MOVIEmeter
SEE RANK
Up 4,687 this week

Ring of Fire (II) (1991)

6.9
Your rating:
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -/10 X  
Ratings: 6.9/10 from 186 users  
Reviews: 1 user | 2 critic

This spectacular presentation explores the volcano belt known as the Ring of Fire. Breathtaking cinematography displays close up shots of past and present Pacific Rim volcanoes from Chile, USA, Japan and the Philippines.

Director:

Watch Trailer
0Check in
0Share...

User Lists

Related lists from IMDb users

a list of 1195 titles
created 20 Jun 2011
 
a list of 1036 titles
created 12 Oct 2011
 
R
a list of 944 titles
created 28 Nov 2012
 
a list of 78 titles
created 7 months ago
 
a list of 14 titles
created 3 months ago
 

Related Items

Search for "Ring of Fire" on Amazon.com

Connect with IMDb


Share this Rating

Title: Ring of Fire (1991)

Ring of Fire (1991) on IMDb 6.9/10

Want to share IMDb's rating on your own site? Use the HTML below.

Take The Quiz!

Test your knowledge of Ring of Fire.

Videos

Photos

Edit

Cast

Credited cast:
...
Narrator
Rest of cast listed alphabetically:
Norman Banks ...
Himself (voice) (as Dr. Norman Banks)
Lawrence Blair ...
Himself (voice) (as Dr. Lawrence Blair)
Gary Rosenquist ...
Himself (voice)
Edit

Storyline

The "Ring of Fire" is the collection of all places, in which the Earth's continental plates meet. Volcanic activity is to be found there far more often than elsewhere. The film is a documentary about how those plates move and how volcanoes work. Written by Julian Reischl <julianreischl@mac.com>

Plot Summary | Add Synopsis

Genres:

Documentary | Short

Certificate:

See all certifications »
Edit

Details

Official Sites:

Country:

Language:

Release Date:

6 June 1997 (Spain)  »

Also Known As:

Ring of Fire  »

Filming Locations:

 »

Company Credits

Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Sound Mix:

Color:

Aspect Ratio:

1.44 : 1
See  »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

 
Very Good IMAX Experience
28 December 2005 | by (California) – See all my reviews

First, I have to say that I'm really not a fan of documentaries, and in general they put me to sleep. That said, IMAX films are some of the only documentaries I've ever been able to sit through. Part of that, perhaps most of it, is their extraordinary presentation. It's a terrific format, and the films made for them are usually well put together.

RING OF FIRE is such a film (at least in it's original IMAX format - I have not seen the DVD). The title refers to the ring of volcanoes on the Pacific Rim, not a hard subject for me to be interested in to be sure. The narration is genuinely informative if not all that exciting.

But it's the cinematography that really makes RING work. The combination of great camera work, and the format itself, was immersing. Short of visiting these volcanic sites (and I'd imagine at some personal risk), I doubt a better experience could be had on the subject. You can forget all that stock volcano footage you've seen before, RING has all that beat, hands down.

If anything, the film's 40 minutes just isn't long enough for me. But even modern IMAX work like James Cameron's ALIENS OF THE DEEP run about the same length. This most likely is due to the expense of shooting the format, but it's still unfortunate. Also, I'm not sure if this can even be seen in an IMAX theater these days, and it will certainly lose much of it's impact on DVD. In comparison, IMAX has done a couple of other films (on the space shuttle and the ISS) that I found superior to this one overall. But as documentaries go, RING OF FIRE is still quite good, and certainly worth the time. 7 out of 10 stars.


7 of 7 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Message Boards

Discuss Ring of Fire (1991) on the IMDb message boards »

Contribute to This Page

Create a character page for:
?