**A Norwegian film heavily influenced by American cinema.** Disaster movies are something we’ve grown accustomed to, largely because of the dramatic and often over-the-top Hollywood productions. This one isn’t American; it's from Norway, but it carries all the hallmarks of US filmmaking – that melodramatic style and heightened language—throughout. I was initially surprised to see a Norwegian film centered around a devastating earthquake. I’m not an expert in geology, but earthquakes of this magnitude don’t immediately come to mind when I think of Norway. The country does experience some moderate tremors annually, and there was a more significant event early in the 20th century that impacted Oslo. However, those Norwegian quakes are minor compared to those that shake places like Turkey, China, India, or the Atlantic and Hawaiian archipelagos. The earthquake depicted in the film, which took place in Oslo, didn't even register above a 6 on the Richter Scale—it was weaker than the recent quake in Marrakesh and pales in comparison to the magnitude 9 event that struck Lisbon and parts of North Africa and the Iberian Peninsula in 1755. Regardless, the film is fairly good and provides decent entertainment. I hadn’t seen the previous installment, though I suspected it existed when I noticed certain scenes early on—a suspicion confirmed during my research for this review. Being new to Norwegian cinema, I wasn't familiar with director John Andreas Andersen or any of the actors. However, what I saw was enjoyable: Andersen clearly draws inspiration from American films like “Volcano,” “Dante’s Peak,” and “Daylight,” creating a film that feels almost like a direct homage. The script borrows elements from these various movies, presenting a familiar story about a hero trying to warn people of an impending disaster while facing indifference from authorities. Still, the movie has energy, drama, heart, and momentum, avoiding slow moments and largely steering clear of cheap melodrama. A drawback is that Andersen didn’t provide a definitive conclusion, leaving the characters in peril without revealing their ultimate fate. Perhaps more important than anything else, including the actors' performances, are the impressive visual effects and CGI, which deliver exactly what you want from this type of film: chaos, destruction, and danger. The filmmakers successfully use these effects to build dramatic tension and create a believable sense of threat. The cast is generally good; while Edith Haagenruud-Sande plays an irritating character who seems oblivious to the risks, Kristoffer Joner does a solid job making his hero relatable. Ane Dahl Torp and Kathrine Johansen were less fortunate—despite their best efforts, their characters feel underdeveloped, suggesting a potential love triangle that ultimately doesn't materialize. I also found Jonas Oftebro’s character unconvincing; he seems unsteady and inconsistent. His character's father unexpectedly appears while he's out with his girlfriend, and can’t even tell his daughter, “be patient, we’ll go out later; at least, I’m going to serve my dad a hot coffee and listen to what he wants”? What a son!

Source on TMDB