3.4/10
897
31 user 7 critic

Disaster Zone: Volcano in New York (2006)

Illegal experimentation accidentally rips open a previously unknown hidden magma reserve directly under Manhattan!

Director:

Writer:

Reviews

On Disc

at Amazon

Edit

Cast

Cast overview, first billed only:
...
...
Levering
...
...
RJ
...
Frank
...
Karen Barbarini
...
Jose
...
...
Joey Walsh
...
Agent Walters
...
Tommy
...
Ace
...
...
Site Director
...
Hal
Edit

Storyline

An evil nasty doctor named Dr. Ironside who is trying to develop a source of geothermal energy and doing so he starts a volcanic rift under the Big Apple! And now that a volcano is beneath New York City seems unlikely yet...nothing else can explain the bizarre tremors and terrifying explosions wreaking havoc on the city! But Matt, his geologist ex-wife, and a team of unlikely heroes have only a few sticks of dynamite and a prayer to rescue the city from volcanic! Written by Anthony Pereyra {hypersonic91@yahoo.com}

Plot Summary | Add Synopsis

Taglines:

The next Pompeii is an eruption away.... See more »

Genres:

Action | Sci-Fi

Certificate:

Not Rated | See all certifications »
Edit

Details

Country:

|

Language:

Release Date:

25 February 2006 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

Core: Boiling Point  »

Box Office

Budget:

$1,000,000 (estimated)
 »

Company Credits

Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Sound Mix:

Color:

Aspect Ratio:

1.33 : 1
See  »
Edit

Did You Know?

Goofs

When McLaughlin and Dr. Foxley sneak down into the tunnel to the spot where "Frank got it", the cooling lines which previously broke are missing from the walls. See more »

Quotes

Matt McLaughlin: Does it hurt?
Dr. Susan Foxley: Only when I look at it
See more »

Connections

References Volcano (1997) See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

 
Unrelenting camera jiggle, unending underscore, dead-ear dialog...DZ:ViNW has it ALL!
3 March 2006 | by (Los Angeles) – See all my 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.


21 of 24 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Contribute to This Page