IMDb RATING
3.4/10
1.2K
YOUR RATING
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!Illegal experimentation accidentally rips open a previously unknown hidden magma reserve directly under Manhattan!
William S. Taylor
- Mayor
- (as William Taylor)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
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.
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
I've got to give Sarah Watson credit. She wrote a screenplay and somebody apparently paid good money for it. With that aside, let me say that this isn't a B-movie. It isn't even a C-movie. It may be the world's first D-movie.
Absolutely every character in this movie is an idiot. All the women act like little girls. One of the characters (a man, of course) is shot in the arm. After climbing a long ladder, he comes to a short ladder and says, "I can't climb it with my injured arm." Really? You did a pretty good job a few steps back. I've climbed ladders with a full bucket in one hand.
No use going into all the stupid, idiotic, irrational, unsafe, self-serving...did I say idiotic yet?...things the characters do.
Avoid this movie. It has no redeeming value and Ms. Watson ought to be ashamed of herself...all the way to the bank to cash her check.
Absolutely every character in this movie is an idiot. All the women act like little girls. One of the characters (a man, of course) is shot in the arm. After climbing a long ladder, he comes to a short ladder and says, "I can't climb it with my injured arm." Really? You did a pretty good job a few steps back. I've climbed ladders with a full bucket in one hand.
No use going into all the stupid, idiotic, irrational, unsafe, self-serving...did I say idiotic yet?...things the characters do.
Avoid this movie. It has no redeeming value and Ms. Watson ought to be ashamed of herself...all the way to the bank to cash her check.
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.
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.
Did you know
- TriviaThe footage of the disaster of the volcano is recycled news footage of the 9/11 attacks aftermath.
- GoofsA 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.
- ConnectionsReferences E.T., l'extra-terrestre (1982)
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $1,000,000 (estimated)
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content