has some rather violent scenes of death and destruction and may not be for everyone. However, the acting is rather good and so are the effects. But, the story is sometimes hard to follow, the lines are typical and the direction a wee bit above average. If you are a fan of disaster or science fiction films, by all means, seek this one out. Despite its weaknesses, it beats reruns every time.

While the plot of the movie wasn't bad and almost plausible, the camera work was extremely distracting and a bit annoying. The camera person seemed to zoom in and out and all over the place for no apparent reason. Saw something similar to that camera work during the 1989 earthquake of Northern California while attempting to film the World Series. Enough to make one motion-sick. Too bad since the acting was okay and the general theme wasn't bad. Special effects were acceptable. The movie was entertaining as far as disaster movies go. Probably wouldn't see it again but worth a peek if you can get past the camera work.

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

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.