NOTE IMDb
2,4/10
3,7 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueAn inventor comes up with a time machine, but must prevent its abuse at the hands of an evil C.E.O.An inventor comes up with a time machine, but must prevent its abuse at the hands of an evil C.E.O.An inventor comes up with a time machine, but must prevent its abuse at the hands of an evil C.E.O.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire au total
Peter Harrington
- Matthew Paul
- (as Peter J. Harrington)
Ilene Blackman
- Newspaper Editor
- (as I.T.B.)
Margaret Daly
- Nicky's Mom
- (as Margaret Schenck)
Avis à la une
Time Chasers joins various films that have been given the razzing they deserve on MST. A little more competent than most films that are shown, it's still pretty bad. A bike riding scientist invents a time travel device and puts it in his Cessna. Why not a car? Well, he can't drive and I doubt he can get going fast enough on his ten speed. Like the lunkhead he is, he tells an evil corporation (is there any other kind?) about his invention and they take over the project. There's also some kind of lovestory too and our butt chinned hero takes his plaid clashing girlfriend to shopping malls of the future and to the fifties! Pretty soon there's two lunk heads running around and they go back to 1777. Why? I just don't know and I really don't care. The question that still bugs me is, where did that gun come from?
One of the funnier MST3K experiments. This was an ambitious film, light years ahead of Manos and Hobgoblins. they simply couldn't afford the talent or special effects for it. In terms of effort they get a 7/10. Almost as funny as Space Mutiny. I give this one a 3/10 because there was a passable plot, and some half-decent acting. The funniest part for me is when the wormy fat guy is in the plane with his evil boss and Crow cracks: "Sir, I'm getting a little worried about lunch, it's almost 12:30" or something like that. This one was fun to watch, even though it is strictly fodder for the folks at Best Brains.
I feel badly for the actors and directors of this film who may come across this site's comments about it, which was fairly well done - for a low-budget film.
All the criticisms about the film are true: The evil CEO's office in an apparent library, the antique computer with outdated floppy disks, and the fairly wooden acting are all valid criticisms. But what do we expect, Spielberg? Lucas? I'm sure they could have taken this film to greater heights, but let's give it its due.
Think about it. The plot line was clever. How many ways can you go into the past? Car, stationary machine, plane? But the "future" portrayed here was embarrassing. Frankly, I thought they had gone BACK in time to 1984! Surely, they could have done better than that. Even in 1994, people knew what types of technologies to expect in the near future. Why not portray even one laptop?
I enjoyed the revolutionary war reenactors, but I think a "twist" of an ending would have been cute, and could have salvaged some of the film. What if, when they returned, everyone had British accents, including the evil CEO of a now-British conglomerate. Think about it.
So, here's my "director's cut" of this film: 1. Allow the lead actor to drive a car (better chase scenes) 2. Use a real computer - at least use the right sized disks 3. Cut the "ditching bicycles" scene (it's only 3 seconds long) 4. Show a better, more plausible future 5. Shorten the "bad future" scene, and shoot it at night, or in the fog, to make it look REALLY ominous, and 6. Make the final scene important (as I said above).
Until then, my rating is 4.
All the criticisms about the film are true: The evil CEO's office in an apparent library, the antique computer with outdated floppy disks, and the fairly wooden acting are all valid criticisms. But what do we expect, Spielberg? Lucas? I'm sure they could have taken this film to greater heights, but let's give it its due.
Think about it. The plot line was clever. How many ways can you go into the past? Car, stationary machine, plane? But the "future" portrayed here was embarrassing. Frankly, I thought they had gone BACK in time to 1984! Surely, they could have done better than that. Even in 1994, people knew what types of technologies to expect in the near future. Why not portray even one laptop?
I enjoyed the revolutionary war reenactors, but I think a "twist" of an ending would have been cute, and could have salvaged some of the film. What if, when they returned, everyone had British accents, including the evil CEO of a now-British conglomerate. Think about it.
So, here's my "director's cut" of this film: 1. Allow the lead actor to drive a car (better chase scenes) 2. Use a real computer - at least use the right sized disks 3. Cut the "ditching bicycles" scene (it's only 3 seconds long) 4. Show a better, more plausible future 5. Shorten the "bad future" scene, and shoot it at night, or in the fog, to make it look REALLY ominous, and 6. Make the final scene important (as I said above).
Until then, my rating is 4.
This movie could only have been shot in Vermont. The scenery is Vermont, the town where our hero (!) lives is a Vermont town (Rutland, as it turns out), and the evil CEO speaks with a pronounced Vermont-hick accent. Not to mention the Castleton State t-shirt our hero (!) wears. Yep, if you like Vermont, you may like this movie.
The premise is interesting, and the writers make an honest attempt to keep the audience guessing with the many plot twists. And given an obviously low budget, the film is very well made.
And the use of "average" looking people as opposed to Hollywood glamour boys (and girls) is commendable, I suppose (but see above note on the ultra-low budget). But, really! The hero (!) looks like the product of a gene-splicing experiment involving Richard Dreyfuss and Nomar Garciaparra! Is that the best they could do? Was he the handsomest most charismatic most everyman actor in the whole of Vermont?
Overall, the movie is OK, but the low budget means cheesy special effects, amateurish acting, a so-so script, and a geeky lantern-jawed hero (!). Still, it beats "Manos" by light years...
The premise is interesting, and the writers make an honest attempt to keep the audience guessing with the many plot twists. And given an obviously low budget, the film is very well made.
And the use of "average" looking people as opposed to Hollywood glamour boys (and girls) is commendable, I suppose (but see above note on the ultra-low budget). But, really! The hero (!) looks like the product of a gene-splicing experiment involving Richard Dreyfuss and Nomar Garciaparra! Is that the best they could do? Was he the handsomest most charismatic most everyman actor in the whole of Vermont?
Overall, the movie is OK, but the low budget means cheesy special effects, amateurish acting, a so-so script, and a geeky lantern-jawed hero (!). Still, it beats "Manos" by light years...
This is another cinematic failure that would be stealing our time if it weren't for those wonderful, talented people at MST3K. This movie is about a physics professor(yeah right!) who invents a time machine(a plane which flies through really bad computer graphics). He is supposed to go visit other time periods with it, but it seems the past and future look a lot like today except with very slight, cheap modifications. The villain is a CEO who wants to use the machine for evil purposes. The movie makes little hint that he is a evil character from the beginning. He also talks funny. MST made great fun of this movie, and their episode featuring it is one of my favorites.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesAccording to David Giancola, Castleton State College (now Castleton State University) provided several free t-shirts for the film, thinking they would be hot items after they were featured in a movie. That happened a few years later, when the film was shown on Mystery Science Theater 3000 (1988).
- GaffesIn 1777, the American flag had 13 stars, not 50.
- Crédits fousLocation Ice Cream Provided By Ben & Jerry's Homemade Inc.
- ConnexionsFeatured in Mystery Science Theater 3000: Time Chasers (1997)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Time Chasers?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
Box-office
- Budget
- 150 000 $US (estimé)
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant