I grabbed this film off of TCM onto my DVR, and am I ever glad I did. But not for the reasons you might think. I'm glad because I now had the benefit of 'fast-forward' functionality. You'll wish you had fast-forward as well if you decide to watch 1979's "The Visitor", trust me.
I won't get much into what the movie is about, or rant about all the easily fixable 'goofs' that occur. What tortured me the most about this film most was the much-misplaced and utterly cheesy 70's 'action flick' music score, and the endless extraneous scenes. Utterly needless scenes that include shot after shot of walking, driving, buildings and passing scenery, actors saying nothing and looking all 'introspective' or just plain confused. Probably as confused as we the viewers.
Add to all that a patchwork of fair-to-weak acting (with a small few rays of sunshine here or there), lame effects that could have been done so much better even in '79, and an overall storyline that could have been a lot stronger with some solid writing changes and you have a pseudo-sci-fi-horror flick that might best be suited for viewing at a drive-in theatre. You know, a place where people are often looking away from the screen for... one reason or another. Because there is so much run-on footage in this movie that even if you only catch half of it you'll pretty much get all you're going to get from it anyway. And sadly that isn't much.
2 out of 10, and that's being generous. It's a movie that had potential but didn't come close to reaching it. But do see it for yourself. As bad as I think it is some do really get off on this type of bad. You may be one of them.
I won't get much into what the movie is about, or rant about all the easily fixable 'goofs' that occur. What tortured me the most about this film most was the much-misplaced and utterly cheesy 70's 'action flick' music score, and the endless extraneous scenes. Utterly needless scenes that include shot after shot of walking, driving, buildings and passing scenery, actors saying nothing and looking all 'introspective' or just plain confused. Probably as confused as we the viewers.
Add to all that a patchwork of fair-to-weak acting (with a small few rays of sunshine here or there), lame effects that could have been done so much better even in '79, and an overall storyline that could have been a lot stronger with some solid writing changes and you have a pseudo-sci-fi-horror flick that might best be suited for viewing at a drive-in theatre. You know, a place where people are often looking away from the screen for... one reason or another. Because there is so much run-on footage in this movie that even if you only catch half of it you'll pretty much get all you're going to get from it anyway. And sadly that isn't much.
2 out of 10, and that's being generous. It's a movie that had potential but didn't come close to reaching it. But do see it for yourself. As bad as I think it is some do really get off on this type of bad. You may be one of them.