A Strange passenger from the future seems to be witnessing all the great disasters of the century. Two reporters are trying to track this man down to see where he will show up next. The movie also works on the problem of the two reporters that want to prevent the next disaster from happening. Should they change the future when they know another disaster is going to strike?
|The Time Shifters aka Thrill Seekers Movie(DivX)||Resolution: 714x576 px||Total Size: 1302 Mb|
|The Time Shifters aka Thrill Seekers Movie(iPod)||Resolution: 480x388 px||Total Size: 342 Mb||
We have taken some photos of "The Time Shifters aka Thrill Seekers". They represent actual movie quality.
I had never heard of "Thrill Seekers" before I came across it in DVD rentals and the description caught my interest. I rented it and was not disappointed. From the very beginning, this movie is a non-stop ride of suspense and action with an interesting cast of characters brought together by a single deviation in the past caused by a negligent time traveler. That one event sets off a chain of events that threaten to drastically change the future -- and those who know what is happening will stop at nothing to prevent that from happening. Will those in the present be able to use their knowledge to change the future or will those in the future be able to prevent any further deviations? You'll just have to see for yourself...!
This movie will never be seen as one of the great classics, it is much toopedestrian in execution for that - sadly. The actors are mostly competent asis the direction, but with the exception of Catherine Bell and James Allodinone is really good, sometimes delivering lines as if just reading from cuecards.What is really intriguing is the script, which does not rely on the typicalB-movie thriller baddies. All characters really *are* characters, thesupposed baddies actually have good reasons to hunt down the two maincharacters. There's even two juxtaposed dialogues spelling it out for thesake of the usual couch potato.Even more surprising is the stand on Free Will the scrÃpt takes as Caspervan Dien tells Catherine Bell that their hunters may try to safe their ownpast, but he has all his future in front of him. As long as we cannotpredict the future in any meaningful way (lets say with 100% assurance) wehave a contingency of decisions, which all influence thefuture.In the hands of a more visionary director, with some changes to the cast andmade for the big screen it could have been one of the best sci-fi thrillersfor a long time - and much more interesting than *Blade Runner* or thesecond and third installment of *Matrix*.
Watched this movie with my old girlfriend a couple years after it wasreleased. We really weren't expecting much because it was a solo VHS inthe older movie section of Blockbuster. I was pleasantly surprised withthe movie. It has a great combination of action and suspense. Greatmovie to watch with a good friend.I agree with what he said too....haha I was not expecting much of thismovie, because it was obviously made for TV. The summary in the TVguide made it sound interesting, although it was not exactly clear whatthe movie was about. I'm glad I didn't give it a miss, because itreally was worth watching. I think it took me about 20 minutes tounderstand exactly what was going on, and that Caspar Van Dien'scharacter was not going to be the one doing the time travelling, butonce I realised that, I really began to enjoy the movie. It's not oftennowadays that I sit through an entire movie, and am glued to thescreen, but I was with this one and it wasn't entirely predictableeither. I like a movie that makes you think about the situations itportrays, and time travel is a fascinating topic. The acting probablywasn't perfect, but I've seen much worse, and I put this movie on thesame level as "Deep Impact" - it has substance.
I will not remember this film for the performances or the direction eventhough these departments were not awful. What made me like the movie wastheappeal of the sci-fi story. The plot was good and of course could havebeenburnished into an elegant film with some effort. The film leaves yousatisfied right up to the last frame of the film--don't missit.I particularly liked the development of the character of FBI agentStantonwith his watch. I only wish the director had thought of giving thecharactermore time on screen.
Is still relatively entertaining. Folks, this film wasn't made to revolutionize the film industry or have a long lasting impression on the viewer. This film was a made for TBS production thats basic goal was to entertain the audience for two hours. With this goal in mind, the film succeeded. From start to finish, the movie is entertaining and fast paced, all the while feeding the mind with little tidbits about how altering the present could change the future. A Good film in my opinion.
