Vivekmaru45 I can't believe the negative reviews. I think most of the reviews have been by persons who have not watched this film properly.This film is far more better than Event Horizon. It stands as a masterpiece on its own.The story is this: A group of skilled individuals have been recruited to go on a voyage into deep space to find an alien race that communicates through radio signals. A man with high telepathic abilities is hired to communicate with this race by listening to the radio signals.The spaceship in which the crew is traveling in has a captain that only appears to them as a holographic image. He never comes in direct contact of the crew. The telepathic man senses an ominous presence within the ship and he keeps this information to himself. Why is the captain of the spaceship avoiding contact with the crew? And what of the ominous presence within the ship? Watch the film to see what happens...Incredible space photography, special effects and thrilling background musical score. Great acting by the cast.10/10. What more do you want? Get it on DVD now!!! You won't regret it - trust me.

ShadeSiren OK, so this movie isn't all that fantastic. Having been a LONG time fan of George R. R. Martin, and having literally cried real tears at the ending of this short story, I was a little disappointed in the way this was converted from story to movie. The many changes made no sense to me at all, and as is usual in a situation like this, the movie ends up being nearly terrible. Still, it has many redeeming features, including the To Die For gorgeous Michael Praed, the always fun Catherine Mary Stuart (playing what was a black amazon woman in the book as a rather uninteresting white girl - can't blame HER for that). It's really not the casts fault that the script was mangled. Even the crazy Michael Des Barres is great, but I would have rather seen the oh-so-cool pocket void-head explosion brought on by the blood-pressure-increasing psychic drug scene, over the silly cuts-off-half-his-head-and-he-keeps-on-fighting nonsense this movie had.The whole thing with Royd's "mother" was badly handled - in the book, she was sinister and creepy, terrifying and powerful, here she's kinda creepy and somehow pathetic, instead of tragic and still sympathetic as she is in the book.The book is MUCH better - all of Martin's short stories are just awesome - and I have to admit, I envisioned Michael Praed when I read Royd Eris's adventure, and that probably helped bring on the tears when it reached the end. The movie's ending is, in the sense that it didn't make me cry, better, but the tragedy that was Royd Eris's life in the book is really the better quality ending.Like Sandkings, the TV version takes out all the fun parts, dumbs down the smart parts, and assumes we can't deal with the complications and ideas as presented by Martin in the originals.Shame on whoever made the changes, you could have kept the same cast, and not changed the story any, and it would have been a MUCH better movie. All in all, it's not a bad sci fi romp, but don't expect much. Read the book after you see it, and you'll be amazed.

cskocik When I enter Nightflyers as my keyword in Google, all I get is references to this movie. That's a shame, since the George R. R. Martin novel, novella, whatever, is a wonderful, intriguing, scary, intelligent mystery story, whereas the movie is the palest ghost of the book's greatness. Martin's book predated Alien by about five years, and I wonder if Ron Shusett or Dan O'Bannon might have gotten some inspiration from it.The movie is a typical '80s gore-fest, complete with misty, foggy sets, ridiculous dialogue and caricatures, and an explosive climax that totally ruins of the book's thoughtful ending. I like the actors who play Royd Eris and Professor D'Branin, and I admit I enjoyed Michael Des Barres's performance as the whacked-out telepath. But most of the acting was subpar. I thought Catherine Mary Stewart did what she could, but the script stripped away all the complexity of her character, who was much more richly drawn in the book. The movie also completely misses the book's subtle sense of humor. The book is closer in tone to John Carpenter's movie Dark Star, plus a great sense of mystery and spookiness. The movie spills the beans on Royd's backstory far too early and off-handedly, as opposed to the book's climactic revelation.So don't let this movie turn you off of Nightflyers -- read the book. By all means, read it!

Aaron1375 For what it is worth I can watch this movie, and at least not be bored. I saw this one on the sci-fi channel and it had its moments and it is a lot better than the stuff they play on that channel these days. You know the stuff, the stupid computer animated sea creature that attacks and someone like Dean Cain must stop it. This one is sort of a horror version of 2001, not that I am comparing the two, but both feature crazed computers. I think this one is based on a book also, but I have never read it so I can't really say if it follows along with the book for the most part or that it makes drastic changes. This movie has this group chartering a spaceship to find something or other, I can't remember what. The ship is run by this guy who seems to have been in space his whole life so he doesn't take to gravity real well. The computer is like his mother or something and it fears that this group is going to take the son away and so it starts a killing spree. I saw a preview of this and the preview made it look a lot scarier than what I saw. On the other hand it did provide a nice distraction for a while and a few interesting kills as well.