Inferno (1998 TV Movie) User Reviews

I Guess It Could Have Been Good

[Theo Robertson · 4/10 · 25 May 2004]

INFERNO starts off with a fairly impressive for a TVM starscape effect . We`re also introduced to a scientist who`s called Heller . Don`t you get it ? Heller , Hell-er , Inferno . So I guess someone on the production had some intelligence . However it does become more and more obvious as the TVM progresses that intelligence has been discarded throughout the storyline in order to appeal to an American TVM audience

The story itself is overwhelmed by subplots featuring umpteen stock TVM characters like the tough liberal schoolteacher who`s trying to save a home boy from a life of crime , the doctor who`s lost his medical licence etc . In fact the story concentrates far more on these characters than the approaching disaster that all the potential tension and drama the scenario might have had soon goes up in a puff of smoke , and being a TVM we just know that there won`t be a downbeat ending

There is an onscreen problem I noticed and that is everytime there`s an explosion there`s a massive fireball which looks ridiculous not to mention physically impossible . Look at the scene where the national guard are in a fight with a gang . A soldier fires a grenade into a tower block and the whole building explodes in a fire ball . What a small greanade containing no more than a few ounces of high explosive can do that ! No it can`t . There`s also another scene of army engineers blowing up a dam with plastic explosive and the same fireball effect is seen . Can directors please note that high explosive is not the same as napalm

Having said that I did find INFERNO highly watchable for a TVM and at no time did I find myself wanting to turn it off . It did have some potential and let me repeat the special effects are fairly good considering the budget and it`s not as bad a TVM as some people are making out

Disaster scenario turns into lame low rent action

[Leofwine_draca · 3/10 · 26 April 2015]

INFERNO is a very poor disaster movie, made on the cheap on a TV movie budget. Every deficiency in the story is more than apparent because this is so cheap and cheesy looking. I could have overlooked the problems had the writing not been so predictable and clichéd, making this difficult to sit through.

The disaster stuff involves a flaming fireball heading through the heavens towards the Earth, meaning like NIGHT OF THE BIG HEAT it's one of those films where the characters start off cool but sweat and lose more of their clothes as the narrative progresses. Apparently this aspect of the narrative wasn't interesting enough as the writers instead focus on the various human interest stories which overlap and combine at times.

Leading the cast is James Remar, cast against type as the heroic scientist for a change (he's propped up cinema as a bad guy for years), but he's as wooden as the rest of the actors involved. Story lines include a down-on-his-luck doctor who somehow has to overcome his problems to treat the injured, plus a teenage gang member who must be "saved" by his dedicated teacher. Needless to say such moments are even cheesier than the mawkish sentimentality of VOLCANO and turn this into a right old mess of a film.

I Like Hot Days But This Is Ridiculous

[jcholguin · 5/10 · 14 June 2003]

I have lived in Los Angeles all my life so I like 90 degree days but over 140 degrees is too much even for me. That is what the story is about, surviving a very high temperature. There were little stories within the big picture. A doctor that lost his license but practicing again as the temperature goes up. A teacher turned soldier that never loses his sense of caring. A pair of bank robbers that get their "just deserts." The true hero in the film is General Craig Maxwell played by Daniel von Bargen that makes life and death decisions in trying to save a city from the terrors of melting ice. Can mankind survive 140 + degrees? Can this tiny planet ever be the same? The answers are will be on display as the planet takes a burning.

The magnum opus of Hollywood clichés

[gtc83 · 29 August 2004]

This is a made for TV disaster movie created by people who apparently don't have a thought in their heads not put there by other Hollywood disaster movies. Not content with producing something utterly devoid of creativity, they decided to throw in a ton of miserable melodrama, overacting, and unlikable characters to boot.

We begin with some solar flares or something, which makes Los Angeles really hot. A bunch of military types gather in a room and recite fabulous lines like "Have you ever been in a war before? Well, this is a war." Suitably impressed, we then get into the sappy personal interest stories.

