SnoReptilePlenty Memorable, crazy movie

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

Kaelan Mccaffrey Like the great film, it's made with a great deal of visible affection both in front of and behind the camera.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Coventry Fire! One of mankind's oldest and most devastating natural enemies already resulted – especially during the peak of disaster movies throughout the 70's decade – in a couple of very memorable movies, like the superior "The Towering Inferno", the more obscure TV-production "Fire!" and this criminally underrated and unjustly bashed "City on Fire". Okay, admittedly this isn't one of the most supreme and overwhelming entries in the disaster sub genre (shaped by all the notorious Irwin Allen productions), but all the terrific trademarks are definitely represented: perilous situations/incidents that go beyond the wildest proportions, an impressive all-star ensemble cast, irrelevant sub plots and character intrigues and – last but not least – numerous of truly astonishing special effects and spectacular action footage. Moreover, since this film was scripted by B-movie legend Jack Hill ("Spider Baby", "Death Ship", "Foxy Brown"), we're also treated to something that usually doesn't feature in standard disaster movies, namely nasty and grueling images of repulsive gore! Leslie Nielsen, still in the period before he became typecast as a slapstick actor, stars as the corrupt and power hungry mayor of a nameless large city. He arranged for a large hospital to be built in the city center, but the building is ramshackle and the equipment is outdated. Worse even, he is under pressure because he also allowed for a massive oil refinery to be constructed right in the heart of the city. When a frustrated employee of the refinery sabotages some of the installations and causes fuels to leak into the city sewers, it doesn't take long for a gigantic fire to burst out and spread itself throughout the entire metropolis. Pretty soon the new hospital is overrun with casualties, but given its location, the hospital itself is guaranteed to be destroyed by the unstoppable inferno. Never mind all the harsh and downright negative reviews around here, and the fact that "City on Fire" got parodied in MST3K, because this is one helluva entertaining motion picture! The script undeniably suffers from errors in continuity and a handful of illogical plot twists, but this is more than widely compensated by the non-stop spitfire (pun intended) of action and brutal violence. There are a lot of stunt people running around with their clothes in flames, falling from refinery pipelines or getting squished underneath collapsing buildings. At a certain point in the film, news anchor lady Ava Gardner mentions the inferno already led to more than 3000 casualties; how's that for a death toll? Nielsen gives away the best performance as Mayor Dudley, but also Barry Newman ("Vanishing Point"), Shelley Winters ("The Poseidon Adventure") and Susan Clark ("Airport 1975") are memorable. Henry Fonda has relatively little to do as the senior fire department chief, but he gets to deliver the philosophical "this-could-happen-to-any-city-anywhere-in-the-world") speech at the end.*title review inspired by the song "Fire!", courtesy of The Crazy World of Arthur Brown.

Sniggy918 Hey movie buffs, How are you all doing? I here to discuss the movie "City on Fire" (1979). Overall, I thought it was a decent disaster movies. For a movie that was made back in the late 1970's, it was pretty good. I know that there are a few movie buffs out there that will think that I am crazy (Hence the 918,a police code where I live for Crazy Person). But the only problems that I found was that the movie was set in Canada and yet they if you look carefully you could see the American flag and how does an oil/chemical works factory that starts on fire burn the entire city. I would sure like to know that. If anybody knows please let me know, please. But other than that, what more can you ask in a disaster movie: great actors/actoresses, crazy plot, for you disaster movie buffs Shelly Winters:). Keep watching movies and long live Hollywood and misc. production companies.

Jonathon Dabell City on Fire is one of the poorest of the 70s disaster films, but not the very worst (Meteor, Avalanche, Beyond the Poseidon Adventure are all a touch worse). It features a stellar cast that includes Ava Gardner, Henry Fonda, Barry Newman and Leslie Neilsen, but most of them seem bored by the material and just hover around in front of the fire, spouting bad dialogue and wondering aloud how much worse it will get and how many more victims it will claim. The fire is started by a disgruntled employee at a power station. Within an hour, it has spread beyond the power station to the whole city, and the film focuses in particular on the hospital, which is fast becoming an unsurvivable inferno. The scenes of patients and doctors running, drenched in water, through the burning streets are pretty exciting, but come so late in the film that many viewers will have switched off by then. Barry Newman is the best actor in it, given a rare leading role and making the most of it. The others, as I've mentioned. don't seem at all bothered. The production is certainly not cheap. It looks very real amid the fire and death, and to have assembled such a good cast obviously took considerable money. Unfortunately, the film is bad though. It takes too long to get going and doesn't try any new things compared with all the disaster movies that have been made before. I'd give this one a miss I were you, unless you're a pyromaniac or hooked on the disaster genre.

slbp_99 Why don't people like this movie???I enjoyed a lot! Ok, the only bad things about it, is that it is slow in the beginning. The reason why is because, they introduced everyone which was slow. The second and final thing is that in some scenes you can see the shadow of the camera. THAT IS A GOOF! But it is still a good movie. Don't ask me why it was on MST3k. I think if you like disaster movies this one be one of them. (I am one of those persons, that likes disaster movies.) Even if you do not like disaster movies it is still a good movie. So I would say go out and rent it and if you like it buy it. Or just go and buy it. 9/10 (reason slow in the beginning and you can see the shadow of the camera)