|Index||10 reviews in total|
4 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Good premise, bad development, 29 February 2000
Author: Mauro Lorenzoni from Venezuela
The premise is rather original and well thought-of, but unfortunately, siding a good story is very low budget that doesn't even allow for decent special effects. Jeff Fahey does his best amongst a poor cast, as does the always beautiful Linda Hoffman. They should make more movies together. The movie, while not worth much praise, warrants at least one viewing.
5 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Takes Place after a War with Iraq!, 23 August 2003
Author: m.p. from Boston to Cape Cod
Drab, dreary and a total waste of my time. The plot is incomprehensible (so
don't think about it too much). The acting is odd and wooden - I would have
sworn that they were all professional body builders trying their luck at
acting, but that might be an insult to body builders. There are no
interesting special effects to redeem this disaster, but lots of fires,
explosions, a gratuitous sex scene, etc. The only thing that caught my
attention was that it takes place after a war between the US and Iraq that
somehow goes nuclear...hmmm. Is Roger Corman psychic? Let's hope that "Iraq"
was just a lucky choice for Corman and that the rest of his scenario doesn't
3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
So bad I had to watch it till the end, 21 February 2002
This movie is a fantastic passtime if you watch it as it's supposed to be
watched (a parody). High entertainment factor. The acting, plot, costumes
and special effects keep you laughing till the end! No surprises or twists.
total no brainer. I've blown more interesting and exciting material out of
nose (or any other opening in my body for that matter).
Go see this movie! Rent it steal it or watch it on NBC.
1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
bad sci-fi, 25 November 2006
Author: dromasca from Herzlya, Israel
Without being really the worst science fiction film ever made, or the worst I have seen, 'Time Under Fire' is still much under average. The premises and the first 10-15 minutes are not that bad, it starts as a X-Files story, combining Bermuda triangle mysteries with time travel. Pretty soon elements of other genres (too many) mix together, but the story never takes off beyond the level of interest of a TV series. Soon, 'Time Under Fire' quickly degenerates into a series of clichés, not only mixing altogether too many genres but also being unable to create anything memorable in suspense or special effects that would help viewers remember the movie until tomorrow. Acting is bad, and the rhetoric lines in the script do not help at all.
2 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Amazingly Hilarious! I Laughed So Hard I Thought I Would Wake My Neighbors!, 17 March 2009
Author: liberalgems from Baltimore, Maryland
Where do I begin? The story was so bad, it must have been written in a
high school film club! The acting was so wooden I felt sorry for the
actors! One actor even reminded me of what a deer must look like when
staring into a car's headlights! Another actor has this constant look
of being constipated! But it was the dialog that takes the cake!
Our hero says to his captors - all holding submachine guns - if you lay a finger on a female prisoner you will be dead. Moments later, the strongest guard, built like a truck, and the only women prisoner go at it. When our fearless leader, who has this very annoying raspy gangster voice catches wind of this transgression, he calmly walks up to the guard, while machine guns are trained on him, and in a split-second snaps this giant guy's neck like he was breaking a tooth pick! He then gets back in line while all the villains with their machine guns do absolutely nothing, but essentially yell at him!
I could go on and on! This movie is camp gem; and if you have any sense of humor, it's guaranteed to make you laugh so hard your eyes will tear!
3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Basically, it goes down as a (non-intentional) B-movie parody., 28 April 2001
Author: sus_elikko from Lappeenranta, Finland
Saw this one as a rental film, and I just have to say it's about the worst beyond-even-b scifi film I've ever seen... The whole submarine/time portal plot is just so unrealistic and the "poor man's Emperor Palpatine" as The Ultimate Evil so ridicilous this thing goes down more as a b-scifi parody than anything else... If you think of renting/buying the pitiful movie, I suggest you forget it and go for Spaceballs (or something like that) instead.
2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
What A Hunk Of Sci-Fi Junk, 11 September 2007
Author: stephenwillyamz-1 (email@example.com) from Mojave Desert
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
To paraphrase Danny Zucco, when he first saw "Greased Lighting", in the
movie Grease: "What a hunk of sci-fi junk!"
We've got a time-traveling submarine, powered by baking soda, that somehow time warps through the Bermuda Triangle and emerges in the year 2077--just in time for the Centenary of Elvis's death. The intrepid sub crew is immediately captured by futuristic totalitarian storm troopers and imprisioned in an abandoned rust-belt factory, which doubles as the new Imperial Headquarters of the Holocausted United States of Amerika. The storm troopers that enforce that "duh law" are all dressed in ill-fitting Fahrenheit 451 costumes and seem to bump into each other every few minutes.
How did our future come to this? Well children, in the beginning of the 21st century, an incompetent United States President, with a hidden agenda, orders his military to invade and occupy Iraq--with disastrous results. Have you ever heard of anything more ridiculous that than?
2 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
not as bad as they say. it's ok to watch only once, 6 October 2002
Author: stimpy-13 from Amherst Ohio
It's not that bad of a movie I liked it. granted it is poorly done and the acting isn't so great. for a cheap B-movie the special effects aren't bad. and for a Roger Corman movie it's better than some of his he's either produced or ex-produced. you want to see a BAD MOVIE? rent CLUB VAMPIRE you will laugh till you cry the movie is so bad. John Savage is in it an it's 10 times worse than this. anyways it was different the plot has been done before an better and the ending is predictable. Jeff Fahey isn't one of the most talented actors of our time to begin with. he's OK but he need to go back to acting school. out of five a 2 and a half which is fair. I have seen better movies true but i have seen worse also.
3 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Simply a terribly bad movie, avoid it!, 27 November 1998
Author: anonymous from Sweden
This must be the first movie I've rented and not seen to the end. Complete garbage! The acting, the plot, set and wardrobe looked like it came from a porno movie with a plot. Not even a B move.
1 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
It pains me!, 12 December 2004
Author: (firstname.lastname@example.org) from Kokkedal, Denmark
I know it is an old movie and maybe this comment is out of date but here goes anyway. A waste of time and it pains me to see this sad imitation of Ian McDiarmid's portrayal of Emperor Palpatine in 'Return of the Jedi'. Lousy plot, awesomely horrible acting, and no visual effects to make it worth watching. I had more fun sitting through 'Red Sonja' and 'Hercules Goes to New York'. I would much rather sit through a whole evening of Danielle Steel movies than watch this movie ever again. We have here yet another movie which should never have been made. Just like the new King Arthur movie. Although the latter wasn't even half as bad as this movie. Whatever you do, do NOT see this!
|Ratings||External reviews||Plot keywords|
|Main details||Your user reviews||Your vote history|