43) Disclosure Day (2026)

(2out of 5)

"Listen..."

Director

Steven Spielberg 

Cast

Emily Blunt - Margaret Fairchild
Josh O’Connor - Dr. Daniel Kellner
Colin Firth - Noah Scanlon
Eve Hewson - Jane Blankenship
Colman Domingo - Hugo Wakefield
Wyatt Russell - Jackson
Henry Lloyd-Hughes - Casper Boyd
Elizabeth Marvel - Sr. Maura
Hettienne Park - Serena
Tommy Martinez - Dave Santiago
Gabby Beans - Angela Childs

Potential Spoilers Ahead

Steven Spielberg's heavily touted sci-fi movie, "Disclosure Day," is an inflated, pretentious flick. That's the impression I was left with after sitting through it.

The movie is trying to make a point. And I can't write about that without bringing up some refutations of my own. 
In "Disclosure Day," the world is on the brink of nuclear war. A cybersecurity specialist, Dr. Daniel
Kellner (Josh O’Connor), has stolen classified evidence of extraterrestrial encounters from a super-duper top-secret government contractor.
Meanwhile, a Kansas City television meteorologist, Margaret Fairchild (Emily Blunt), suddenly develops really freaky psychic abilities after an encounter with a cardinal. She somehow acquires the
ability to speak an alien language, and this newfound knowledge of alien jibber-jabber comes spilling out while she's live on TV.
Thanks to her newfound psychic abilities, Margaret discovers that the Wardex Corporation, a government contractor headed by Noah Scanlon (Colin Firth), is pursuing her as well as Kellner. She meets up with Kellner, and the two attempt to outrun Scanlon. They eventually discover that their mysterious connection dates back to a childhood alien abduction. With the help of a group of whistleblowers, they attempt to broadcast the truth about extraterrestrial life to the entire world before Scanlon and his staff at Wardex can stop them. 

Of all Spielberg's alien movies, from "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" to "E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial" to "War of the Worlds," and whatever other alien movies he's made, "Disclosure Day" is the one that focuses on the worldwide reaction to the existence of extraterrestrial life. Granted, "War of the Worlds" is about a hostile alien invasion of Earth. But the story ends with humanity confronting the reality of an alien attack. The consequences of such a disclosure would have made for a far more entertaining movie, and only entertaining. 

I'm not opposed to alien movies as a form of science fiction. In fact, Spielberg has given us some memorable ones. 

Nor am I opposed, generally speaking, to a story about how the world would react to the revelation we're not alone in the universe. With "Disclosure Day," that very premise is exactly where it belongs - in science fiction. 

Emily Blunt as Margaret in "Disclosure Day."

Somewhere on social media, someone suggested Spielberg stated the story would force “Christians and people of faith” to “second‑guess their own religion.” I had trouble finding where and when he supposedly said that. Maybe I just didn't look hard enough? But that's what I kept hearing before the film's release. 

In a June 7, 2026, interview with CBS News's "Sunday Morning," Spielberg said, "The movie takes the position of the believers, or the curious, the ones that have been deeply affected by this. The Emily Blunt character (Margaret Fairchild), you know, something has happened to her. She has no idea what it is. She has to try to understand why this has upended her life."
He then said, "And the movie also takes the position of the church. What does this do to the fundamental beliefs that many of us have? Is God our God only on this planet? Or is God a god for every system where there's civilization and intelligent life, and even developing life?"

Meanwhile, Christians including myself objected to the suggestion that discovering intelligent alien life could undermine Christianity. I still hold that position.

Between all the controversy around this movie along with its general premise, the whole thing suggests that the possibility of intelligent life on another planet—or even of aliens secretly living here on Earth—could fundamentally change an entire religion's understanding of God. Why alien existence would lead to that conclusion, though, isn't explained. But if such is the case, that premise reveals a rather shaky understanding of Christian belief. The existence of life elsewhere wouldn't invalidate the teachings of Jesus Christ any more than the discovery of a new species of fish deep in the ocean would do so.