There's a teacher who's entire life revolves (to the point of mild insanity) around reforming a gang member. The gang member basically hates the teacher, and once the disaster sets in, he and his fellow gang bangers turn a couple of blocks of LA into a war zone. Oh yes, it's easy to see why we should share the teacher's concern for this person. This whole subplot plays out like some sort of Hollywood cultural awareness sensitivity training seminar.

After this, we've got a couple of tow truck drivers, one a stupid, sleazy male and the other an opportunistic, sleazy female. The male is in love with a lifeguard, who goes on her own subplot with a doctor who lost his license because he was too compassionate and kind and sensitive and generally nausea inducing to practice medicine in a hospital run by an evil HMO. The lifeguard turns, magically, into a professional nurse halfway through so she can work together with the doctor to save the previously mentioned gang banger (as the teacher donates his own blood to save him, and yells "you've got to do something!" as the heart monitor flatlines). Meanwhile, the sleazy female tow truck driver cooks up a plan to rob a bank.

She walks into a military base and walks out with a howitzer. She flips someone a salute, and that fools everyone into thinking that she's in the military and has permission to enter the base. The sleazy male tow truck driver torches the lock off the gate of the military base without anyone noticing, then lights his cigarette with the torch. Once he gets his share of the bank robbery money, he kidnaps the lifeguard/nurse and takes her back to his sewer.

Etcetera. There's some more crap with the military, but it's too awful to get into (It involves the teacher character).

Stephanie Niznik looks terrific, though her character isn't very likable, but she says all her crappy lines with that deliciously deep voice of hers. And she sweats a lot. Kathryn Morris steals the show as the sleazy tow truck driver, the only likable character and the only one who rises above being a compilation of clichés. Everyone else is a cardboard cutout in comparison to her character.

So schlocky it doesn't even qualify for campy.

[JimBurd · 2/10 · 14 June 2003]

Absolutely horrible movie. Not a bad plot concept, but executed horribly. Cliché storyline; bad script. So schlocky it doesn't even qualify for campy. This is the kind of movie that gives sci-fi a bad name.

Awful Acting, Awful Film

[samwise-1 · 1/10 · 23 April 2002]

This has to be one of the worst films I have ever had the misfortune to see. The general idea of a coronal mass ejection hitting the planet earth with EM disruption is fair enough, but where did they get the idea that humans could survive a sustained 155ºF? The acting was so terrible I got the feeling that the casting agents simply grabbed a handful of people off of Santa Monica Boulevard and threw them in front of the camera. In all honesty I have seen less wooden acting from my ironing board. Sorry, but this film was poor, poor, poor.

Decent TV movie spoiled by too many sub-plots

[mcguin71 · 5/10 · 24 April 2015]

The film beginning is fairly good considering its a pretty standard TV disaster movie, however once things start to be fleshed out it rapidly becomes overwhelmed by characters and subplots that do more and more to distract from the movies positives ultimately leading to enough mismatches to flesh out 2 or even 3 different films...but which squeezed in to one just distracts and detracts from the enjoyment.

Watxch out for the stereotypes from the standard liberal but tough schoolteacher and the requisite gang banging brother of a dead gang member, a disgraced because he tried to do the right thing doctor and the lifeguard he befriends - who just happens to be the ex of the mad tow truck driver...etc etc...and apparently there was some army guys too...

Such is the poorly setup melodrama and the way the story concentrates more on these characters than the almost forgotten disaster of the impending 60c+ heatwave that any potential edge of the seat tension and drama is smoothed over and its difficult to even say there was any.

The question of who dies,who survives and how/why doesn't even come in to it by the end as there's too many by the book twists to put any flesh on the bones of any individuals or plots. I simply sat and watched each mini- story as a separate as there was no real immersive interplay or connection even when the characters had some supposed back story. Just mentally tick or cross them off as they go because in most cases you never seem to want to care enough to do more than count them in and count them out again. ... Surprisingly I did find Inferno quite likable, if rather forgettable, despite the lack of depth and annoying characters and multiple subplots. For a TV movie it fills the time effectively enough, however it just doesn't do enough to warrant a rewatching in a hurry.

