Ablaze (2001) Poster

(2001)

User Reviews

Review this title
27 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
2/10
A complete and utter load of worthless rubbish
munitzs5 August 2005
It could be a very lame poor parody of fire disaster films, but has not a jot of wit or intelligence.

Poor camera work - some of it lifted from stock footage or other movies.

Acting is incredibly lame.

Scripting abysmal.

Direction atrocious.

Everything about this movie sucks big time.

Whoever participated should be ashamed, and should be banned from movies for ever! One of the worst - no redeeming features.

2 stars for some interesting pictures of 1960s fire engines.
8 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
this was a "how to" guide for making a bad movie
pkzeewiz21 April 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Okay my synopsis is going to make it sound better than it really is I am sure. A gung ho fireman is injured while saving a little boy from a house fire, meanwhile his brother is trying to set-up and bust a crooked man who owns most of the town and is running a very dangerous refinery that ends up catching fire while he is there inspecting it. The whole town goes up and the small, unequipped clinic in the middle of town is getting all of the fire victims and it is caught in the middle of a burning town. Firefighters have to get them out the best they can and all kinds of other junk is going on too...okay so my description isn't good either.

This movie is bad production. The fires are either edited from old footage or CGI, the acting is horrible for the most part, and the good actors in this d-list cast have stupid dialog and actions to work with. This plot is bad...

I mean a movie starting out with Ice-T "the cop killer" playing a cop as he seems to always do, as well as some nobody actor I have never seen before, is not a way to scream "watch this movie". We see all kinds of has beens and never have been actors like Tom Arnold, Cathy Lee Crosby, Amanda Pays, Pat Harrington, Jr., Edward Albert, Michael Dudikoff, Mary Jo Catlett, William Zabka and Christian Oliver.

The movie is directed by sequel king turned porn king Jimmy Wynorski, who has brought us movies like BIG BAD MOMMA II, 976-EVIL II, THE RETURN OF THE SWAMP THING and SORRORITY HOUSE MASSACRE II.

Stupid story lines include the cops in a dangerous high speed pursuit of a man who has a bomb taped to his chest; a little boy lighting toilet paper on fire attaching it to his airplane and throwing it on the floor in his bedroom, and workers in thick protective outfits welding while standing next to gasoline drainage.

I didn't hate this movie, it was fun at times, and so bad it was good at other times. It looked like it was made for TV, but it has language of an R rating. I give it 3 out of 10 stars, its not a fireman movie like backdraft, its just a silly drama with many major problems.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
I joined this board while late for work
forums-598 April 2008
just to warn everyone how bad this "film" is. Acting, directing, make up, script... I bet even the food served to the cast and crew on set made everyone sick.

The main plot and all of the sub plots suck. Nothing is logical, scenes are re-used, and mistakes are everywhere. Here are some examples from the first 30 minutes of the film:

The bad guys "get away" car loses its' front bumper in a crash and then regains it. The power cord leading to the rotating red light on top of the cop car switches from inside to outside the door frame in milliseconds.

The actor in the first fire stunt is so covered with protective gel he looks like "grease man." A ranging fire starts inside a bedroom so fast that only gallons of gasoline could have been responsible. A plastic toy kangaroo survives the blazing inferno for at least 10 minutes while only inches from the flames. The "firemen" all run into the inferno without masks, oxygen, or even gloves. Then they stroll about perfectly upright throughout the blazing structure as without a care in the world. One actor falls down and barely bumps his head and then everyone expects him to die. Which he does, but only after a twenty minute death bed confession.

It goes on and on and on. See how many you can spot.

So bad it is almost funny

I have to turn off the TV and go to work now, thank God.

