The Time Machine
A scientist builds a machine that will enable him to travel back and forth in time, but when he puts it in motion, he gets more than he bargained for.
You may also like
The Time Machine torrent reviews
Alex r (es) wrote: Well executed low-budget Slasher film that is a fine throwback to the genres heyday. This film boasts a sick, demented and brutal killer that belongs in the same category as Jason Voorhees, Michael Myers and Freddy Kruger. This film is perfect for people for an effective and brutal slasher where it showcases a brand new killer, instead of giving us the same old horror icons in disappointing remakes. For those looking for a bloody good time, then this is the film to check out. The picture has its flaws, but it does what many remakes fail to do, and that's to entertain the viewer. The film does rely on the classic Slasher film formula, but gives it a modern twist and it pays off. Acting wise, the actors aren't the best, but who cares? They're meant to be the victims here and get killed off. They won't win any Oscars any time soon. Chromeskull is an effective killer that belong in the horror killer hall of fame, he is one of the best on-screen killers in recent memory. Director Robert Hall direction is impressive, and though Laid to Rest is short on great plot, it more than makes up for it with bloody, gross kills that will certainly make horror fans relish. What's great with this film is that no specific motive is given to the killer in order to kill. Every other killer in the Slasher genre back in the day seemed to have a motive, Jason Voorhees wanted revenge for the death of his mom, Freddy Krueger wanted to punish the kids of the parents to kill him and so on. Michael Myers had to kill his sister to make the voices in his head stop. However with Chromeskull no reason is given and I think it adds a lot more to the enjoyment of the film as it makes you wonder what his motives are. This is a very entertaining horror film that should be seen if you're tired by the countless uninspired films in the genre.
Jennifer T (ca) wrote: Finally watched this movie on BlueRay. What a piece of garbage. 1st of all, why are all the people who are supposed to be French, speaking in British English accents??? Don't you think an intelligent reviewer would pick up on that? How's that for stretching reality and the truth of the original story. But then again, this is Hollywood at it's clumsiest...There seem to be 2 directors that always get a pass from every reviewer, no matter how bad their movies are - Martin Scorsese and Tim Burton. Even when they make really crappy movies, the reviewers praise them falsely. The main character in Hugo, Asa Butterfield was completely miss-cast asusual. He has no emotion, and a completely flat performance that sucks. He has no charisma to draw the audience in and that is the same lousy performance he does in every film he is in. The rest of the cast is merely adequate to this disjointed, confusing mismatch of 2 different stories that get "lost in translation", as they are not as the "book" tells it. Yes, the cinematographer does a great job with the outrageous budget the studio gave them, and the film's photography is very pretty.However, if Scorsese wants to do a film about the history of movies, let him write his own from beginning to end and not piggyback it as a con and a distortion on the back of a far superior writer.I do not recommend this movie at all. It is a complete waste of film, money, and time. The book was great, this movie is an Unbelievable piece of junk.
Bruno V (jp) wrote: This was sweet and funny ...Faye ,Lauren and Ian acted nice ! SOMDVD
Brad S (fr) wrote: There's just something about this story that really connected with me. Yes, it has some far-fetched story ideas and overly contrived scenes for some of the characters, but I'm able to get past all of that because the heart of this story and the three main characters played by Kevin Kline, Kristin Scott Thomas and Hayden Christensen is just so good, every time I watch this film. So for me, while this film may not be 5 stars by the strictest standards, it's 5 stars for me emotionally.
Ken S (au) wrote: Decent flick about Michael J. Fox seeing ghosts and using them for financial gain. Eventually a real bad ghost shows up to fuck up his life. It is a good little film, sort of in the same vein as "Ghostbusters" or "Beetlejuice". I think "Heavenly Creatures" gave Jackson his serious drama credibility so that he could take on the LOTR trilogy, but "The Frighteners" gave him the genuine Special Effects credibility he needed. He proved he could masterfully mix practical and CG effects here, more so than his cheapo schlock flicks ever would. This film is entertaining, with a good lead and a solid premise, definitely worth a whirl or two.
Cody C (ru) wrote: Kind of frustrating. Like a not as good version of Eric Rohmer. But not bad.
sheenal p (de) wrote: i love da song ishq kaminaa!!!
Alec L (es) wrote: How a great director like Milos Foreman let's some of the painful performances in this film slide, I do not know. And even though some of the performances were substantial (Coalhouse Walker Jr., Younger Brother), Ragtime does a good job of bringing E. L. Doctorow's masterpiece to life and is embellished with a star-studded cast, it fails to impact you like the book and play do.
Byron B (ru) wrote: nominated for best foreign film at the golden globes
Terese S (au) wrote: Can't go wrong with Elvis!
Ed Q (de) wrote: A gripping character study that becomes a bleak tale of enforced redemption and regret.
Jaime L (au) wrote: Definition of 80s cheese right here, I can understand why some people would enjoy this film but it the acting was too atrocious and the plot too nonsensical for me to like this thing.
GB J (jp) wrote: Four stars for the three seashells
Tom R (es) wrote: one of the best performance by Kevin Costner. Story line is good but has some flaws though. Still its really good.
Jessyca F (au) wrote: "The worst film I've ever watched" might be an understatement. Suing the Devil is truly dreadful in both narrative and technical terms. Those responsible for the editing and sound mixing departments should be "crucified". Poor Malcolm McDowell.