Trancers 6

Is 'Trancers 6' good? Not specifically. Is it altogether bad? No. Make no mistake, it's certainly a bit of a mess. But very importantly, it's emphatically better than 'Jack of swords' and 'Sudden Deth,' arguably better than 'Deth Lives,' and more mildly enjoyable than not.

This last entry in the 'Trancers' franchise feels like a mash-up of the sci-fi flick the first three films represented, a self-parody, a teen comedy - and a fan film. These flavorings are accentuated by the supporting cast that includes no small number of extraordinarily young and fresh-faced nobodies, and the fact that aside from one-liners, most of the comedy relies on the simple incongruity of seeing the tough-talking attitude of trancer hunter Jack Deth coming from a pretty, idealistic young woman. The dialogue is only slightly less blunt than the original music of Jon Greathouse, and the camerawork, acting, and overall narrative writing all but totally lack any subtlety or dexterity.

Makeup, effects, and even sound are somewhat dubious; rarely has gunfire looked or sounded less convincing. I can only imagine that the budget for 'Trancers 6' was at rock bottom. Scenes are orchestrated with such a straightforward and direct heavy hand that filmmaker Jay Woelfel seems to be operating on a level of B-movie only marginally more sophisticated than "first student film." Most of the cast gives off an air of similar inexperience, as though the casting director mostly just pulled people off the streets. Only Robert Donavan, as prominent supporting character Dr. Malvern, and - surprisingly - star Zette Sullivan, as protagonist Jo, demonstrate any small measure of nuance in their performances. Though to be fair, that's not necessarily saying much; who wouldn't be a shining beacon when compared against the astoundingly ham-handed acting of Jennifer Capo, or the wholly flat portrayals of unnamed characters?

Despite all these notable flaws, faults, and imperfections - against all odds, 'Trancers 6' is kind of fun. At no point is it outright funny, nor thrilling, but it carries a very basic sort of entertainment factor. It's the kind of movie you can watch without being actively engaged, and walk away saying "That was pretty okay." That may not be much, but it's safe to say there are a lot worse ways one could spend their time (including this feature's two immediate antecedents). Granted, this assumes one takes the premise at face value. Don't try for one moment to think about the intricacies of the concept, the plot, or how this film could tie into the "timeline" established by its predecessors, because doing so will result in a big headache and no clarity.

Tim Thomerson didn't contribute much to the series past the second film, so I can't rightly say he's missed here. The return to the core notion of the franchise is welcome, and it's somewhat refreshing to see a wholly new cast in a saga that was growing stale, even if the execution leaves a bit to be desired. It's also gratifying that beyond the very beginning, this feature refrained from the lazy, cheap jokes that have historically followed when a movie has explored gender-bending as a root idea.

This is definitely a very mixed bag. Whatever one's broad outlook where cinema is concerned, or experience with this series, I begrudge no one their opinion on the final outcome. Yet regardless of its deficiencies, without any glaring blemish to hold it back, to me it seems to get along just fine. In a checkered franchise that only ever aimed for fun, 'Trancers 6' manages to regain that focus, however modestly, and that perhaps sums up the film best of all.

Just when you thought that the "Trancers" franchise couldn't go lower, after the abysmal fourth and fifth movies, then there was "Trancers 6". Yup, this movie was bad, phenomenally bad.

I have to admit that I was expecting it to be a step up from the previous two horrible movies in the franchise. Why? Well, because of the movie's synopsis. I genuinely believed that writers Danny Bilson, Paul De Meo and C. Courtney Joyner would bring the franchise back on track with this 2002 movie.

But that is not what they did. Instead they spawned an abysmal movie that was brought to life by director Jay Woelfel.

The storyline in "Trancers 6" was pretty straightforward. I will say that much, sure. But it wasn't good and it just fell short of entertaining me.

And it didn't help that the acting performances were atrocious. Especially leading actress Zette Sullivan, whom was just fumbling through the movie. And it was so difficult to take her serious in the movie, given the dialogue that she had to deliver.

Visually "Trancers 6" wasn't a good movie either. So it didn't even have that working in favor of it.

My rating of "Trancers 6" lands on a three out of ten stars.

Lacking even the mediocre production values of its predecessors, including Tim Thomerson as the arrogant Dirty Harry inspired hero of the franchise, Trancers 6 adds a gender-swap twist to the overextended franchise.

In an early trick that sets the low-budget tone of the film, series star Thomerson appears to hold a conversation with another character through use of clips from the previous films. Thomerson, who is thanked in the closing credits, is a spectral presence in the film; appearing in flesh only courtesy of a body double.