The production values of this movie are really, really, bad. People runthrough train stations with guns drawn while no-one notices, and thespecial effects of disasters are very amateurishly done. Themotivations of the main characters are simplistically drawn. Add awhole slew of pretty bad performances, and you've got a recipe fordisaster.Yet despite all this, I rather enjoyed the movie, in spite of itself.The time travel paradoxes were well handled - to the point where Ifound myself rooting for the nominal "bad guys," instead of the "goodguys." The story is interesting and well handled, and Catherine Bellis, as always, a knockout.One point - the general premise of the film (and this isn't really aspoiler; it's spelled out right away, but if you don't want to knowanything about the film, stop reading), that of time travellers fromthe future taking vacations to the past to view disasters, is taken(uncredited) directly from C.L. Moore's classic story "Vintage Season,"one of my favorite sci-fi works. The details are different, but thepremise is identical. Moore's story has been filmed more faithfully, as"Disaster in Time." Anyone who liked "The Time Shifters" should checkit out, or even better, the original source material.
Despite its low budget and production and unlike many other time travelmovies this one deals with the consequences which are believable. Youwillfind yourself sympathizing with both the "good guys" and the "bad guys"whoare just doing their job in preventing change in time. Suppose you stop aplane from crashing which had a person aboard who would later plot to killthousands of people, or save a person from a car accident who would laterhave a negative impact on life. If we had the technology to go back,wouldwe save the victims from the titanic, or the hundreds of plane crashesthathave claimed thousands of lives. Sure if you think about it that would beagood idea but at the long run you are facing a population crisis and thepeople who are supposed to be dead are changing historyforever.Every action you perform has an impact, not a sudden one but in a fewyearsit changes the course that history would have taken. This is why you canfind yourself sympathizing with the bad guys who arent really depicted asbad guys in this movie. Maybe it would be wise to let nature take itscourse and not interfere with history because it could have devastatingeffects in the future.
Zapping through the movie channels last evening, I came across: Nextfeature presentation: Thrill Seekers with Martin Sheen. I wonder if onecould sue the channel for this kind of tendentious (but not factuallywrong) publicity? Anyway, it made me decide to watch. Hardly any MartinSheen, but entertaining for sure, and with surprisingly decent specialeffects for a TV movie. The plot is intelligent, and would be a goodstarting point to get people to discuss the paradoxes of time travel.Suppose you could go back and kill Hitler before he came to power,would you do it? But if you would, can you be certain nothing worsewould happen? And how would it affect your own life? Would you stillexist, even? (My parents met because of the war.) Or: if you go back toa time after you are born, can you meet yourself? All of this is hardlyoriginal, of course. SF writers in the golden age (which was sadlyended by Star Wars, shifting from intelligent writing to blockbusterspecial effects) frequently tackled the issue, for instance describingthe butterfly effect: a firm organises time trips to the Jurassic,where thrill seeking (again!) hunters can kill a dinosaur a fraction ofa moment before it would have died, thus not altering the time line.But one hunter stumbles and accidentally kills a butterfly. He getsback to his starting date, but the killed butterfly has changed thetime line and this new line turns out to be the hunter's worstnightmare. Something similar happens in Thrill Seekers. But here theprotagonist has the means to go back in time to change a future he hasalready experienced. This, of course, was already obvious from themoment they take the laptop from the disaster tourist. In fact, Merrickcould have used that device to go back to before he boarded the planeand, using some kind of subterfuge, a bomb alarm for instance, avertthe plane crash, and the subway crash, and the fire... But we wouldn'thave had the same film then.One question of logic though. If Merrick goes back into his originaltime line, the time guards would also be in there, but unaffected bywhat will happen later. In the film, they follow Merrick back from thefuture. The film does not explain this. But the question doesn't endthere. If you go back to when you were 3 hours earlier, you would alsonot yet have any memories of what was going to happen those next 3hours. Merrick and the time guards should not have had any knowledge ofthe disaster happening 3 hours in the future.I also wonder how the title sequence relates to the film. I admit Iwasn't paying a lot of attention, trying to figure out when MartinSheen would be mentioned, but in retrospect I wonder if there wasn'tany subtle message in the sequence?