All this alien speculation in "Disclosure Day" comes amidst, or perhaps at the tail end of, the recent release of classified reports and footage concerning Unidentified Anomalous Phenomena (UAP). Despite all the excitement, there's still no concrete proof that these flying objects are spacecraft from other planets, much less that extraterrestrial beings actually exist. The government is terrible at keeping secrets. So, where are these aliens? 
"Disclosure Day" includes some of the recently released footage as a part of the plot point that the government is keeping alien existence a secret. It also inserts its own fictional footage of alien bodies and such to fill in the missing pieces behind the U.S. government supposedly covering up proof of aliens.
The movie gives the fictional aliens too much credit, really. 

The absurdity lies in the assumption that if such beings really exist—and possess such impressive knowledge—why would they travel light-years across space to come here and do what, exactly? To look at us from the sky? 

The hype behind the movie, and its story line deals with a lot of what-ifs. However, between the initial hype and the movie's plot, the distinction between fact and speculation is too blurred.

The premise of "Disclosure Day" rests on the rather grandiose notion that the discovery of intelligent extraterrestrial life would fundamentally scramble everything we know about God, faith, and humanity's place in the universe. It's an extraordinarily pretentious position, presuming that the existence of intelligent life elsewhere would somehow invalidate or revolutionize humanity's understanding of the divine. 

Considering Spielberg's own controversial remarks about the film's relationship to faith, the whole thing threatens to confuse astronomical discoveries, real or theoretical, with theological revelation, as though the two were necessarily at odds. It's a mighty ambitious burden to place on a science-fiction film, particularly one that seems to assume the discovery of intelligent life on another planet would somehow force humanity to reconsider everything it believes about God as though Christian theology had never considered the question before.

You know, St. Thomas Aquinas (1225–1274), touched on the subject. He states in Question 47, Article 3, of his "Summa Theologica," "It is
said (Jn. 1:10): 'The world was made by Him,' where the world is named as one, as if only one existed."

Granted, that doesn't state anything about the possibility of intelligent life living on another planet. But speaking as a Roman Catholic, alien life doesn't change anything about Christ's incarnation, redemption and resurrection here on Earth. 

It doesn't change what Christ did for mankind. That still stands whether or not E.T. is out there somewhere flying around trying to avoid detection. To think otherwise because aliens must be super-duper intelligent (an assumption based on...what?) shows how ignorant Hollywood must be about the teachings of Jesus Christ. I keep referring back to Christianity as the film seems to target Christianity (Catholicism) specifically. The character Jane Blankenship (Eve Hewson) is a devout Catholic who was once a novice in a convent. She still has a close relationship with her former abbess, Sr. Maura (Elizabeth Marvel), whom she talks to about what the existence of intelligent alien life would mean for belief in God.

Nature is not beyond God's control, despite what the film seems to suggest. Existence itself depends on God. He sustains all creation. Nor is the legitimacy of divine revelation teetering on whether or not we're alone in the universe. 

Aside from that, the storyline itself falls flat as entertainment. The movie is about the fictional day when the existence of aliens is finally revealed once and for all. The movie doesn't strike me as really being all about the aliens, nor does it offer a particularly compelling exploration of how mankind would react to their existence. In other words, "Disclosure Day" is a boring flick that misses the mark.
And to think this misguided movie comes from a director who previously gave us a generous handful of Hollywood's most popular alien movies. Well, I guess it's debatable if that resume of great alien movies includes, "Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull" (2008). 
To give "Disclosure Day" some credit, the film does a decent job building intrigue and maintaining the intensity of the chase. It does maintain intensity and thrills. And that's about all I enjoyed. But the one thing the audience is waiting for occurs briefly at the end before the end credits roll. My biggest problem overall is presentation. It inflates alien disclosure, or rather the possibility of it. "Disclosure Day" treats its premise as though the discovery of extraterrestrial life would be the most profound revelation in human history, when all it would really establish is that we aren't alone in the universe. That hasn't happened yet. 

