Magma: Volcanic Disaster

The movie does not start well. The writing, acting and sound are all about as bad as it gets, suggesting the entire movie may end up being a disaster. Not true. But the long-dormant Iceland volcano with an unpronounceable name starting with "Troll" does erupt suddenly and quickly, with terrible consequences for the people we didn't likely enjoy watching.

This is on the level of a TV-movie, but not as much of a disaster as some disaster movies. The actors playing Peter and Bree are actually pretty good, once Bree is no longer perky (or perhaps you can count her perky behavior as good acting). Bree is too perky and enthusiastic to be believable as an intelligent scientist, but that will change later.

The writing is about on the same level as the typical movie of this type, but the last half-hour or so is quite exciting. Some actors with only a few lines seem like they are sitting around the table reading their lines for the first time.

The President of the United States is no Kiefer Sutherland, but he does a good job.

The visual effects are competently done but not spectacular. In most scenes we see only the minimum necessary to communicate what is happening, but toward the end we get a little more detail. Violence is not graphic (unless you count people catching on fire, but even then you can't really see anything) but several people surely die. In one case we are told the person died.

This isn't bad enough to be good, but it's good enough not to be bad.

It's hard to figure out what to rate a movie that's basically gives you a neutral feeling: nothing to get excited about and nothing that seriously disturbs you. In light of that, I'd have to say this movie is a 5.

This movie is entirely based upon one of the flimsiest of reasons - one that is explained in one sentence at a top government meeting. Basically it is this: humans have released toxins into the environment and this is causing the internal core to heat up.

Normally, I'd be outraged. In this case, I didn't really care because my expectations are so low that the movie can only go up in value. Somehow this movie slightly redeems itself if you're sympathetic to volcano disaster movies. In this case, many characters (both genders) are "allowed" to die by dripping magma and simply being overrun by lava flow. Generally this doesn't happen in most volcano movies.

Also, large populations of people also get wiped - another thing which doesn't typically happen in volcano disaster movies. So on these marks, I commend the filmmakers/screenwriters for daring to actually create a "disaster" in a volcano movie (most movies in this area typically avert all disaster).

The atmosphere, tone and performances in the movie are decently serious (except for Amy Johnson's character - way too nutty). The special effects reminded me more of 1970s film-making - but they were passable.

I'd rate this a '5', where a '7' is what it would take for me to actually recommend a movie. See it if you're under 15 and are easily impressed, or in the background if you're really into natural disaster movies - esp. volcanoes.

You know the flaw with disaster films? It's not a foe that can be fought. Each follows the same formula, run away, talk, run away, talk, run away, then a finale that essentially involves the disaster simply ending or some ridiculous pseudoscience.

Ontop of that every such movie needs a scientist who relays his/her fears regarding the forthcoming disaster to the government and gets ignored.

Magma: Volcanic Disaster is exactly what you'd expect for a movie of it's sort. Scyfy original with poor sfx, generic writing and absolutely no originality at all.

Credit where credit is due the movie doesn't have the worst cast but there isn't much they could do to raise this paint by numbers affair above the mediocre.

The Good:

Amy Jo "Pink Power Ranger" Johnson

Xander "So very tired veteran" Berkeley

The Bad:

SFX

Lack of originality

Yet another example of a made-for-cable film that started with a workable premise and a couple of really good actors, but managed to screw it all up. Low budget isn't always a bad thing, but somehow the biggest deficit here is in the imagination column. Absurd situations, ridiculous plot oversights and contradictions, supporting actors who just recite lines, and awkward dialogue make this painful to watch. When you find yourself awake and channel-surfing at 3AM, if you happen across this, go ahead and take a look, but don't go out of your way to find it otherwise. Honestly, the Sci-fi channel has talented people at its disposal, couldn't they have managed one more script treatment before production started? At least buy the poor writer a thesaurus and a geology textbook!

This seemed like a typical Sci-Fi channel disaster movie that would be 4 hours over two nights. I didn't believe the TV Guide listing. But in the last 5-10 minutes, it wrapped up everything at warp speed. The end had more senseless death than I imagined. It was like a bad episode of '24' or like 'Atomic Train'. The only reason I completed watching was for two of my favorite beautiful actresses, Reiko Aylesworth ('24') and Amy Jo Johnson ('Power Rangers', 'Felicity'). Not bad clap-trap for a Friday night of nothing to do, but don't go out of your way for it. I am usually up for a good made-for-TV disaster, but this did not satisfy my excitement for world destruction. But then again, it was better than '10.5'. Test patterns are better than '10.5'.