29 reviews
I have been a fan of the disaster movie genre ever since I saw 'The Towering Inferno' in the cinema back in the day. And since then every disaster movie seems to follow the same formula. A couple, children, a builder etc. Having said that I thought the strain between the couple was well set up. I can accept the not so stellar special effects I can even take dodgy acting but please change the formula re children.
- Leofwine_draca
- Nov 20, 2019
- Permalink
Well I must admit to not being familiar with "Crystal Inferno" (or "Inferno: Skyscraper Escape") prior to stumbling upon it by blind luck. And I am a sucker for disaster movies, so of course I took the time and effort to sit down and watch this 2017 movie.
I will say that it was actually better than I had hoped for, because the vast majority of disaster movies available are just downright horrible and mauled by having grotesquely awful CGI. Luckily the was only so much CGI in "Crystal Inferno" that it didn't really matter that it looked fake sometimes. You could look past that, because the movie was not relying heavily on having a spectacular special effect to blow the audience away. I doubt they would have had the funds for that, but that is another issue.
"Crystal Inferno" is based more on being a story-driven movie that focuses on the characters and not having blazing special effects to make the audience go "oooh" and "aaah". As for the story, well it was entertaining enough actually, albeit very, very predictable and generic.
It should be said that "Crystal Inferno" has TV movie written all over it.
This is not among the worst of disaster movies that I have seen, and it is actually worth the time if you have an hour and a half to spare and got nothing preceding on the menu.
I will say that it was actually better than I had hoped for, because the vast majority of disaster movies available are just downright horrible and mauled by having grotesquely awful CGI. Luckily the was only so much CGI in "Crystal Inferno" that it didn't really matter that it looked fake sometimes. You could look past that, because the movie was not relying heavily on having a spectacular special effect to blow the audience away. I doubt they would have had the funds for that, but that is another issue.
"Crystal Inferno" is based more on being a story-driven movie that focuses on the characters and not having blazing special effects to make the audience go "oooh" and "aaah". As for the story, well it was entertaining enough actually, albeit very, very predictable and generic.
It should be said that "Crystal Inferno" has TV movie written all over it.
This is not among the worst of disaster movies that I have seen, and it is actually worth the time if you have an hour and a half to spare and got nothing preceding on the menu.
- paul_haakonsen
- Jul 2, 2018
- Permalink
- neillynchehaun
- Apr 12, 2018
- Permalink
Acting is straight out of stage-school. Wooden and rigid.
The plot is poor. The dialogue/script is very, very poor. This isn't even TV movie quality.
How on earth did Claire Forlani fall from Meet Joe Black to this rubbish? Avoid this. Don't waste 93 minutes of your life.
EDIT: I wrote after having watched the first 20-25 minutes. I wish I could now give it a lower score, as the film just got progressively worse... What Claire Forlani's character did in the lift shaft at about 55 mins is simply ludicrous. The acting surrounding an aerial accident a bit later is even worse.
I wish I could unwatch this diatribe.
The plot is poor. The dialogue/script is very, very poor. This isn't even TV movie quality.
How on earth did Claire Forlani fall from Meet Joe Black to this rubbish? Avoid this. Don't waste 93 minutes of your life.
EDIT: I wrote after having watched the first 20-25 minutes. I wish I could now give it a lower score, as the film just got progressively worse... What Claire Forlani's character did in the lift shaft at about 55 mins is simply ludicrous. The acting surrounding an aerial accident a bit later is even worse.
I wish I could unwatch this diatribe.
- williamsw-1
- Dec 16, 2017
- Permalink
- whooperdooper
- Sep 6, 2020
- Permalink
The story lacks originality and follows well established tropes with villainous corporate types, wholesome archetypes and just-add-wickedness mayhem. A real Syfy ready summer flick. The one positive and strong exception to this slightly mundane premise is the female lead of Supergirl/Wonder Woman heroine-ness of Claire Forlani'mother/professional character. Sadly the miss use of Jamie Bamber was a obvious disappointment, to equal Forlani.
The special effects are the typical display of scaled-down practical tricks that one expects from this level of disaster movie blended with lower budgeted CGI effects. This doesn't mean that the film is bad or cheap, just didn't want to equate "Inferno: Skyscraper Escape" to the Syfy channel, but yeah this one would work beautifully on their lineup. The effect have ample quality and impact with only a mild drop in CGI quality.
Overall the movie gives a straight-to-Redbox, low budget performance that works as far as action entertainment value for fans of microbudget disaster/action flicks. There is a strong female lead that plays to the heart of the story. There is some superbad acting and some melodrama that falls flat but for what it is, "Inferno: Skyscraper Escape" is a decent flick that should satisfy fans of this type film.
The special effects are the typical display of scaled-down practical tricks that one expects from this level of disaster movie blended with lower budgeted CGI effects. This doesn't mean that the film is bad or cheap, just didn't want to equate "Inferno: Skyscraper Escape" to the Syfy channel, but yeah this one would work beautifully on their lineup. The effect have ample quality and impact with only a mild drop in CGI quality.
