Smartorhypo Highly Overrated But Still Good

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

filippaberry84 I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Kamila Bell This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

mlink-36-9815 I first saw it on Cinemax in the 80's & I liked the movie. They tried to show a sodom and gomorrah scene where sex was given away cheaply. Its the type of movie where the filmmakers were hoping interesting stuff would happen and then afterwards they could edit the good stuff together. But not enough interesting things happened. The VHS tape is a cut version at its proper speed. The cinemax version is time compressed. Both are 91 min.! I guess they were told 91 min. and no longer. I have not seen the dvd yet. I own the movie poster, paperback tie-in and soundtrack album. Guess I must like it. eh? The best scene is where the girl attacks the skier with a knife and he throws a glass of milk in her face. Its unforgettable.

jjnxn-1 Dreadful, horrendous, awful and terrible are all words that don't even begin to describe how bad this movie is. Rock and Mia, about as mismatched a pair of costars as could be imagined; he towers over her and they share no chemistry whatsoever, would make more sense as father and daughter than ex-spouses but that is the least of this picture's problems. Some of the cast try to maintain their dignity and soldier on while being faced with stupid words to speak and idiotic situations to react to. Nonsensical happenings, bad special effects and rotten direction all add up to a textbook example of why the disaster epics ran out of steam shortly after the release of this dog.

Coventry I'm an avid fan-boy of 1970's disaster movies. Not so much because they're intense and captivating since, quite frankly they're not, but actually just because they're so exaggeratedly clichéd and kitschy. You can easily summarize ALL the 70's disaster movies ever made with one and the same synopsis, only the nature of the disaster differs. It can be a fire, flood, volcanic eruption, virus, shipwreck or – like in this case – an avalanche! The main difference between this film and the majority of classic titles (such as "The Towering Inferno" and "The Poseidon Adventure") lies in the budget. Usually Irwin Allen produced this sort of stuff and he had plenty of money to spare. "Avalanche", on the other hand, is a Roger Corman production and he's mostly (in)famous for delivering cheap and extremely low-budgeted cult films. A half-decent disaster movie is simply impossible to accomplish without a bit of budget, and this clearly shows in "Avalanche". The special effects are pitiable, with whole bunches of people getting buried underneath thick and oddly shaped boulders of Styrofoam. But, aside from the budgetary restrictions, "Avalanche" does live up to four out of five essential disaster movie trademarks. #1: there needs to be at least one major star and a long list of secondary stars. Rock Hudson and Mia Farrow were big names around the time, but the supportive cast is a bit disappointing. I assume that Roger Corman spent all his actors' budget on the aforementioned two names and Robert Forster. #2: The characters are usually split into two camps with completely opposite ideals and/or initiatives. Why, yes! Although the "righteous" camp is extremely small this time. Rock Hudson is the owner of a fancy winter sport resort in Colorado and he keeps on expanding the area to lure more tourists. Robert Forster is the tree-hugging reporter who endlessly warns him that the expansion needs to stop otherwise there will be avalanches. #3: regardless what type of disaster we're dealing with, variants of the exact same perilous situations are always applicable. Too true, we have people that are buried alive, trapped in ski lifts, crushed or dead in gas explosions. #4: always remember that, when the situation appears to be at it worst, it can and will still get even worse! That's another true cliché of the disaster film! In "Avalanche", for example, there's a sequence in which an ambulance transporting people who narrowly escaped dead already, crashes into a ravine! Only for die-hard disaster movie fanatics.

kurtman-3 I love disaster films, even the bad ones, but this one is completely horrible. From the acting to the special effects this one is crap. The script is laughable and the whole affair is absolutely boring. The "Avalanche" doesn't happen till around the hour mark and all we get till then is totally blinding boredom. Mia and Rock barely have anything to do (god knows why they actually did the movie), Robert Forester is hot but the character is bland, and Jeanette Nolan is under used in the only entertaining role in the flick. The rest of the cast are forgettable and not all that all-star. The action is contrived and "special effects" are for the most part low-budget 70's-ish.This movie would make a great sleep aid. It's bad, not enjoyably bad, just bad. It's bland and pointless. Skip if at all possible.