In typical "Quantum Leap" style, this latest adventure puts hero Jack Deth into the body of his own daughter as he tries to preserve the integrity of the timeline and stop an alien invasion. The paradoxical novelty of this idea enables the filmmakers to essentially remake the first film to lead the series in a new direction. In fact the closing scenes make it quite apparent that this is the intent.

B-movie sci-fi flicks from the 1960s and 1980s were characterised by representations of the future which were essentially cheap display of props and flashing lights and Trancers 6 continues this tradition.

The majority of the film is set in Los Angeles in 2022 but there is nothing despite a title card to suggest this fact. Everything looks the same as now! Shot mainly in fairly ordinary looking rooms and old industrial locations, this form of production design is present throughout the film. In true Ed Wood tradition, offices are identified by maps pinned to walls and laboratories are endearingly characterised by fluorescent liquids in smoking test tubes. As if this wasn't enough to evoke those late night movies of old, the main prop is a ray gun.

The great thing is that it isn't laughable. You actually find these aspects comfortably familiar and they help draw you into the B-movie world. Trancer 6 doesn't take itself too seriously, but it isn't unintentionally funny either. The direction and the performances of the largely inexperienced cast make this fun for all the right reasons.

What is interesting is the treatment of the theme of male/female relations. There are a lot of dated, chauvinistic clichés which seem vaguely offensive. Jack's sexist words coming out of a young woman's mouth is an attempt to undermine his macho persona.

The idea of a female hero is a popular one, but even now all are essentially male fantasies. In this case the integrity of its female heroine is undermined by giving her the mind of the male hero of the franchise. But there is no effort to concentrate on the complex differences between the sexes, which are laughably reduced to a single scene in which Jack/Jo attempts to put on tights.

If one were to give the film a look over from a "Newsnight Review" perspective, one could say that Trancers 6 comments on the very manner in which female protagonists remain essentially controlled by male ideals. This would certainly give a greater significance to the other dated aspects of the film which I have already mentioned.

This film is filled with female stereotypes, each worthy of consideration. The heroine is, prior to transformation, a shy scientist, while Deth's supervisor appears to him in the body of a prostitute. There is an instant contrast. Jo Deth is petite and fragile looking, which obviously adds to the novelty value of her suddenly acting macho, but this is the very form which audiences seem to appreciate most. It's a valid point to consider that if the roles were reversed, that the buxom actress was in the lead, it would undermine the integrity of the film.

Highlighting female sexuality degrades a film. Trancers 6 parodies the Hollywood casting of such sexless, nonthreatening heroines. As is usually the case in films like this there is a similarly sexed antagonist. Again her sexuality is seen as negative. She's a man-eater, a manipulator using her body to control weaker men. A Lady Macbeth figure, she is very definitely representative of the 'woman-behind-the-man' mode of thinking. In many ways she may be superior to her employer, but she embraces the mainstream acceptance of a male-dominated society.

Reviving the franchise 8 years after Trancers 5: Sudden Deth (1994) was always going to be an interesting proposition. The sex change novelty has breathed new life into the series. The opportunities for intelligent discussion are merely a bonus.

This movie was terrible...How can somebody even think that this movie was like the ones back in the "good old days" when Tim Thomerson was not even in it. And to make things worse, they used clips from old trancer movies. Thats just terrible. NO trancer movie is complete without Tim Thomerson.I love Fullmoon films, and i have been watching them since i was 4 years old. I have been through everything they have done and this movie almost made me lose it. Now i got a couple of lines to fill so i will keep going. Their way of breeding new trancers is completely stupid as well as way to send Jack back in time. What happened to the TCL Chamber. AND finally! What happened in the end of trancers 5 where lina says and i quote "Jack Has given me something special" AND her and some other broad looks at her stomach. I don't know...maybe a BABY is in there. There were so many other places of going to, but fullmoon S'd the Bed

Jack Deth this time (played by archive footage of Tim Thomerson) takes the form of his daughter to take on those pesky Trancers who have regrouped since part III (4 and 5 we're about alternate universes) The Trancers series we're necessarily great movies, but they we're great for the time, by that I mean the first 3 movies we're a lot of fun. Sure only the first one really holds up still, but nostalgia goes along way with 2 and 3. Trancers 4 was mediocre, Trancers 5 was pushing it, and Trancers 6 is very bad. There's literally nothing to see here. Trancers 6 is far too low budget to make any ambitious ideas work, the movie is horrendously made and without Thomerson to hold it together the film merely plumbs to asinine depths. Zette Sullivan tries hard, but this sequel is utterly hopeless. All in all, it's a shame the series went out with such a whimper and whimper is something you will do if you sit through this dud.

* Out Of 4 (Bad)