Overall the movie gives a straight-to-Redbox, low budget performance that works as far as action entertainment value for fans of microbudget disaster/action flicks. There is a strong female lead that plays to the heart of the story. There is some superbad acting and some melodrama that falls flat but for what it is, "Inferno: Skyscraper Escape" is a decent flick that should satisfy fans of this type film.
- ASouthernHorrorFan
- Jun 29, 2018
- Permalink
It's nice to see somebody other than the Americans and Canadians taking on a disaster movie. Though the trouble is the film is lacking in the action they usually possess.
I will have to give the writers, Regina Luvitt and Philip J Ross, credit for making the story larger than the screen can handle. It is certainly one ambitious story. Brianna works for a company overseeing the construction of a new skyscraper in Antwerp. It is her business to run all the safety checks and confirm the building has been constructed to code, which we know it hasn't. The building's owner, Lucas Beaumont, decides that Brianna needs to be taken care off. Instead of killing her as he did her predecessor, he has his lackey discredit her with her husband. They create a series of faked photographs that give the impression of an affair. The hubby, Tom, is an idiot and believes the piccies. This course of action finds them at the lawyers months later... in the same skyscraper that Brianna should have been working. Due to cheap parts and materials, the building catches fire while the family are inside. WOW, that is a lot of backstories and it should have developed the characters and their relationships. The only trouble is the writers and the director, Eric Summer, blast through it without concern. It's a waste and as such is pointless. We could have started the whole film in the Lawyers offices. Which would have left extra time for the wonderful action to follow.
Except, there's very little action. What should have been an action tour-de-force for Claire Forlani as Brianna as she repels and climbs through a burning building to save her children and her marriage is nothing more than a sauntering shuffle through smoke and haze. There was so much in the main body of the film that Summers' could have accomplished to construct excitement. I mean, you're dealing with heights and fire and fire at great heights for Godsake!
As for the acting, this is just about as average as you can get. Nobody really gets into their characters. To be fair, when you see what type of characters they are you can't blame the actors and actresses. The worst, by a country mile, is the two children. It's not too surprising though because everybody is stereotypical as are the kids, so perhaps they were to come across as annoying, which they both do well.
This is a film to steer clear of. If you are wanting a nice and easy, leave your brain at the door, entertaining action film this is not the one. Do not be fooled by the trailer. Watch the trailer and enjoy that instead. It is the best part of the film after all.
Please swing on over and check out my Disastrous list to see where this damp drivel charted. You may find something better to watch.
I will have to give the writers, Regina Luvitt and Philip J Ross, credit for making the story larger than the screen can handle. It is certainly one ambitious story. Brianna works for a company overseeing the construction of a new skyscraper in Antwerp. It is her business to run all the safety checks and confirm the building has been constructed to code, which we know it hasn't. The building's owner, Lucas Beaumont, decides that Brianna needs to be taken care off. Instead of killing her as he did her predecessor, he has his lackey discredit her with her husband. They create a series of faked photographs that give the impression of an affair. The hubby, Tom, is an idiot and believes the piccies. This course of action finds them at the lawyers months later... in the same skyscraper that Brianna should have been working. Due to cheap parts and materials, the building catches fire while the family are inside. WOW, that is a lot of backstories and it should have developed the characters and their relationships. The only trouble is the writers and the director, Eric Summer, blast through it without concern. It's a waste and as such is pointless. We could have started the whole film in the Lawyers offices. Which would have left extra time for the wonderful action to follow.
Except, there's very little action. What should have been an action tour-de-force for Claire Forlani as Brianna as she repels and climbs through a burning building to save her children and her marriage is nothing more than a sauntering shuffle through smoke and haze. There was so much in the main body of the film that Summers' could have accomplished to construct excitement. I mean, you're dealing with heights and fire and fire at great heights for Godsake!
As for the acting, this is just about as average as you can get. Nobody really gets into their characters. To be fair, when you see what type of characters they are you can't blame the actors and actresses. The worst, by a country mile, is the two children. It's not too surprising though because everybody is stereotypical as are the kids, so perhaps they were to come across as annoying, which they both do well.
This is a film to steer clear of. If you are wanting a nice and easy, leave your brain at the door, entertaining action film this is not the one. Do not be fooled by the trailer. Watch the trailer and enjoy that instead. It is the best part of the film after all.
Please swing on over and check out my Disastrous list to see where this damp drivel charted. You may find something better to watch.
- P3n-E-W1s3
- Mar 5, 2020
- Permalink
One of the greatest action/adventure films i've ever seen. Great acting, especially the fireman. 10/10 acting for him. I highly recommended you to watch this amazing movie with great actors.
There are many faults with this movie but are you watching it to find fault or be entertained?
If you can forget that superman is not actually real and the A team are not actually super heroes, you will thoroughly enjoy this movie.
This is up to you.
I really enjoyed it.
- jerryadlington
- Aug 22, 2018
- Permalink
Story could have been good .. BUT seriously did they try to get all the worst actors they could find?
