- Tangents
"Whoa, minutemen!", 8 November 2008
Nick Miller has developed a means of time travel using a computer and his small airplane. Needing the funds to continue his experiments, he agrees to sell his invention to a large corporation named GenCorp. But Nick hadn't planned on how GenCorp would use his time machine. On his next trip to the future, he discovers a world in chaos where social order has broken down. Nick decides he must go into the past if he is to restore the future.
Like most people on this sight, I came by Time Chasers courtesy of Mystery Science Theater 3000. And while the movie is bad, it's not as bad as a lot of the stuff they showed. Oh, it's got the usual bad acting, a dorky lead, poor special effects, some ridiculous locations (Others have mentioned it, but I've got to agree with the slamming of J.K. Robertson's office. The mezzanine of the local public library isn't a very effective or realistic looking location.), giant plot holes, and everything else you find in your typical, run-of-the-mill bad movie, but it's got something I wasn't expecting to find. It's actually got some good ideas buried under the rubbish. The whole notion of time travel, changing the future, and going into the past to make things right is a good, interesting concept. Unfortunately for the makers of this movie, I think their ideas far exceeded both their abilities and certainly their budget. It's too bad, because as I indicated, there are some good ideas to be found in Time Chasers.
The MST3K treatment of Time Chasers is good – actually, it's very good. The first time I saw it, I found myself laughing out loud. So, while I give the movie a 3/10, I'll give it a 4/5 on my MST3K rating scale.
3/10
"Actually, Captain, I am familiar with history. And if I'm not mistaken, you're dead.", 9 February 2008
I remember seeing Star Trek: Generations in the theater back in 1994. At the time, I was so heavily into Star Trek: The Next Generation that anything with Picard and Data was going appeal to me. Seeing it now, some 13 years later, the best word I can think of to describe the experience is "silly". Oh, I enjoyed bits and pieces of the movie, but overall, Star Trek: Generations has to be one of the silliest movies I can remember seeing recently. From an overweight and much too old William Shatner attempting to play an action hero to the incredibly annoying subplot involving Data and an emotion chip, it's all so silly. How in the world did I ever think this tripe was good?
The plot involves a scientist named Soran (Malcolm McDowell) and his attempt to enter a mysterious energy ribbon called the Nexus. His plan, though, would require the destruction of the Enterprise and an entire planet. Captains Picard and Kirk must put a stop to the madman's plans.
The best thing Star Trek: Generations has going for it is McDowell. The man proves once again that regardless of the poorly written script and ridiculous plot, he's capable of giving a solid performance. In comparison, I'm really not shocked to see that most of the rest of the Star Trek cast has done very little of note since this movie.
4/10
I miss Hammer's style of movie making, 4 December 2005
This is a wonderful documentary for any fan of Hammer. It's all here – from the rise of Hammer as the King of Gothic Horror with The Curse of Frankenstein to the tragic downfall in the mid-70s. I have seen dozens of Hammer films over the years and to hear the stories about these films from the people who were there is an absolute joy. Even though the film is narrated by Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing, the best stories are from Hammer directors like Roy Ward Baker and Val Guest and by Hammer writers like Jimmy Sangster and by Hammer producers like Michael Carreras. And they don't hold back. I appreciated their honesty, especially that of Carreras, concerning the demise of Hammer.
My only complaint would be with the film clips selected for use in Flesh and Blood. Little effort appears to have been made to clean-up or restore the clips. The quality is lacking at best.
8/10
The weakest of the five, 27 May 2005
In the final Hercules made-for-television movie, Hercules is called upon to save a village from a Minotaur. But things are not as simple as they seem. The Minotaur has a secret that Hercules must overcome if he is to save himself and the village.
This is easily the weakest of the five movies that preceded the television series. Half of the running time is filled with flashbacks from the four previous movies. It gets old real quick. The actual battle with the Minotaur is a disappointment as well. The costume worn by the actor playing the Minotaur makes it all but impossible for him to move with any grace during the fight scenes. The relationship between Hercules and Iolaus, which would become one of the highlights of the television series, seems very unnatural. Almost all of the dialogue is designed to set up the next flashback.
Too bad, because this one has a lot of potential. The plot concerning the Minotaur's secret is one of the best in the five movies. Although the way it is handled makes it very obvious for anyone to guess.
3/10
Fun, 22 May 2005
Of the first four Hercules movies that preceded the television series, this is easily my favorite. Hercules must save a town from an opening to Hades. Along the way, he faces several temptations and a slew of monsters. But that's not his greatest challenge. Deianeira has been killed and Hercules must find her while he's in Hades and bring her back to the land of the living.
These Hercules movies aren't about great acting or deep plot lines. Don't watch them expecting Academy Award winning material. These movies are about having fun. And Hercules in the Underworld delivers fun. From Hercules' battle with the giant Eryz the Boxer to his taking on zombies in the underworld, it's pure eye-candy filled entertainment. The special effects are quite good given the limited television budget. It's easy to see Sam Raimi's (Executive Producer) influence on the special effects. Many of creatures, etc. are used by Raimi in his Evil Dead movies.
Kevin Sorbo is the perfect television Hercules. He plays the character with tongue firmly in cheek. He's big enough to be believable and he's athletic enough to pull it off. The supporting cast is, for the most part, adequate enough in their roles. The exception is the most experienced actor of the bunch - Anthony Quinn. He just seems so out of place that I'm glad wasn't used in the regular series.
7/10
