Enrique Sanchez OK this was not a big production...but heck, it was fun to watch. The ideas of time travel are all engraved into our brains. The ins and outs and the possibilities and the paradoxes.This movie handled it well...and it did NOT take itself seriously it even had a comic touches, though slight enough not to be painful...just enjoyable.Sure, many things could have been done - with a budget. And even with this qualm, the result had nuances and a good storyline that did not cause half the population to tear down the plausibility factor in the time continuum that is usually laid down as the test in these types of movies.I thought the ensemble was good and there were few clichés that stuck out in my mind. Those who would say this is a bad movie or a B-movie are missing out on one thing which I repeat: FUN.This movie was fun and it was fun to watch it unfold. Even with the predictability of the whole thing, at least we weren't asked to challenge our understanding of science fiction and the time travel genre.

cheshire551225800 This is a really bad cheesy movie but it was made with some heart and I liked it. It hasn't got the best production values and the story is predictable, but still I liked it.Weird, but true. I think that some of the actors really tried to make something of this fairly bad move, most notably Alex Hyde-White and Kathleen Beller. Ned Beatty knew he was the comic relief and did what he could with the role.Kathleen Beller wasn't having much luck getting out of her "Sword and the Sorcerer" type casting but she gamely took it seriously and tried to make it better.Maybe the true test of an actor is not what they do with great material but what they do when they are in some real piece of crap, do they keep on trying to raise the material as far as possible?

Moviefanguy I guess it was worth the $2.00. My 11 year old will probably enjoy it. The basic premise, an evil scientist steals the first time machine to erase the existence of all others responsible for it to take full credit, is a good one. This basically good premise suffers from cheap sets, cheap costumes, and silly dialog. Good actors like Ned Beatty and Lee Bergere end up being wasted. The whole affair comes off like an episode of Wishbone performed by Monty Python. In fact, I believe that Wil Shriner wears some of Wishbone's old wardrobe at some point. If someone with a budget and some imagination got a hold of the script it could be a decent movie. Are there any takers out there? This could be made into a good independent film.

DonnaJo For anyone looking for some unintentional humor, this movie would not be a bad choice. The premise itself is pretty interesting: in the future, scientists are battling for control of the planet and one of them goes into the past to kill off his rivals. It could have benefitted from a better script and a bigger budget. The sets were very fake-looking and the costumes looked like something out of a high shcool production. One of the funnier moments actually comes when Shriner goes to open a door and almost knocks it down. The design team also apparently had some trouble finding up-to-date cars for the present-day New York sequence. The whole production had a 1980s air about it, typified by the brightly-colored tie-dyes that the cast dons at one point. The movie is actually a lot funnier in hindsight. Back when I saw it, I was disappointed and embarrassed for the filmmakers. Knowing who Roger Corman is actually makes me smile when I think of it.