Mike
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Almost a Parody!
timothytippins3 July 2004
This movie is a page out of movie history, it first came out as 'Striking distance' the cop car chase scene in the beginning is exactly the same as the chase scene in 'Striking distance' complete with the cars rolling down the embankment at the end of the chase (I thought the bad guy was going to get out and shoot Ice T). Oh by the way, what happens to Ice T later on in the movie? . Then as the movie progresses, it turns into 'City on fire' a disastrous disaster movie from 1979 complete with scenes right out of 'City of fire'. I mean the actual scenes in 'City on fire' were cut and pasted into 'Ablaze'. Like the scene where the nurse opens the closet door and gets smoked. I wonder how they got away with that? I was waiting for Shelly Winters to make a cameo. (They could of cut and pasted her to!). What a Bomb!
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
movie stunk
srsp2428 February 2004
I felt this movie did a major ripoff of several good movies and T.V. shows. The big car chase scene in the beginning is from "Striking Distsints". I felt like I was ripped off by the writers of this movie. The acting was terrible at best. I also felt that this movie was poor showing of what firefighters do in the real world. I think that the writers should never be aloud to write again. The only good thing about this movie in when it ends. I also felt the movie was slow to progress. The special effects left something to desire.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Possible spoiler
engine1321-125 February 2004
Warning: Spoilers
May spoil the movie.

What, are you crazy? This movie has to be the absolute worst movie I have ever seen. They piece parts together from other shows, mainly Emergency! and video clips from foreign films about fires. I noted a change in fire engines seven times in a 10 minute segment!

The first part doesn't even relate to the last part. Where did Ice-T go after the dude set himself on fire in the first scene? Then he just randomly appears at the end? This movie is destined for the fiery pit from which it came.

Too many questions, too little time.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Sickening
Shaq_Ames26 October 2003
Warning: Spoilers
..::**Possible Spoilers**::.. I remember browsing the shelf at Movie World, and me, being a fireman, my eye caught the cover. It looked good. The cover is the only good thing about this piece of trash. I knew something was wrong when you could see the stunt mans "goo". Next thing I know, our "heros" pull up in an outdated piece of crap, and run in with next to no gear on. They would have been just as well of dousing themselves in gasoline before running inside. The plot dissolved after the beginning credits rolled, and after the ending credits, still wonder what happened to the arsonist plot. I think the PFD on their helmets stands for "Pretend Fire Department" because everything they could have done wrong in this movie is done wrong. It's weird how you can leave they leave the station in a Ward, then shows them responding with what looks like European apparatus, and even shows a tiller (where the heck did this come from) and then they pull up to the scene in a totally different rig. In one scene, you can see Jonny and Roy pull up in squad 51 (tv show emergency!) I think they used more stock footage than actual footage they taped themselves. Chessy one liners, innacurate statements, the list goes on and on. This piece of trash should be lit ablaze.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
BRUTAL
kevinregan863 March 2003
This movie By Far is the Worst Movie I have ever seen. First off it didnt make any sense AT ALL!! Secondly the back of the cover says that there are arsonists going around setting fires when thats not even the plot. Third im a firefighter and once again it is hollywood over exaderating things not even so much with the main fire but when a house burned down thay made this paper airplane that a little kid was playing with just explode into flames and within 5 seconds this kid's room is on fire, thats impossible unless there was gasoline poured all over his room. What else can I say just bad everything the worst script Horrible no-name Actors. There's only one word that can describe this movie. BRUTAL !!!!!!!! Take my advice PLEASE!!!! save youre 7 bucks from renting this movie you could probally find it in someone's garbage for free.
3 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Someone set the script on fire
Garry-103 April 2002
Absolutely terrible. How can abominations like this ever be made? A decent premise (city put in danger by big corporation, heroically saved by firefighters), but an absolute cliche ridden script of the worst order, hammy acting by a cast who don't seem to know whether to play it for laughs, and very cheap and repetitive special effects. Must have been a stuntmans hog heaven, because we get to see lots of people wandering around on fire and falling from buildings for no good reason. Ice-T, despite taking second billing, appears only for about a minute at the start and a minute at the end. Tom Arnold picks up his cheque by sleepwalking through his role, and the rest of the cast must have been desperate for work and are desperately under rehearsed or just unfamiliar with the script.

You know something is badly wrong when in the intro scene, a man sets on fire by the side of an extremely large lake, yet prefers to wander around going 'argh, argh' rather than THROWING HIMSELF IN THE LAKE! The final climactic scene is frankly laughable - not even 'good in a bad way' as people make mistakes that they simply wouldn't do in real life (walking around slowly and having a look at the pretty fires rather than running like hell). Do yourself a favour and avoid this turkey.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Beyond the pale... Godless
albaitis15 May 2005
Although I have been a firefighter for 23 years, I make it a point to not be overly critical when the technical "advisors" drop the ball as they so often have (even on Backdraft and Ladder 49). However, the absolute disregard for any reasonable correctness in this abomination is unforgivable.