Overall the SF was decent for its genre/budget - outside of the weird space fireball shots. The plot was driven along with enough energy to prevent sleep, though not enough to set the heart racing either. Characters, scenes and dialogue were very mixed and this is where the movie loses points, especially the way some characters seemed to be shoehorned in to the plot but without any redeemable features (The tow truck duo - I'm pointing at you!)

Overall this could have been polished up and had a reasonable score and with one or two less characters and subplots it may have made it...but no, I'm afraid as it stands:

5/10...

Quite good, actually!

[John1986 · 7/10 · 20 July 2010]

Well, it's a good and simple TV movie, which will surely entertain you! I Have this film on VHS. It has a good story. The actors, but specially James Remar, are also good. The only thing i don't like is the ending! I don't gonna write it in my review, but when you see the film, you'l understand what i mean! It's actually a shame that this movie isn't available on DVD. There aren't much people who have saw this film. I personally think that the films from the 1990's and the early 2000s are better than the Special FX 3D movies from now (2010). Anyway, i like this entertaining Disaster movie, and i hope you also will. Well thanks for reading my review!

A hot time in the old town, day or night!!!

[Ironman-7 · 9/10 · 4 March 1999]

I thoroughly enjoyed this made for TV movie. I was channel surfing, and came across the start of the movie. Boy am I glad I stopped. This movie has a real hot cast, as well as a semi-believable plot. There's drama, comedy, action, and best of all, the human nature aspect of this film is what makes it great. I hope it comes out on Video, because I will buy a copy. Rating...9 out of 10 stars

Not the best

[steeleronaldr · 7/10 · 11 March 2021]

When it comes to TV movies I don't expect a big budget a-lister. What I do except is at least a decent story to go along with the main topic. With Inferno we don't really get much but a few names and wishy-washy subplots. We don't get any real back stories on any of the characters, no over the top CGI and not real story at all. What we do get are a few big and soon to be big names. Anthony Sparke plays a soldier who just isn't believable, the army running around really doing nothing but gunning down looter's and gang's. A disgraced doctor, a lifeguard, two sleazy tow truck driver's and a spaghetti plot.

Still for some reason this movie does what it's supposed to do and that is entertain. A few scenes I admit are a bit hard to swallow but it's a TV movie. A few scenes that would be totally impossible in real life but it's a TV movie. You can't pop this movie in and expect a spectacular special effects heavy movie. I think the writer's tried to make a movie where nobody knows what's going down with the extreme summer heat but couldn't pull it off. I admit the writing could have been much better but for the actors it was employment and nothing more. No one really shines in this movie they all just blend in together and sweat. It's a decent movie if you only watch it without expecting anything more than cheesey set's, effects and acting. Other than that I say watch at your own risk, for me it's a pleaser and nothing more, BUT, I love disaster movie's so it's up my alley.

Burn baby burn...

[tonymcfadden · 16 July 2001]

Mediocre acting, enough sweat to keep RightGuard in business for decades and some of the most god-awful CGI effects in recent memory...and I'll watch it again just to see Stephanie Niznik in a sweaty t-shirt.

Plot holes galore [if the metal on the side of the building is hot enough that your wet hand sizzles when it touches, there shouldn't be a long lasting wet handprint left there, should there?]

Actually, the story wasn't that bad [loved the scene of the pile of dead birds "...just fell out of the sky this morning. Damndest thing I ever saw."] and the view of Southern Cali from space, cooking, was well done.

*** out of *****

INFERNO aka INFERNO Beware

[mtringali-1 · 6/10 · 5 April 2005]

I bought 'INFERNO' thinking that it was the movie in which JONATHAN LAPAGLIA was an actor, but instead, I was fooled when I purchased 'INFERNO,' obviously the same title, but different actors and story. This one stars Ray Liotta, Gloria Reuben, and Armin Mueller-Stahl, and it's about a man who has amnesia and is found in the desert. I can't find a date on the DVD box, but must be fairly recent, within the last 10 years. My complaint is how can two movies have the same title and no subtitle to differentiate them? Not very nice for a fan of Jonathan LaPaglia to be fooled into buying the wrong video. This other video is put out by Promark - Trimark Pictures. I would like to know where to purchase the correct INFERNO movie. Thanks.

