Ring of Fire (2012)

• Year: 2012
• Released: 11 Mar 2013
• Country: United States
• Adwords: 6 wins & 5 nominations
• IMDb: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt2315850/
• Rotten Tomatoes: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ring_of_fire
• Metacritics:
• Available in: 720p, 1080p,
• Language: English
• MPA Rating: N/A
• Genre: Drama, Sci-Fi
• Runtime: min
• Writer: N/A
• Director: N/A
• Cast: Michael Vartan, Terry O’Quinn, Ian Tracey
• Keywords:

	4.6/10
	36% – Critics
	36% – Audience

Ring of Fire Storyline

When an oil rig causes a volcanic eruption in a small town, it’s just the first in a trigger effect called the Ring of Fire that stretches across the globe. If these cataclysmic series of eruptions cannot be stopped, the earth will be swallowed whole, leading to an extinction-level event.—Sonar Entertainment

Ring of Fire Photos

Ring of Fire Torrents Download

Ring of Fire Subtitles Download

Ring of Fire Movie Reviews

Overly Long– Would Rate It Average Overall

I’m partial to disaster flicks and I found this DVD at Redbox, although it’s a TV Miniseries. It’s in two parts, each one about 90 minutes long, which I felt was overly long for this film. Of course, it’s not up to the quality of classics like the original “Poseiden Adventure” or “Towering Inferno”, although it had some positives to it adding up to an average rating from me.

Set in Oregon, it centers on an oil company, Trans Nova, using a supposedly environmentally safe laser drill to find oil in a naturally protected preserve. However, surreptitiously they’re digging lower than legal depths and what they think is a vast oil reserve is actually a compressed magma (lava) deposit.

After a whistleblower, who works at Trans Nova, reveals this to the head scientist overseeing the project Dr. Matthew Cooper (Michael Vartan) and to the aggressive environmentalist opposing the project, Emily Booth (Lauren Lee Smith) they project a disaster unless the well is immediately shut down.

Even as livestock and wildlife begin to die, the head of the Trans Nova project Oliver Booth (Terry O’Quinn)–yes Emily’s estranged father– refuses to shut it down. You can guess what happens next–disaster with a huge volcanic eruption and the threat of triggering the Ring of Fire, whereby 75% of the world’s volcanoes could be activated and erupt.

In addition to the length of the movie, other drawbacks I thought were rather wooden acting and dialogue plus too many scientific technical terms as it went along. I thought overall the special effects were so/so, but at times very well conceived. On the positive side, I thought it maintained tension fairly well and the rescue and survival stories, as is the norm in these epic films, were quite well done, and at times could be moving and touching.

Should have THROWN the shaky-cam in the Lave tube.

Not a bad plot and acting for a made-for-TV/Cable Miniseries, but the “shaky-cam” is WAY overdone and makes it a pain to watch. Almost every scene (at least the ones I could endure) used this technique, subsequently this was more of an “on in the background while I did other things movie”. The constant jittering and jarring, lack of any real time focused on any actor or scene really detracted from the product. Certainly DOES NOT add realism. Too bad for us viewers. As far as scientific accuracy goes, seems about half of it was at least plausible. Most of it was pure Hollywood. The real problem nowadays is too many people are starting to think this stuff is real, as opposed to just fun entertainment.

Somebody SHOOT the cameramen so they stop jerking the darn thing

Look, when an earthquake or tremor happens it’s one thing, but looking at actors talking or walking through debris or on a street THE CAMERA IS TREMORING, it’s IRRITATING!

Hey, What’s the purpose of having vibration correction of it’s shut off and the cameras INTENTIONALLY shaken for some stupid effect!

Try this at home-move your head around while staring at something in the foreground. What MOVES is the background behind the object and the object of your view only changes in perspective: instead of looking straight on at the subject you’re at an angle, BUT in the whole process the PICTURE doesn’t JERK!!!

WHY CANT THEY DEVISE A CAMERA THAT MOVES BACK AND FORTH A LITTLE, maybe an inch or five, WHILE LOCKED ONTO THE OBJECT OF THE PHOTOGRAPH! The background will move but the subject will stay in the camera’s center… NO JERKING!!!