Reviews & Ratings for
Def-Con 4 More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 5:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Index

42 reviews in total

---

10 out of 10 people found the following review useful:
Revenge of the 80's: Apocaplypse Now!, 17 January 2005

Author: Miyagis_Sweaty_wifebeater (sirjosephu@aol.com) from Sacramento, CA

Def-Con 4 (1985) was a surprisingly good low budget take on World World 3. Despite the low budget and the cast of minor actors, it works. The landscape and the situations the residents on a heavily radioactive Earth are a lot similar to what it would actually be like compared to most movies that were made during this time.

A nuclear warhead equipped space station is circling above the stratosphere when the unthinkable happens. Nuclear holocaust! In a pickle, the crew aboard the space station must make several decisions in order for them to survive in a world that's nearly impossible to survive on. Can they do it? What kind of world awaits their return? A watchable film that will give you a good time if in the right mood.

Recommended.

---

14 out of 19 people found the following review useful:
Better than you might think...excellent vibe & music, 27 May 2006

Author: leathermusic from United States

Def Con 4 is one of those movies that is pretty much unique in the world of B grade cinema. First off, why do so many imdbers dislike this? There are thousands, perhaps millions of movies far worse off. The acting and special fx are actually pretty good for such a low budget film. The beginning of the film has a great sense of dread. The music by Christopher Young is awesome! There is some over top emoting from the lead actors that is slightly lame, but overall a good relic from the cold war. This may be one of the more underrated Canadian sci fi movies of the 80s, although much of the plot and characterizations goes way lame in the second half. In summary, it's a good bad movie that is more good than bad.

---

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Get off your high horse and enjoy it, eh?, 10 March 2003
Author: Fenrir-5 from California, USA

Perhaps my enjoyment of this movie largely stems from my not being Canadian. It seems that the Canadian reviewers have a grudge against the film. I can only imagine that they are getting some inside jokes that I am not.

I have liked this film since I was a kid. I rank it up there with "The Day After" as one of the better post-apocalyptic movies made. A lot of people give that honor to "Mad Max", but I found "Mad Max" boring and far too campy.

"Def Con 4" takes a serious tone, which is occasionally undermined by poor acting and special effects. But the overall impression is quite good. Sure it's fun to make fun of, but this is largely because we no longer live with the fear of nuclear war on a daily basis.

I found the writing to be quite good, with an effective and interesting opening drawing the viewer into the life of the astronauts as they waited to return to Earth. The movie is actually quite solid until it is necessary for a new conflict to be introduced - when the surviving astronauts meet the teenage, post-apocalyptic Hitler, the downhill slide begins. But even then it's not terrible. It's actually fun seeing how seriously everyone is treating the subject matter. And how can you not love a movie that begins with "It is the day after tomorrow"? The movie also has quite possibly the best tractor-immobilization sequence ever committed to celluloid.

On the downside, the action sequences are rather ineptly filmed, and the acting can be a bit wooden. But, hey, it's a low-budget sci-fi film. I recommend it for a fun evening.

---

7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
It was the best of films, it was the worst of films..., 20 February 2001

Author: jessewillis from Canada

It was the best of films, it was the worst of films... two words: "Engrossingly Mind-numbing". Def-Con 4 is truly an oddball. The script is incomprehensibly senseless. There is no story arc at all, it is simply a collection of characters improvising scenes. It is a great example of what I like to call "plotless development" or "one damn thing after another". The acting is uniformly bad with the exception of Maury Chaykin who is hilarious as a Canadian survivalist. I particularly love one scene in this film in which we see the detail of a mechanism of a booby trap. The booby trap has as its trigger a Canadian social insurance card. What kind of symbolism are we supposed to find in this? Either this is the deepest film I've ever seen or the it is the shallowest. Either it deserves a 10 or it deserves a 1, I'll split the difference and give it 5.

---

4 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
Better Than The Average, 29 December 2006

Author: junk-monkey (liam@merriol.freeserve.co.uk) from Highlands of Scotland

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Three astronauts on an orbiting space station loaded with nukes witness the outbreak of Nuclear War. After weeks of orbiting, knowing their loved ones back home are dead or dying an external signal forces them back to Earth. The crew jettison their nukes but one jams in the bay. When they land the female doctor is injured and the captain is killed by cannibals. The third member of the crew (Howe) goes looking for help and is soon in the hands of a local warlord who, it turns out, was responsible for the re-entry of the spaceship. He (rightly) suspected it contained information that would lead him to a "Safe Haven". The two remaining crew members are tried for war crimes and sentenced to hang. Howe escapes but returns, starting a rebellion. He finds the doctor dead. Eventually Howe and JJ (the Warlord's girlfriend) sail away as the last nuke on the downed ship explodes.

I'm surprised at the low rating this movie gets. For a lo-budget SF film of the period it is not at all bad. For one thing it does not play safe. Though influenced by many movies: Mad Max - obviously, Dark Star, The Quiet Earth etc. the first section of this film on the station is genuinely effective. It goes downhill a little as we enter the usual post apocalyptic shoot 'em up of the second half but even so, everything that happens is horribly credible.

I suspect people don't like this movie because it's not easy. It doesn't drop all the usual clichés into place like the the standard lazy Hollywood cheapo SF flick. The moment where our hero shoots the two guards on the boat is very realistic. He doesn't want to shoot them. He's never shot anyone before and pleads with them not to pick up their guns. They think he's bluffing and slowly reach towards them. He screams at them to stop. Their hands reach out nearer their rifles. He fires. It's horrible. In your standard Mad Max rip off the hero would have blazed in and just blown everyone up. The guards if they were given a chance would have dived for their weapons - not reached out for them slowly like they do here. It's not your standard Holly wood schlock.