When examining photos of some of the great disasters of the 20thcentury, a investigative reporter discovers a man who appears inseveral of the disasters--separated by decades, yet seemingly not aginga day. So he begins to investigate. When he chances upon the same manon a plane flight, things start happening. Unfortunately, thispromising sci-fi idea quickly dissolves into a disappointing bore,thanks in great part to the wooden and dull acting of Casper Van Dien.Apparently he thought this was a photo shoot and never engaged theacting gear. The beautiful Catherine Bell is wasted as the loveinterest. Somewhere in here there's a pretty good idea, but its notworth watching the movie to dig it out.
I bought this movie because I like Catherine Bell (Good Witch) a lot. I'm not a huge fan of pretty-boy Casper Van Dien (Starship Troopers), yet I liked his character in this movie. I love science fiction, and I would rate this as science fiction "lite". The time travel story was familiar, yet all in all, it was entertaining with strong action and a bit of a twist. I think this movie had another title at one time because I also find it listed as "Time Shifters" in some websites. Like most time-travel stories, time paradox is responsible for much of the story's conflict. The old idea "if you go back in time and kill your grandfather, how were you ever born to be able to go back in time to kill him?" My one gripe (with all time travel movies) is that when the paradox occurs, why are some people aware of it and not others? It doesn't make sense that one could remember more than one time line. Oh well, time travel is always confusing. Thrill Seekers
This review is from: Thrill Seekers (DVD) Some dvd movies are hard to find,as they are not made any more, this I think is one of them. This film was not a block buster but good. People were going back in time to see disasters as they happen in real time. They had to be very carful not to do anything to upset the flow of time or it could alternate history. I was lucky to get my hands on this film.
This is a direct-to-video production with corresponding production valuesand acting. Well, the mayhem about the stadium looks almost as good as abig-budget disaster movie. Usually the subject of time travel offersinfinite possibilities that are mostly mutilated by a weak script, butThrill Seekers (yes, USA title or not, i get it on cable by that title)offers an intelligent story with plenty of intelligent twists - telling morewould spoil the surprise. The atmosphere is also good, though the music haslittle merit in that : Tourists visiting disaster areas & war zones exist,sadly enough, but the emotionlessness that comes with it does not show untilyou have seen this. The best part is, it lives up to an expectation few timetravel movies can develop to : in the end, the plot comes together. The solemajor turn-off : Casper van Dien with a beard. He has thisi-want-back-to-shark-attack look glued to his eyes.
This movie is, happily, not a waste of time. It is fairly intelligent, andfor the most part manages not to get too lost in temporal theory. Thepremise lies with Tom Merrick (Casper Van Dien), a former award-winningreporter now working for a tabloid, discovering that the same person waspresent at the RMS Titanic sinking, the Hindenburg crash, and an electricalplant fire where Merrick nearly lost his life. As he investigates, heattracts the attention of some strange agents who might be timetravellers.While the movie is relatively fast paced and manages to steer clear of toomany cliches, it is unfortunately marred by a couple of gaping plot holes.However, it is nice to know that Casper Van Dien can actually act, and hemanages to do a decent job on this one.So, the final verdict: not too bad SF, and fairly good entertainment fortwohours. 3.5/5
The movie, "Thrill Seekers" AKA: "The Time Shifters" is such a suspensefulmovie. This will keep you on the edge of your seat. This is actually oneofthe very few movies that is completely unpredictable. Casper Van Dienplayedexcellent in this film!
This review is from: Thrill Seekers (DVD) If you liked "The Philadelphia Experiment" or "The Final Countdown" you'll love this movie. Once it gets started, you'll want it to go on and on. You can pick up a used copy at a real bargain.