But the firefighting aspects aside, this movie to date stands alone as the worst that I have ever seen. Ever. I accept some of the blame for not ejecting the thing but it was like a train wreck. I could not look away.

As we all can attest, some movies by virtue of their awfulness can be fun. (i.e. Ed Wood's side-splitting "Plan-9 From Outer Space") This was not one of them. "Ablaze" is one of the many Hollywood debacles that must beg the question, "where do they get the money?".
7 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
warning: watching this movie can cause serious brain damage!
frenky_dee14 December 2008
ablaze is absolutely the wort movie i've seen in years. it is so bad that it comes close to being a parody. but parodies were meant to be absurd, the worst thing about ablaze is that it actually tries to be a serious action movie.

i wonder whether the director/producer hung himself after seeing the end result. he should be banned from any film studio for the rest of his life!

there is totally nothing positive to mention about this movie: camera-work is a drama. action scenes are totally absurd. the acting is below every possible standard, the average commercials actors, selling loans, is doing a better job than these people. the movie is loaded with bloopers, all over the place.

this movie trying to be serious is an absolute insult to the viewer's intelligence, even if the viewer is a complete moron.

watching this movie is an absolute waste of time, you could just as well stick your head into the sand for an hour and a half!
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
a reel must not see....
bytemychip25 April 2008
Warning: Spoilers
the spoiler is the first full sequence of the movie was better in the movie it was lifted from (bruce willis' striking distance). then there was a fire at 1313 mockingbird lane(isn't that where the munsters live). not to mention ice tea phoned in his performance, i'm sure just for the paycheck. it was almost like watching a train wreck, no matter how bad it was you look for a glimmer of hope. but alas , no glimmer of hope , no happy ending no story. i could have done better special effects with stuff from my house. actually there was one good sequence , but like i said , that was taken from another movie. and the funny thing about that was i saw striking distance one day and this looser came on the next day.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Yet another movie they lifted from (Striking Distance)
DPonti27 April 2003
Not only did they lift scenes from City on Fire but the opening chase sequence was lifted from the Bruce Willis movie Striking Distance!

This movie was probably the worst movie I have seen.

This movie belongs in the bargain bin at Wal Mart, ummm... better yet it belongs in the trash.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Simply a very bad film !
amundula3 June 2002
My Dear God i must start out by saying that i wasnt happy at all with this. Was it just me or did all the firefighting scenes and Stock shots come from the 70's ?? It was a cross between a bad takeoff on Lethal weapon and loaded weapon. I didnt know if i was supposed to laugh or be serious. My favorite scene is the dialogue between Tom Arnold and his two henchmen trying to cover up the sloppy oil refinery job their doing. i qoute. Go find those damn files and Change your clothers for gods sake you stink. WOW pure bad acting. Meet the stupids / Rosanne. Oh boy
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
atrocity to the movie world and all of it's fans
gawkygeek28 July 2004
i would like to know one and only one thing about this movie, WHY IS ICE-T BILLED SO BOLDLY?!?! he is in the movie for all of 10 seconds and manages to make it to the front cover it is ludicrous to even think that a character so meaningless and replaceable would even be listed in the credits before the first 10. now to continue with the plot, THERE IS NO PLOT fire thats all there is to explain this atrocity of a movie lots of fire and explosions, gas leaks corrupt firemen and mayors. WHAT DID ANY OF IT HAVE TO DO WITH THE REST?! this movie wasn't worth the meager 3 dollars blockbuster charged me to rent it, i believe it should come with a large warning, if you have brain cells do not rent this movie or they will explode. ALL OF THEM!!
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A Ripoff of "City on Fire"
fx_gent30 November 2002
I have been interested in disaster films since seeing the ?Poseidon Adventure? in 1972 (among the better made) and over the years I have seen many, some good, many bad. I rented this film,interested by the box?s description. When I actually started to watch it, I felt like I was experiencing deja vu. In 1979, another film was released called ?City on Fire? with an identical plot involving a city, an industrial complex, and firestorm. Having seen it about three times, I am somewhat familiar with the plot. ?Inferno? is nearly identical, in fact it is if someone took that other script, altered some things and came up with this. The kid trapped in the house, the hospital trapped in the firestorm, the scaffolding falling on people running from the hospital, the guy running into the burning building to retrieve a file, and the gauntlet of fire people must run to escape the hospital are a number of examples. Another person stated that some scenes looked like stock footage from the 70s, the reason for this is that many of those scenes appeared to have been lifted from ?City on Fire.? This film was an embarrassment to those performing in it and the writer should be ashamed of themselves. I am surprised the original scriptwriter did not try and sue for copyright infringement. They say that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, in this case it is not.
3 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
waste of time
RLARKT19920 February 2004
This film is a waste of time. Much of the footage was taken from the 1979 film,City on fire,starring Leslie Nielson,. Ice-T had very few lines. Go to the video store and rent the original,City on fire, with better cast. Leave Ablaze alone, not worth watching,a waste of time.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Ablaze
Bigtoe-41 October 2006
This movie is great, but there's one thing that the end credits say that is not entirely true. The end credit say that the movie was shot entirely on location in Los Angeles, California. Not true. There is original footage from the 1970's from an apartment building in flames in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. I recognize the blue and white police car on the left of the screen and also the housing style as I have been to Montreal many many times living 1 1/5 hours drive from that city. Also the firefighting gear is mostly Canadian in the film, especially in the original footage. Now my big question is, being an avid collector of vintage Canadian firefighting gear, how did the producers get a hold of all of the vintage gear like; Chieftain long coats, Chieftain firefighter rubber hip boots, etc... That is something very, very special that is very, very rare. Two thumbs way up for this.

