IMDb > Thunder Point (1998) (TV) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
Thunder Point (TV) More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 6 reviews in total 

10 out of 11 people found the following review useful:

what a waste

1/10
Author: GMTMaster from London, England
9 August 2002

The novel by Higgins is one of his best. Strange how the producers didn't see the potential in this story. Just take the novel and adapt the screenplay. But no. The producer had to buy a lousy script. The direction is beyond words - the actors had no chance. Real dull movie, no thrills whatsoever. I only hope Mr. Higgins got well paid for his film-rights. What a shame and waste of money

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

Simply awful

1/10
Author: haggar
10 September 2001

This was one of the worst movies I had the displeasure to watch.

This movie is full of annoying artifacts used to "construct" the plot.

For example, when the villain(s) is(are) knocked out, they are never immobilized, handed over to police or special services or killed. No, they are left to run after the "good guys", in order to generate new scenes of cat-n-mouse. Unfortunately, this technique has been so much abused in this movie, that at a certain point I started to root for the villains. Then I just stopped watching the movie and thought I'd spend my time with something more interesting.

I later returned, to see the last 5 minutes of the movie, and I remained feeling miserable and angry that a few good ideas have been wasted.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Oh Dear what have they done.

3/10
Author: Daniel Taylor from Nottingham England
11 February 2002

This is a great book set on a Caribbean Island with a witty and dashing lead character and a tale of mystery, intrigue and excitement. Unfortunately somebody turned it into a terrible straight to video movie. I knew it would be bad but I was looking forward to seeing it anyway. The acting was terrible, the script was terrible the soundtrack was done by one man and his Yamaha keyboard. It bore only minimal resemblance to a good book. I can't tell you how bad this film is, the only reason to watch it is out of curiosity. It is to be avoided at all costs.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 14 people found the following review useful:

We need a new film genre: Snoozer

1/10
Author: visualthinker7 from United States
30 April 2005

This movie is the opposite of a thriller, it's a snoozer. It must be very difficult to take two people as attractive as the leads in this film, and dull them down to the point where it's painful, tedious, and boring to watch them. The violence is sickening without being truly frightening. The actions of the characters make no sense (I'm inclined to blame the original author for this), there are loose ends all over the place... Even the S&M scene with a very sexy dominatrix manages to be boring. Whoever wrote the dialogue seems to have never had, or overheard, a normal conversation between two human beings. The dead space between the actors, the lack of any heat, feeling or sincerity in the delivery of their lines makes the whole thing sound dubbed, or more accurately, as if the actors called in their lines via phone, without being able to see each other. I turned it off after 1/2 hour, thinking i'd go back for the last 10 minutes. Then I forgot. No loss.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

Depressingly endless stomach-turning violence

Author: Harry Preston (preston8@onramp.net)
1 May 2000

I was only tempted to watch this as I enjoy Jack Higgins' novels...BUT...the excessive violence disgusted me and at the end I never could figure out what it was all about, nor what happens at the end. The plot got lost someplace...and this only added to my growing disgust over too many contemporary films. I'm almost beginning to hate movies, and the only truly palatable (meaning enjoyable) films seem to be made before 1970. Needless to say, most of my movie viewing is of older films where violence was more restrained and more was left to the imagination.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 10 people found the following review useful:

Piece o'crap

1/10
Author: ChrisHawk78 from Berlin, Germany
6 March 2007

This movie is basically trash. The original by Jack Higgins, which I have read would have made a very nice thriller for the big screen if just converted and not completely torn apart to produce something that might have been cut together from a trashcan. The original novel might not be Higgins best but is still highly enjoyable, set in the Virgin Islands with charming recognizable characters and a distinct plot. A Nazi submarine is found by amateur diver Henry Baker. Inside he finds a diary and the so-called Windsor protocol. Recognizing the importance he takes it to a friend in London, Rear Admiral Travers, who refers it to the prime minister. Sean Dillon, a much wanted terrorist is then trapped in Yugoslavia and forced to help Charles Fergfuson of Group 4 (A security service answering only to 10 Downing Street) to recover a book containing names of people who would support the Nazis after the war. Here begins a murderous race between Dillon and Max Santiago, brought into the race by a British politician who's father is one of the most important names in the book. There is no reason to change the location (despite the cost perhaps?) and no reason to mess up the appearance of the main character(s) and certainly no reason at all to make a sequel called the Windsor protocol.

Would someone please see that justice will be done and make a proper film version of this book?

Was the above review useful to you?


Add another review


Related Links

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