GurlyIamBeach Instant Favorite.

Huievest Instead, you get a movie that's enjoyable enough, but leaves you feeling like it could have been much, much more.

Roy Hart If you're interested in the topic at hand, you should just watch it and judge yourself because the reviews have gone very biased by people that didn't even watch it and just hate (or love) the creator. I liked it, it was well written, narrated, and directed and it was about a topic that interests me.

Edwin The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

Leofwine_draca MAGMA: VOLCANIC DISASTER is a low key disaster film of the 2000s, barely remembered by anybody a decade later. It stars the constantly underrated Xander Berkeley, an actor I've been a fan of ever since I saw him in TERMINATOR 2, playing a vulcanologist who warns of the imminent eruption of volcanoes around the world. What follows is a by-the-numbers thriller full of insipid performances from everyone who isn't Berkeley, alongside poor scripting and the usual gamut of terrible and cheesy CGI effects. It's a shame that Berkeley's protagonist is so dull here because he alone carries the film and is the only worthwhile thing in it.

Alice I should start by explaining that my rating of "Magma" doesn't correspond with my enjoyment of it. I regard these movies as a guilty pleasure and I am a fan of Xander Berkeley, so I really enjoyed watching it, but that doesn't make it a good movie. However, since it's a Sci-Fi Pictures production I wasn't expecting one.The plot, as other reviewers have pointed out, is predictable - though that's true of all disaster pictures no matter how large the budget. The special effects are really, really bad; the underground scenes look like they could have been shot in Tom Sawyer's cave at Disneyland (though in actual fact, the movie was filmed in Bulgaria). Berkeley is great; it's a treat to see him in a starring role and getting to play a good guy for a change. Reiko Aylesworth does a creditable job as his estranged wife, though she doesn't get pulled into the plot until the last third of the movie. It must have been Old Home Week for "24" alumni when they were casting this thing.I have to commend the writers for one plot twist I wasn't expecting. Berkeley's character works with a cute young female geologist who obviously hero-worships him. I would have expected some romantic entanglement to ensue between the characters, but that doesn't happen. In fact, in one scene in a bar she gives him advice on how to make up with his wife! She winds up falling for the only other one of Berkeley's research assistants to survive the cataclysm. Nice work, writers.The reviewer above who pointed out the nonsense of getting "superficial burns" from exposure to hot lava was right on the money, and the whole concept of a volcano going from total dormancy to blowing its top with absolutely no warning is just as silly. But that just adds to the fun. If it weren't ridiculous it wouldn't be a Sci-Fi channel movie, now would it? So, should you watch it? If you are a Xander Berkeley fan and/or a fan of cheesy disaster movies, go for it. It's your call.

jack-mart This was a good movie.I like the story.The cheap special effects were good. It may be cheesy but if you a natural disaster fan then check this one out. Now the plot. Appertinly nuclear power is heating up the core and starting volcanoes around the world. Volcanologiost Dr. Sheprerd starts to notice that it's starting to happen when a volcano erupts according to a theory he has to convince the government to save the earth and keep his marriage from falling apart. I loved this Movie.Its one of my favorite8/10

Rob_Taylor Ho-hum. Another SciFi Channel production and another direly tedious, badly acted, poorly produced effort with sub-standard effects and story. Who woulda guessed, huh? The SciFi Channel seem to think that getting the crews' four year old kids in as science advisers is a good idea. Hence we have the laughable technobabble on display here that makes Star Trek look like science fact.The Earth is rebelling against us, since we've poisoned it with radiation and chemical pollutants etc. How very Gaia-like. Also how terribly intellect-insulting. I'm not sure what is worse. The fact that they hope we'll swallow this garbage or the decision to try to send an eco-message to the viewers (albeit only in passing).Clearly no one even proof-read the script or they'd have noticed the glaring gaff involved in solving the problem of the erupting Earth. You see, having poisoned the world with radiation and such, the only solution to save the planet is to detonate nuclear warheads, thereby adding more radiation. It really isn't just me that noticed this ridiculously counter-intuitive nonsense? Right? Other intelligence insulting details include the apparently limitless diving abilities of nuclear ballistic submarines and the attendant ability of their torpedoes to likewise survive the crushing pressure at the tremendous depths of ocean trenches.My favourite nonsense though, was the scene where a guy gets dripped on by molten lava and later, in hospital, we're told that he only has "superficial burns".....All in all this was complete rubbish, like most SciFi productions and is best avoided by all.