I'm not saying it's a great film, there are many faults with it. But it doesn't deserve the panning some people give it. For instance: The actress playing JJ (though very good) is too old for the part I don't buy her as a teenager at all - and everyone's hair is far too clean. The end of the world by thermonuclear heck and everyone is wallowing around in filth but their hair is all nice and freshly washed? I don't think so. And I didn't buy the hanging scene at all, there is no way the kilted survivalist wouldn't have stepped forward and saved his own life at the first opportunity. I guess the writers were trying to turn him into a more sympathetic character but it just didn't work.

If I was looking to make a low-budget movie I would certainly give this one a look for ideas and inspiration. There is some good stuff in here.

---

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
unfairly dismissed, 25 January 2001

Author: stp_44720 from Cleveland, Ohio

One of the better eighties post-apocalyptic films was and is Def Con 4. It bombed in 1985 but has gone on to gain a small cult following. It is the story of three astronauts, one in particular, who witness war and nuclear holocaust from a satelite. The space footage is well shot and a genuine sense of dread reigns as we watch them contemplate the deaths of their families and of civilization.

When their satelite is forced to land they fall into a nuclear wasteland fillled with armed militants and plague ridden cannibals. This is perhaps one of the dirtiest looking movies of its day, which rather adds to the already oppresive atmosphere. Unfortunately Def Con runs out of steam toward the somewhat hurried finale. Yet if your not easily put off by the brutal tone of the movie, its science fiction worthy of 90 minutes of your life.

---

7 out of 12 people found the following review useful:
So badly done, it is one of the funniest movies of all time., 21 January 2004
Author: Joel Dart from Toronto

This movie was absolutely hilarious. I watched it over 10 years ago, and recently watched it again. The acting, directing, and screenplay are so badly done that it is funny.

If you do not find it funny to watch bad movies that are unintentionally funny, do not watch it. If you do however, this is the best unintentionally funny movie I have ever seen. I wish that I could have gone to the cast party.

---

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
I've seen worse, I actually liked this movie, 13 November 2010

Author: siggy_4844 from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I saw this one when it first came out, back in the 80s and was looking for it to watch it again. I didn't think it was all that bad, I thought it was actually entertaining. The WW3 aftermath was much more realistic than in most other post-apocalyptic movies of the time. The beginning of the movie was really good but lost some steam towards the 2nd half. I especially liked the beginning, when the crew realized in horror that a nuclear war had broken out on the Earth below. Just as they are trying to decide if they should go back or not, the decision is made for them and they end up crash landing.

Yes, the acting was mediocre at best, but that is to be expected in a low-budget movie with largely unknown actors. Taking that into consideration I thought it was done quite well. Compared to some of the stinkers that received high praises by the movie critics, this one would have been Oscar material. I would rather watch this one several times than having to watch Last Days all the way through one more time.

*SPOILER* I vividly recall one scene, where the guy with the broken back is strapped to a board and being teased with a steak.

---

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Def-Con fun..., 18 October 2008

Author: burbs82

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

DEFENSE CONDITION FUN! Yes, sorry for the cheesy summary title, but I enjoyed this cheeseball 80's post-nuclear holocaust flick from our good friends at New World Pictures (They who brought us the immortal 80's vampire-stripper film 'Vamp' and some other goodies). It's a fun low-budget ride about a trio of astronauts manning a U.S. Star Wars defense satellite as World War III/nuclear Armageddon breaks out between the U.S. and the Soviet Union. Following this rather well done sequence, they are quickly brought down and then one of them is just as quickly devoured by starving, irradiated homeless teenagers... and it just gets campier from there.

Turns out a sadistic, well-connected college student has somehow managed to takeover this local chapter of post-Armageddon society, so alas, even in the event of nuclear war, it appears we're still destined to be ruled by idiot frat brats. The two shuttle survivors, a hilarious survivalist pervert in a kilt, and the college dude's ex-girlfriend try to make their way out of this easily-led, two-month-old dictatorship society to an uncontaminated area of the globe.

Completely lacking in logic, and desperately in need of some good post-nuclear holocaust landscape imagery, it's nonetheless an enjoyable 80's b-movie-action-sci-fi-thriller-comedy, or backfillerdy for short. Watch for the "areolae" scene...

---

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Starts out promising..., 25 October 2005

Author: (xtrospawn@yahoo.com) from Hollywood, California

The first half hour of this flick is so intense and well-done that you can't help but feel letdown when it quickly degenerates into Z-grade, Mad Max post apocalyptic nonsense. And it just continues to get worse and worse until the rather abrupt ending.

Three astronauts orbiting Earth watch helplessly as World War III erupts. After making an emergency crash landing, one of the astronauts in rendered unconscious while another is dragged from the ship and eaten by savages. Howe, our hero, escapes and finds that Earth has become a wasteland inhabited by post apocalyptic cretins ruled over by a snot nosed rich kid named Gideon.

If the film had maintained the tension and drama of the first half hour, this movie would have been a classic. But as it stands, it's just another Mad Max wannabe. Skip it.

---

---

Page 1 of 5:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	External reviews
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user reviews
Your vote history