Of course it is a low budget film but I still enjoyed it very much! I thought the idea for the story was really cool! If you like time travel you will like this movie, atleast I did!
I've been trying like crazy to find this on DVD. The fact that no stores(including Blockbuster) carry it, might make you believe that that's proofthat the movie sucks. But, when I think of how hard I'm trying to findit....I realize how much I enjoyed it.It's simple....just when you've seen just about every "back in time","aheadinto the future" film......along comes The Thrill Seekers with a uniqueangle....a man joy riding through disasters. Makes me think of what itwouldhave been like to be on the Titanic, Hindenberg...even the World TradeCenter. Don't particularly know the actors all that well. I was sold onjustthe story itself. It made me walk away wondering what it would be like totravel back to famous/infamous dates in time.If you walk away and find yourself thinking about a movie's plot a yearafter seeing it....doesn't it deserve a 10?Acting? Directing? Lighting? Script?Who cares?It was simply fun.John
Watching the movie last night on the TV i can surely make some remarks:Good beginning. It was entertaining the way that guy went through thedisasters and appeared in the pictures.. it made you think about who ishe and where does he come from. The part that he is a Thrill Seekersucked. I am sure there could have been other ideas, better than that.I liked the love story between the main two characters and the generalidea of going through the time. This is not the place to comment on theeffects of going into time =>there are a lot of places where that canbe discussed but in the general it was interesting. It was an enjoyablemovie to watch although the ending was very predictable ( we don't likethat now-a-days, do we? ) I give it a 5/10 as for encouraging but itcould have been much better.
I was thrill to see the WWF wasn't apart of this movie. Lots of action from start to end.I mean the story was just plan awesome. If you love Science fiction movies this movie is a must have.One of Casper Van Dien better movies.this movie is sorta like timecop,like you mess things up then you have to travel back to the past to fix thing,this movie rocks.FIVE STARS BABY!
This forgettable attempt at sci-fi action stars the boyish Casper Van Dien, who acts with pop eyes and sounds like he studied voice under Scott Wolf. When CVD notices the same man appearing in pictures from 3 different historical disasters, he stumbles across a temporal travel entertainment, whereby tourists from the future use a timeline to visit past disasters. The man in the pictures resembling Max Schreck from FW Murnau's Nosferatu gives the phenomena a gothic touch that is never taken advantage of - as soon as we hear him speak the illusion is broken. When we learn that the current popular attractions all occur within days of CVD's realtime, the always reliable if-you-change-destiny genre is presented. Regrettably the screenplay doesn't demonstrate the depth of intellect that such a genre requires for an audience to empathise with the fate of those involved. CVD is a journalist for the "National Inquisitor" and the momentary concern he has over the parallel beween the timeline tours and contemporary news as entertainment is quickly dismissed. However there is a redemptive twist in the narrative, and a payoff for the running gag of a geek rookie cop who has transfered from MIT. His superior played by Lawrence Dane has nothing to work with except for his authentic gruffness, as opposed to CVD's juvenile gravel tones. Matters aren't helped by the music that never lets up, and Mario Azzopardi's less than inspired direction. He has a fondness for chases and crowd scenes. It's just unfortunate that he has no gift for them, and relies upon generated FX. Logic doesn't appear to be a priority either. A relative is found at the 3rd attempt of looking amongst 11,000 victims covered with blankets, and someone who is capable of destroying a car with a missile gun is stopped by a locked door. When CVD steals someone's car, the owner delivers the camp and superfluous howler "What do you think you're doing?!", and CVD also gets to deliver an awful reflective speech full of mixed metaphors after he is caught ogling the breasts of his female interest, Jag's Catherine Bell. Martin Sheen has a few video appearances as the leader of the conglomerate, and Theresa Saldana wears an unflatteringly alien cow-slicked hairdo as someone chasing CVD, though I doubt either of them will be listing this film high on their resume of greatest achievements. Catherine Oxenberg appears as the timeline advertising hostess, her English accent contextually odd until I learnt she is Mrs CVD.