Curapedi I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Gurlyndrobb While it doesn't offer any answers, it both thrills and makes you think.

Lela The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Candida It is neither dumb nor smart enough to be fun, and spends way too much time with its boring human characters.

drystyx This film about an impending volcanic disaster that threatens the planet has a lot of upside.Formula films like this depend on writing and directing, even more than the acting. The direction here is logical, and the writing is pretty good.What makes or breaks such a film is the writing of the characters, and of being natural, or what we call in writing, "not expository".This pretty well does that. The characters are good for the most part. There are two poorly written characters, though, that bring this down. The usual naysayer, like the mayor who denies there is a shark at the beach, and the martyr.The movie would have been more of a "film" with these two characters toned down, especially the martyr. It must have been a tough role for the actor, because he seriously doesn't have motivation written into the role.What really works for this film is the lack of "contrivance", the ability to not "play God". This is something that movies did too much from about 1965 till about 1985. Whether you play God to kill ogres or to kill nice people, it looks contrived when you do it.This movie lets the cards like where they lie. It's as though they rolled the dice to see who might become a victim of the volcano. The people who are engulfed in lava are credible people, likable enough, not overly, but three dimensionally. One doesn't feel like one is being preached to.Hoping that isn't a spoiler. I hope instead that it gives an idea of what to expect, and if you're into a natural film with good characters and writing, you will appreciate this. If you are into the usual preachy movies, you won't.

Paul Magne Haakonsen For a disaster movie, then it wasn't too shabby. But for entertainment, then "Magma: Volcanic Disaster" didn't fully live up to other movies of the same genre.The story in "Magma: Volcanic Disaster" is pretty much as in most other disaster movies. A series of cataclysmic events, in this case; volcanic eruptions, are threatening our relatively peaceful planet. And of course, a scientist predicts this, but no one listens - not before it is almost too late, anyway. And of course now, it is up to a very small group of people to stop the coming of the end of days. Yes, there you go, end of the story summary. Sounds like something you've seen in other movies before this one? You got it!The effects in "Magma: Volcanic Disaster" were actually decent enough. Though there are other disaster movies available out there with far better effects. That being said, then it should be noted that the effects in this movie are not bad, and there are disaster movies out there with far worse effects.A fairly decent group of actors and actresses are on the list in this movie. Though the movie was carried almost exclusively by Xander Berkeley (playing Peter Shepherd).Now, "Magma: Volcanic Disaster" is a movie without any real roller-coaster effects of thrills and suspense. It is a pretty flat ride from start to end. Sure, there are a couple of scenes that could come off as dramatic, but they were far apart and were just there to keep you interested. The movie could have used more destruction and mayhem from Mother Earth's side, but that was not to be.Having sat through this movie, I can honestly say that it wasn't a super great movie, nor was it a horribly bad movie. However, it is not a disaster movie that I will be returning to for a second watching, it just doesn't have that much value in it. Especially because the story wants you to buy into these volcanic eruptions will result in the end of humanity and the world, if they are not hindered, but the movie never builds up the feeling of the end of the world is at hand.If you like disaster movies, then give "Magma: Volcanic Disaster" a chance. It might not be the best of movies, but it is a good attempt at the genre.

Vic_max 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.

Jack Well, this isn't the worst Sci-Fi Channel Original Production that I've seen, but it may just be the most boring. We start with a college professor and a few students going to explore a volcano in Iceland. Of course the volcano erupts, and they barely escape with their lives. Turns out the professor knows some genius who has worked out a theory of how all the world's volcanoes will start erupting, and we see the scenario played out via the usual cheap looking computer generated special effects. Loads and loads of cheap looking computer generated effects. Toss in the stupendously clichéd government bureaucrats who don't take the threat seriously, some utter nonsense about how humans have caused the Earth's core to expand, and a breathtakingly dull subplot concerning the professor's ex wife, and that about wraps it up. Oh wait, I almost forgot the environmentalist speech at the end, where we're supposed to learn from our mistakes...and some other stuff. Sorry, I'm afraid I nodded off there for a minute. I'm sleepy after sitting through this thing.Overall, you've got a pile of characters we couldn't care less about, a plot that's identical to a dozen other really crappy disaster movies, a script that sometimes sounds as if it was written by someone who wasn't a native English speaker, and there you have it. These film makers really need to hire a consultant to at least give them enough technical insight into their subject matter so that it doesn't make the average layman laugh at the absurdity of it.Edit: Kind of funny, I apparently wrote this review on January 26, and here it is February 6, and I can't remember ever having seen this movie.