» » Volcano: Fire on the Mountain (1997)

Volcano: Fire on the Mountain (1997) HD online

Volcano: Fire on the Mountain (1997) HD online
Language: English
Category: Movie / Action / Drama
Original Title: Volcano: Fire on the Mountain
Director: Graeme Campbell
Writers: Merrill H. Karpf,Donna Ebbs
Released: 1997
Duration: 1h 36min
Video type: Movie
A USGS scientist attempts to convince his boss and the residents of Angel Falls, California that a nearby volcano is about to erupt.
Cast overview, first billed only:
Dan Cortese Dan Cortese - Peter Slater
Cynthia Gibb Cynthia Gibb - Kelly Adams
Brian Kerwin Brian Kerwin - Buck Adams
Don S. Davis Don S. Davis - Mayor Bob Hart (as Don Davis)
Lynda Boyd Lynda Boyd - Maureen
Colin Cunningham Colin Cunningham - Stan Sinclair
Micah Gardener Micah Gardener - Jason
John Novak John Novak - Corben
Kendall Cross Kendall Cross - Beth
Jano Frandsen Jano Frandsen - Bill Webb
April Telek April Telek - Brenda Webb
William deVry William deVry - David
Kerry McPherson Kerry McPherson - Sheryn
Tasha Simms Tasha Simms - Dr. Osborne
Jonathan Walker Jonathan Walker - Steven Halpern

Reviews: [10]

  • avatar


    My wife brought this one home from the store one day, having mistaken it for the Tommy Lee Jones movie. Rather than have her return it, I decided to open it up and throw it in, just because... well, just because. It was bad, man... just plain bad. Even for a TV movie. The acting, the "special" effects (the red glowing light that simulated lava underground was a side-splitter), it just stunk. But you know what? We kept it, and I'm glad. It, along with Summer Lovers, came in quite handy for keeping my kitchen table from wobbling on our uneven floor. Buy a copy today! Or just use a scrap of wood.
  • avatar


    Ow. Pain. Lots of pain. From the horrible acting, to the impossible situations, to the complete and utter lack of geology, this movie left a bad taste in my mouth. Even When Time Ran Out had a more realistic eruption. I've never seen such a pathetic pyroclastic flow in my life. "Forming a new magma chamber under the west face," my foot.

    If you want to see a volcano movie that makes only a few mistakes (most of them being exaggerations), watch Dante's Peak.
  • avatar


    This is a typical cash in television film. In 1997 there were two disaster themed films due for cinema release with Volcano and Dante's Peak hitting the big screen at a similar time frame.

    This was a lower budget affair which you know would hit the video market first with frankly a nonsensical script and even more nonsense action sequences.

    An inactive volcano in a ski resort starts to show signs of activity with locals being sceptical. When it does erupt the volcano expert decides to start an avalanche and outrun the avalanche on skis and then cross it with the lava and somehow cool the lava.

    One of the skiers who got swallowed by the avalanche suddenly turns up at the end without a scratch or snowflake on him, just after the said avalanche crashed all over the log cabin by the mountain and left it undamaged.

    The film is silly, the acting is wooden and the script is bad. The sheer audacity of it all means it deserves more than one star.
  • avatar


    OK, Volcano: Fire On The Mountain is not a blockbuster movie. It doesn't pretend to be - it's a TV movie! It doesn't have any actors I've ever heard of which, in itself, seems to pre-determine some viewers' opinion of it. But why does an hour-and-a-half's free entertainment need to be studded with mega-stars for it to be appreciated? My contention is that it doesn't! In some ways, this movie is fairly "ordinary" in that it portrays a very believable event in a very believable way. Sure, it needs to have some super-heroic deeds incorporated into it (which it does) otherwise it would just be a news broadcast! Nevertheless, those dramatic events are, in this movie, dramatically realistic.

    I don't intend to detail exactly what those dramatic events are (because I would then have to click the spoilers box and I think it would be better for you to judge for yourselves). Suffice to say that real things happen to real people in real situations and those things are told in an exciting way.

    No, Volcano isn't ever going to get mentioned at the Emmys - but then how much of what we watch on our TVs ever is? It isn't boring and, to be honest, I enjoyed it and I think you will too. Just remember - you get what you pay for and, since this costs nothing, it is worth a lot more than that!
  • avatar


    I saw the TV-movie I mentioned when I was in Dallas (PRIOR to release of "Dante's Peak"). The plots of the two are rather similar: (1) both cases, a long-inactive volcano in a nice spot suddenly starts showing signs of activity (2) both cases, there is love-interest connexion with the volcano and vulcanologist (3) both cases, bickering vulcanologist and woman have to do the actual work to handle the eruption (4) obviously, both cases must have unrealistic solution ("Fire on the Mountain", the solution was to set off ACTUAL avalanche to counteract what vulcanologist described as "liquid avalanche"; I didn't see "Dante's Peak" to comment on the solution, other than it being unrealistic--as it oft is in movies).
  • avatar


    I'm a critic but a very strange one. Some movies click to me and some don't, but "Volcano : Fire on the Mountain" pleased me all the way. Dante's Peak was too slow, Volcano was too unreal, but Volcano : Fire on the Mountain combined a little of both and got a great TV movie. The acting is no better than any other natural disaster film and the special effects are excellent! I just wish other made for TV films could be this good.
  • avatar


    I generally have a high degree of suspension of disbelief. I can forgive poor writing and acting if its at least mildly amusing. I did find this movie at least that, mildly amusing. The acting wasn't great though there were some stand out performances, best of the worst kind of thing. The writing wasn't great but it kept me going even with the gaping holes. Until the end. They talked about pyroclastic flow and when they got to it I was speechless, for half a second. Then I yelled at the screen because it was not pyroclastic flow they were showing. Pyroclastic flow is a huge cloud of super heated air and ash rushing at extreme speed down the side of a mountain. Instead it was a lava flow, the kind that is supposed to move slowly i might add. Then they try to stop it with an avalanche. my first thought was, any snow that was going to avalanche would have fallen during the massive earthquakes affecting the area.
  • avatar


    From a geologist perspective...the story is impossible. The situations that are portrayed could not occur in a real volcanic eruption. However, from at entertainment perspective...the storyline is pretty good for a TV action movie.

    The story lines interrelate and there are characters that was reasonably interesting to watch. And if your a scientist, geologist or know anything about volcanoes it is really amusing to watch. The acting is pretty good for a TV movie. The movie creates an interesting relationship between a natural disaster and a overly dramatic plot. At times it appears as though the volcano is merely a catalyst for the drama.

    Don't expect accuracy, but it's good for a quick, mindless entertainment.
  • avatar


    The movie "volcano: fire on the mountain" is supposed to be an action/drama movie. However, from an earth scientist's point of view (i.e. my point of view) it is a comedy due to all the terrible mistakes they made when it comes to realism. Here I'll give one example: There is an explosive eruption which indicates a silicic magma. Silicic magma cannot flow down a mountain due to its high viscosity. Yet in this movie it flows down the mountain without any trouble. Here I still think: "Oh well, it's a movie not a documentary". But then the people are worried that they will get killed by the lava flow. Now this is when the movie becomes real funny. So there is a lava flow in the snow.....then where is the water, the lahar???? A lahar would destroy everything on its path. Why worry about a lava flow when a lahar will get to you first? So if you want to see a comedy then you should definitely watch this movie, but if you want to see a far more realistic volcano-movie, then choose "Dante's peak" (which contains only a few scientific errors).