ONE OF THE BEST NATURE TYPE MOVIES

[Nicholi · 10/10 · 12 June 2004]

This is speculation. This movie could of inspired Paramount Pictures to film the movie The Core. Both movies have something in common nature.The only improvement for Inferno is a better cast. Inferno's cast is still good though. Excellent movie 8 out of 10. This is worth watching. This movie does have truth to it heat waves are real. Another piece of truth is heat related power outages. Where I live i have actually heard transformers blow. Unrest from heat is possible because people seeking to cool off may get rowdy. There is a considerable amount of team work in this movie. Again this a movie worth watching. The movie has a good cast. The movie has no slow spots.

A disappointment

[grisell · 27 January 2002]

Incredibly stupid.

This could have become a good movie. The basic story IS good. Instead, it focuses on a few stereotypical characters that seem to come from a Donald Duck magazine. To continue the analogy with Disney, the crime-story in the movie is at the Mickey-Mouse level, and the metaphors and symbolism like in Three Little Pigs.

And they really tried to squeeze in everything: There is the Love Story, the man worried about his relatives, the bank robbery, the man-to-man-fight between soldiers &c.

Not to mention all the plot holes... A dangerous enemy to intelligence in your living-room. Hopefully, it's not contagious.

• And, of course, in the end, we have to say a prayer! May they never do this kind of movie again. Amen.

Entertaining disaster with a wry pulp fiction edge and lots of sweat.

[IAMROD · 10/10 · 9 November 1998]

Inferno gives Los Angeles what it deserves-- a baptism in fire, death from above. An excellent cast of obsessed characters could survive and sweat out the passing of the coronal mass ejection but that would be no fun and certainly not dramatic. A really lame review in Variety criticized the characters for being concerned with their personal redemption instead of banning together to save the world. But what's refreshing about this big heat is that there's nothing anyone can do about it. We are, therefore, mercifully not subjected to "heart warming" scenes of fascist presidents and other big blowhard statists as they contrive implausible plots to save a chosen remnant of mankind (ala Deep Impact). Here the sweat drenched and lust-powered dirty half dozen work out their own redemption or face their personal oblivions the old fashioned way-- together as individuals or......alone with the Alone. Excellent TV film all in all. Clearly not denatured by the destructive meddlesomness of overzealous Network Execs. I highly recommend.

First, Volcano; now what? The sun??

[sam_3 · 23 April 2002]

Not again! A disaster/panic film taking place in West Coast US...What has LA done to deserve all these tragedies? Probably a lot. I had made a vow not to see this kind of movies since Volcano (1997). I don't know what got into my head...Volcano at least had some loud special effects which you could enjoy. This one doesn't even have that. As for the moral lessons, well forget it. Even a ten year old would laugh at it. You'll rather enjoy a re-run episode from The Simpsons.

Not too shabby....

[CuE--2 · 13 May 1999]

I actually watched this movie mainly because a very good friend of mine was in it (Daniel von Bargen as Gen. Craig Maxwell). However, I actually did enjoy the film. I walked into my pub just as it was starting, looked up, saw him, and ended up watching the whole thing over a couple of brews.

For avid sci-fi readers out there, I'm almost positive this movie is loosely based on an old sci-fi short story that I've seen in two separate collections I own. The name, however, evades me. For a TV movie, it wasn't bad. ***xx (three stars out of five)

This film is pretty stupid - Spoilers

[Gideon40 · 24 April 2003]

This made for tv movie was dumb. It spent about 90 percent of its time on events with the characters. Examples are : the teacher character joins up with the army and later gets into gunfights with a gang, a gangster teams up with his girlfriend to rob a bank. I mean, what relevance do these events have to do with the overall story? The movie is about some solar pulse thats supposed to heat up the country by over 100 degrees, but instead we're shown random sub plot after random sub plot which, I'm afraid, eventually made up the whole movie. It is only during the last 5 minutes that the solar pulse actually happens, and all it does is shatter the glass on one floor of a skyscraper. Nobody is killed at all! The whole disaster came and went in a matter of seconds! Stupid film.