Big Toe 4
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Has To Be Seen To Be Believed
lase-protect16 August 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Firstly, it stars Tom Arnold which should make anyone suspicious, a god-awful actor at the best of times. Saying that he's not all that much worse than anything else I've been unfortunate enough to see him in, but looks at the camera inadvertently almost more times than he appears.

It's funny because I actually fell asleep after around 5 minutes but then woke up another few minutes later and was left wondering "have I been asleep for over two hours? The film I fell asleep to had Ice T in it, where's he gone?".

The writing is monumentally terrible. All the simplistic dialogue you'd expect from an abomination with a plot summary similar to this one. I can't help but try and imagine the process involved when this band of hapless Hollywood types scratched around for ideas and funding. If anyone amongst this tribe ever worked again God only knows how. Hollywood films are poor more often than not and this is like 'Hollywood Culture' wrapped up in one epic masterpiece of wasted time.

I'm a film collector, and I don't know who John Bradly (top billing) is... I still don't.

In terms of score, it's everything a Hollywood Blockbuster normally is, miserably monotonous horns throughout and "awwww" sorry strings for the mooshy bits at hospital bedsides and shots of heart monitors. Absolutely awful.

What should amaze the uninitiated, is that I saw this film on television. With the wealth of spectacular film making across the world, someone, somewhere actually made the decision to air this over it all. I understand that it's part of the dumbing down process but it's so tiring that the library of television stations is consistently stocked with plastic, ready-made microwavable mind-fluff in favour of art. The mind of the 10 year old in the body of an adult is nurtured heavily, always.

Possibly, the worst film I've ever seen.

