Trancers 6

I have to say, I was glad to see this film return to the original theme after that side trip they took in 4 and 5, but even though the basic story was good, there was so much of it that was painful to watch. First, yes, it was low budget. But by 2002 standards, with computer editing and special effects, it was about as low budget as what some college film students could do - it actually reminded me more of a sci-fi TV show than a feature film. As for Zette Sullivan's performance, maybe this was because the low budget also meant less rehearsal time, but her macho-ness was overdone - she played Jack Deth as more macho than Tim Thomerson did in the first five films (and that doesn't even take into account the assumption that someone who's gone down the line as much as he has should have at least some training in "blending in"). Although it was kind of a good start what they did in showing her out of sorts in her female body (failing miserably to put on pantyhose, feeling awkward in a skirt) they could have done more with that than they did.

On the whole, they get an A for effort in trying to bring the Trancers saga back to what it originally was. And yes, the cheap effects and staging can clearly be blamed on the budget. But oh, how I wish the director had had Zette Sullivan turn her 'maleness' down a notch!

I'm a huge Full Moon Video fan, which includes the Trancers series. Trancers 6 did not have any appealing qualities at all. The first Trancer films were classics, and 1-5 were well done and well acted. Trancers 6 looked like it had a budget of about 20 bucks. Tim Thomerson needs to come back for one more Trancer film, just so Band won't end the series on a low note. Like many others, I wish Full Moon Video could go back 10 years to what it used to be. The Subspecies series, Puppet Master series, and many other films were well done, well acted, and the effects were head and shoulders above Trancers 6. I think I'll go back and watch the first Trancers movies to wash the could taste of Trancers 6 out of my mouth.

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.

Full Moon's budget just keep getting lower, so it's kind of sad to see one of their best series being continued on a budget lower than what Nicole Kidman spends a year on sun block. The TRANCERS films involve Jack Deth, a Bogart-ish cop from the future who keeps getting sent back in time to deal with Trancers, zombie-like former humans, whose actions virtually destroyed the time-line Deth originates from. To time travel, Deth must inhabit the body of one of his ancestors all of whom, at least until this entry, look just like actor Tim Thomerson.

This time around, Full Moon couldn't afford Thomerson, so they open with some stock footage of him, from previous films in the series, and then send him back in time to inhabit the body of the daughter he never knew he had fathered during one of his visits to the 80s. If you're a follower of the TRANCERS series, this all makes pretty good sense, as the third film did introduce just such a child.

Anyway, entry #6 takes place in a low rent version of the present and Deth's daughter is played by diminuitive (5 ft tall) Zette Sullivan, a serious little cutie who does a nice job of playing a tough "guy" in a girl's body. Sullivan is much of the show here as she effectively mimics Thomerson's style and earns a few smiles by playing the uncomfortable macho male in a woman's body role.

There's a couple of nice action sequences and some OK, bargain basement special effects and makeup. Most of the cast is fine and it all flies by enjoyably, if forgettably, enough. If Full Moon ever gets a decent budget again, they could do a lot worse than to continue this series with spunky Sullivan, maybe even team her up with Thomerson, and let this film's director, Jay Woelfel, take a shot at it. If he can do this well with next-to-no-money, I'm guessing he could make a pretty good film with a budget featuring more numbers than a zip code.

DVD owners can see this on a double-feature disc with the first TRANCERS film, which features a young Helen Hunt (who was in entries 1-3) as the woman who will eventually be the mother of Deth's daughter in this entry. Jeez, this is getting confusing.

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.