SoapboxQuantez08 Certain collegians have been losing control in a town, and the reason could be subliminal experiments by one of the professors. At the center of the film is Laurie Stevens (Farrah Forke), a college student who befriends a detective. Early in the film, a teen is so beyond help that he panics during the detective's first-murder questioning, and leaps out of a building just for a crime he wasn't guilty of. At one point: a subliminal attempt is made on Laurie, while she and the detective are having dinner, and it seems he's going to get his groove on. Instead, she snaps out of the phase, and he winds up with spaghetti tossed on his shirt. There are pretty bizarre killings, as people are losing control, and people are murdered during a party halfway through. Only Detective Turi can protect Miss Stevens, and stop the pandemonium before it's too late. X-Files episodes involving mind-control (Blood, Wetwired) clearly took a page out of this one.

SanteeFats About the only redeeming thins about this movie is Farrah Forke, from Wings fame, is in it. The guy who plays the professor is not a very good actor. He does get the smarmy, superior academician snobbish down very well. The professor is doing psycho experiments on some of his students that cause them to go nuts when they see flashing lights and kill innocent bystanders. Terminating the experiments which have been funded by some corporation the professor is in turn terminated a further into the film. There is a detective who is investigating some of the murders/suicides and starts dogging the prof. Then the FBI gets involved, he keeps his investigation going and gets suspended for two weeks. The corporate exec that is masterminding the cover up gets killed by one of the experiments. I don't know this a pretty uneven and poorly done movie. Why was it made? Who knows, someone with more money than taste? Wil;l I watch it again? Oh, Hades no!!!

mgt1978 It's not too bad. I was able to watch the whole movie. It wasn't a comedy and didn't have any jokes, but I found myself laughing through some of it. The acting is horrendous. I can't really describe bad acting, but you know it when you see it, and I saw it a lot. The main bad guy was creepy, but laughable creepy. The relationship with the chick from "Wings" and the cop was really weird. There was a lot of food in the movie. It seemed like every scene had someone chomping on something. Two scenes stand out as total cheese.The first scene is in the nightclub. I guess the creepy bad guy is looking for a new victim. He hangs out in a club, then some 80's synthesizer music starts playing and all the teens start dancing. I think it was the first flash mob. He hits on a chick and she turns him down. There was something eerie throughout this whole scene. It didn't really belong.The second scene is my favorite and is worth the 40 cents I paid for this movie. The chick from "Wings" gets scared and calls the cop. The cop invites himself over for dinner that he ends up cooking. First he yells at her for having no garlic, then breaks out some garlic in a bag he brought over. They have this "romantic" spaghetti dinner that looks disgusting. Plus, this couple doesn't match up well. The chick is a young beautiful college student and the cop is some goofy looking old guy. He makes some joke about if she is like the virgin olive oil and we wants to check for himself. After dinner he kicks her out of the kitchen and does the dishes himself while the chick watches TV and gets in a trance. She gets a knife to kill him, but she comes out of the trance and starts making out with the cop "Dumb and Dumber" style. They looked like two teenagers who have never made out before. After eating all that garlic I would imagine it wouldn't be too pleasant. The whole relationship is uncomfortable, but funny too.This movie also had a creepy janitor that never amounted to anything at the end. All in all it wasn't too bad. I'll never watch it again, but it was worth the 40 cents I paid for it.

fjaye I think the other reviewers have been a bit harsh. Yes, there is little blood and no nudity whatsoever. Yes, the execution is pretty tame. Yes, there are plot holes you could drive a truck through.But the outcome might have been different, had the movie been produced by others. The story centers on experiments in non-surgical neurological rewiring, disguised as a college professor's lab experiments. A chilling concept, when you think about it: the ability to transform just about anyone into a murderous pawn, without drugs and without surgery. (Echoes of The Manchurian Candidate, no?)Unfortunately, the creators never fully follow through on this, or several other plot threads. We never learn the true purpose behind the experiments (funded by some sort of biotech company). How is the detective's partner drawn into the conspiracy--mind control, or just a hired gun? The feds are brought into the case, and take over the official investigation...but it's mentioned once and then abandoned. The professor clobbers a bouncer with a beer bottle (oh, JEEZ...is he going to become a killbot himself?) but nothing comes of it.I've seen some real clinkers from Crown International (Malibu High and Cindy & Donna come to mind), but Brain Twisters at least has the germ of a contextually plausible story.And that's what kills me: it may have been a lack of writing and directing talent, of money, of time...but I think the basic concept of Brain Twisters is solid, and could resonate today. Conceptually, it's not a big jump from mind control via video games, to mind control via Fox News (or MSNBC, depending on your own political persuasion).Oh, what might have been...