If I was to be positive, I'd say that this film needs 30 years to become a classic, but only because it will become a great social document to help understand what disgusting times the late 20th and early 21st centuries were to live in.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
I want my money back.
ghostsmokesix30 January 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Wow. 'Ablaze' was terrible. I just rented it and watched it, and had to find a place to post a review to warn people to STAY AWAY! Bad acting, bad script, horrible special effects, etc. The movie box says something about a serial arsonist being on the loose (*cough*Backdraft*cough*), but that has absolutely nothing to do with the plot. It advertises that Tom Arnold and Ice T are the main actors in it...wrong. Ice T is in the movie for less than 5 minutes and makes no impact on the storyline whatsoever, and Arnold really doesn't have more than a dozen speaking lines before he's killed. On a technical note, this movie was made only like 3 years ago, but they're driving a tiller ladder truck that looks like it dates back to the 50's. Half of the apparatus in the movie I'm pretty sure is English anyway. At the house fire, they go into a burning building without SCBAs. And could someone explain how the Captain's brother died? He didn't have major burns, he didn't take in any more smoke than the other guys with him did, but somehow he dies. None of the stuff they're doing makes any sense. If you want a good firefighting movie, go see Ladder 49.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Best worst movie ever made!
cwinf526 October 2006
I have been a firefighter for over 21 years. When I first saw this movie I was outraged! How in the heck could anyone have made such a horrible piece of garbage? Yikes! Then I saw it again, and realized that I had watched history being made. Out of all the horribly made, horribly acted, horribly edited B-movies ever made, this is the BEST WORST MOVIE EVER MADE! I loved this so much, I actually bought it. It is great fun to see where all the mistakes are, like the British fire trucks responding to the American fire (it's even in the trailer!). I saw Striking Distance the other day, and fell out of my chair when I saw the chase scene from that. OH MY GAWD. I even showed this movie to my firefighter friends, and they agree with me that this is THE BEST WORST MOVIE EVER MADE.
3 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Not too bad for a lesser Hollywood movie.
ralpgalland23 August 2006
Not too bad for a lesser Hollywood movie with no big screen names(Ice-T don't count). It's got the usual amount of bloopers that you can expect from a such a movie. It also got the usual amounts of flaws in how things are done, like a fire rescue team running into a burning and smoking building without the proper equipment, kinda like "firemen Rambos".

The storyline could have been better, but I've seen worse in some of the major hit movies the last 10 years. However, the movie does have a "tv movie" feel to it, with some of the acting and how it's shot.

As for the cast, some of them I would have expected more from, while others that are more unknown does a rather good job.

But overall, if you manage to ignore the bloopers and errors, it's an enjoyable film to watch when you're out of the "major name" movies. Just grab the popcorn and enjoy.
3 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
A real rip-off
Leofwine_draca19 March 2018
Warning: Spoilers
ABLAZE at first seems like a decent, big budget disaster movie until you realise that half the footage has been stolen from other, better movies. Things begin with a blistering car chase lifted from STRIKING DISTANCE before the plot moves into a straight copy of the underrated '70s film CITY ON FIRE, complete with an oil refinery blaze and a rescue-the-patients hospital climax. Not that we should expect much better from director Jim Wynorski, who takes plagiarism to new levels here. Despite the presence of various briefly-used guest stars, the only decent bits of this film are those stolen from prior, better movies, so you'd be better off sticking with them.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Just watch City on Fire instead....
mustang520116 July 2017
Warning: Spoilers
Let me start by saying how much I love disaster movies. I even love ones made by The Asylum. That being said, do not waste your time watching this movie. To start with, Ice-T, who has top billing, is only in this movie for about 5 minutes in the beginning and 1 minute at the end. Huge disappointment.

Second, about halfway through I started feeling deja vu. I knew I'd never seen this exact movie before, but why did it feel so familiar? There are two reasons for that. First, it has the almost exact same premise from a 1979 movie called City on Fire. From the refinery fire, to the hospital evacuation. Second, most of the scenes of the hospital evacuation and fire was actually footage from the same movie. You can clearly see the difference. One scene everyone is dressed in 2000 era clothing, the cars are from around that time, the firefighter suits are from that time, the hairstyles, etc.. Then the next scene you can clearly see how dated the film is, the hairstyles, clothing, and cars from the 70's. It's blatantly obvious and quite laughable.

My only question is, why would anyone make this movie if only to be lazy about it?? Don't waste your time with this. While City on Fire isn't the best movie ever, it's much better than Ablaze.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
For once I agree
tdh572 January 2013
As with politics, vacation destinations, television shows and a multitude of other things that the majority usually go for, I don't generally agree with many movie reviews on IMDb. But for once I do. This movie doesn't even try to be good.

Right out of the gate they steal a 10-minute scene frame-for-frame from Striking Distance. I don't mean it's a similar car chase, it's the actual chase from the Bruce Willis movie shot in 1993. Ablaze is a blatant rip off of other films from start to finish.

Not worth investing a single minute with let alone the 90 minutes they steal from your life. But at least they're consistent; all they do is steal from something else to put this drivel together. Avoid this mess at all costs.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed