Reviews written by registered user

4 reviews in total 
Index | Alphabetical | Chronological | Useful

Lethal Orbit (1996) (TV)
1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Nothing to redeem it, 9 October 2007

Acting was awful. Photography was awful. Dialogue was awful. Plot was awful. (I'm not being mean here...It really was this bad.) Even the DVD itself is cheaply made and starting to delaminate. The worst of all was the editing; it made dialogue painful, cutting back and forth between people with unnatural, long pauses...Jan Michael Vincent slurred his words and never moved a muscle in his face.

This movie really is SO bad that there needs to be some sort of apology or explanation for it. Most bad movies have SOMETHING going for them, SOMETHING that made the participants get out of bed in the morning. How could this "movie" get made? Every step of the way, every participant must have known that the movie was an absolute failure...when it was written, when the actors were hired, during production design, during editing, mastering the DVD, writing the crap on the back cover ("Our three astronauts are running out of air...Blake must be caught and forced to tell the password that will reactivate the shuttle's life support systems.") It's worse than you can possibly imagine. It's so bad that I want to hurt myself.

Prototype (1983) (TV)
8 out of 33 people found the following review useful:
Shame, 24 May 2005

'THE FUTURE IS NOT FRIENDLY' intones the cover. While this may or may not be true, the movie is set in 1983. I suppose that being suckered into buying this bargain DVD at Wal-Mart in 2005 is the unfriendly future they were referring to.

The cover art is a lie. There are no skeletal Terminator-style robots with red eyeballs in this movie. The android guy wears a white turtleneck and is less threatening than Star Trek's Data, and he doesn't do anything interesting. He's a wuss. This movie is crap.

If you are responsible for the marketing of this DVD, you should be ashamed of yourself.

9 out of 18 people found the following review useful:
Below the scale, 31 March 2005

I could tear this piece of crap apart, frame by frame. But it's not worth the effort to do so. MST3K hasn't touched this, only because there's not much to work with.

It has no entertainment value, at all. I pity the people who made this movie, because it has got to reflect some part of their bland, disconnected, below-average life experiences. Apparently a man named Peter Spelson is mostly responsible for this crap.

No joy, no suspense, no horror, no pathos, no character development, no direction. Plenty of mustaches though. This thing is like a 70s porno without the sex.

16 out of 18 people found the following review useful:
Armageddon and bell bottoms, 29 March 2001

Sequel to "A Thief in the Night", this one answers the question: Does Patty sell her soul to Satan? This is the best of the four movies; it's creepy, full of unintended humor, spookiness, and has a funky twist at the end. Accept Jesus into your heart now, before the rapture, or you'll have to hang out with crying high school girls for seven years.