Not all were bad but most.
Just couldn't get over the acting and I like watching b movies and usually bad acting is fine it's part of it but not this time..
- mrichartz-45069
- Sep 19, 2019
- Permalink
My eyeballs have got splinters after watching this atrocity.
So many things just plain wrong it's hard to know where to start, but since a lot of the film is based around the elevators I'll start there.
I don't know how their elevators work but they look to be held up with steel bars akin to scaffolding poles, not cable, even sounded hollow when they clanked together lol.
And then there's the whole "Skyscraper on fire, let's just send a couple of fire engines" and that's all that was there for the duration.
In the office, their way of destroying incriminating evidence was to put it in a metal box with a fire inside it, granted it did have Hot Surface stickers on it, but I really really doubt such a device exists as an office shredder lol.
And then when the helicopter crashed, it had a couple of impacts with the building on the way down but landed on the skids which is fair enough, every panel of the chopper was dinted with paint scraped off.
But throughout the whole film, everyone from the kids to the TV News reporter, to the Fire captain was in real danger of catching fire due to how dry and wooden they were.
I really can't think of any redeeming part of the film apart from the end credits, not that there was anything special about them, but at least it signified the end of the film.
Don't bother watching, it's 90+ minutes you'll never get back.
So many things just plain wrong it's hard to know where to start, but since a lot of the film is based around the elevators I'll start there.
I don't know how their elevators work but they look to be held up with steel bars akin to scaffolding poles, not cable, even sounded hollow when they clanked together lol.
And then there's the whole "Skyscraper on fire, let's just send a couple of fire engines" and that's all that was there for the duration.
In the office, their way of destroying incriminating evidence was to put it in a metal box with a fire inside it, granted it did have Hot Surface stickers on it, but I really really doubt such a device exists as an office shredder lol.
And then when the helicopter crashed, it had a couple of impacts with the building on the way down but landed on the skids which is fair enough, every panel of the chopper was dinted with paint scraped off.
But throughout the whole film, everyone from the kids to the TV News reporter, to the Fire captain was in real danger of catching fire due to how dry and wooden they were.
I really can't think of any redeeming part of the film apart from the end credits, not that there was anything special about them, but at least it signified the end of the film.
Don't bother watching, it's 90+ minutes you'll never get back.
- brianallen-05435
- Aug 3, 2022
- Permalink
- Morpheusjeremy
- Dec 31, 2019
- Permalink
Coming over as a Video on Demand Dwayne Johnson Skyscraper ripoff.
Disaster hits a skyscraper after the developers cut corners on safety.
Divorcing couple Brianna (Claire Forlani) and Tom (Jamie Barber) find themselves having to rescue their children who sneaked in after coming across some evidence that their mum was not cheating.
The kids find themselves trapped as a fire rages throughout the building. It is left to Brianna to turn into an action woman.
Outside of the main leads the acting is weak. The special effects look cheap, although there are one or two nice shots despite the low budget.
The movie is merely functional without much of a story. The dialogue is bad.
Disaster hits a skyscraper after the developers cut corners on safety.
Divorcing couple Brianna (Claire Forlani) and Tom (Jamie Barber) find themselves having to rescue their children who sneaked in after coming across some evidence that their mum was not cheating.
The kids find themselves trapped as a fire rages throughout the building. It is left to Brianna to turn into an action woman.
Outside of the main leads the acting is weak. The special effects look cheap, although there are one or two nice shots despite the low budget.
The movie is merely functional without much of a story. The dialogue is bad.
- Prismark10
- Jul 23, 2022
- Permalink
I love a good "bad" disaster movie but this was just baaaad. Lousy acting, lousy effects and everything was predictable. So bummed out.
Everything with this movie is just awful. Cgi, acting, plot. And the creators of this movie gave 2M!
If you look closely like me, a crazy ideal I actually would not suggest, you will see that the building they put on the official poster is not the same as the building they are in the whole time of the movie. Come on!
- statarov-st
- Oct 18, 2019
- Permalink
I'm lost for words. The acting was unbearable to watch, the so call special affects were awful..there's nothing good about this movie...I'm speechless.
- casper_janeway
- Nov 1, 2020
- Permalink
The little girl in the movie was so dislikeable, that I wished her character was killed off. When I see a movie this amateurish, I wonder if the actors, writers and the director realized how awful the project was going to turn out.
- Woodyanders
- Sep 28, 2021
- Permalink
My husband and I love silly, over acted, horrible plot line movies and this doesnt disappoint. Addressing the elevator scene with the son and mom, all I can say is, hopefully that encourages the boy to start working out. As long as the cast had a good time making it, it's all gravy baby. There are good bad movies and bad bad movies. This is the former imo. Just embrace the bad decisions, overacting, and improbable scenarios.
- nemohotatse2
- Jul 28, 2020
- Permalink
- pangos-32597
- Aug 17, 2020
- Permalink
Very bad visual effect and fiction.Because they like had cursed.That fiction is very absurd.
- erbat-48425
- Dec 21, 2018
- Permalink