Otherwise, the pretentiousness of "Disclosure Day" jumps right off the screen, even before the aliens do.

42) Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die (2026)

(4out of 5)

"Can you put your phones away, please?"

Director

Gore Verbinski

Cast

Sam Rockwell - the Man From the Future
Haley Lu Richardson - Ingrid
Michael Peña - Mark
Zazie Beetz - Janet
Juno Temple - Susan
Asim Chaudhry - Scott
Tom Taylor - Tim

You know that crazy, maniacal guy you often see on the bus or subway, or in the middle of the sidewalk, yelling seemingly nonsensical stuff about government control, surveillance, the voices in his head telling him it's all fake, the end of the world, or whatever else people like that guy shout about? Well, what if that guy actually knew what he was talking about? What if his nonsensical shouting was actually a dire warning we needed to pay attention to? What if that guy wasn't actually crazy? 
Someone (I don't remember who) recommended the sci-fi comedy "Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die," directed by Gore Verbinski and released in February 2026. This movie is a depiction of the kinds of warnings that crazy guy on the bus might make, warnings that passersby would otherwise ignore and chalk up to drugs, schizophrenia, or just good ol' fashioned paranoid delusions. And the movie itself is crazy, outrageous, and very sensible.
In this movie, Sam Rockwell plays a man from the future who barges in on an otherwise ordinary night at Norm's, a Los Angeles diner.
This man doesn't hesitate to claim to all the diner guests that humanity will be wiped out by artificial intelligence while humans are too engrossed in social media and internet scrolling to even notice.
However, only a small group of random ordinary people who happen to be eating at Norm's that night can do something about it.
The future man, with the help of what looks like a bomb strapped under his overcoat, convinces those seven people—Susan (Juno Temple), Scott (Asim Chaudhry), Janet (Zazie Beetz), Mark (Michael Peña), Marie (Georgia Goodman), Boy Scout leader Bob (Daniel Barnett), and Ingrid (Haley Lu Richardson)—to accompany him on his mission to stop AI.
So, off they go, chaotically across Los Angeles, through buildings and other random places, taking on random threats and obstacles just to reach a nine-year-old kid (Artie Wilkinson-Hunt) who is developing computer code that will single-handedly trigger AI and destroy everybody.

Sam Rockwell as the Man from the Future in "Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die."

Even as they pursue this kid, his code has already started manipulating reality and the events that befall the rescue crew.
As I sat through this movie, engaged as soon as the first scene flashed before me, I couldn't help but be a little proud of myself for choosing to utilize what talent I may posses to comment on movies rather than allowing myself to be taken in by stupid TikTok videos. 
"Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die" is ridiculous, blunt, and insightful.
Its commentary on social media, the trail of absurdity it leaves behind, and it's take on the widespread pandemic of isolation spreading across the world is satirical in a way I can't quite compare to any other movie.
Sure, there are similar dark dystopian comedies that came to mind while I watched this one. "Brazil" from 1985 came initially to mind, followed by "They Live" (1988) and "Idiocracy" (2006). Also, for some reason, the film "The Truman Show" (1998) came to mind. 

In a way, probably due to the weird nature of the story, this movie reminded me a little of "Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" (2005). That also may be due to Sam Rockwell also starring in both films.
What really struck a nerve was how seemingly factual much of the absurdity is. For instance, in one part of the story, mindless teenagers at a local high school begin following Mark, a recently hired teacher, and his coworker Janet like a bunch of zombies entranced by their phones because Mark simply touched one of the students' phones while watching them scroll nonstop through mindless, pointless videos and images.

In another scene, Susan is approached by a small group of moms who are members of a support group after Susan's son is murdered in a school shooting. However, their support group is more like a country club who treat loss with barely any suitable emotion. These people are desensitized to the severity of murder and the pain of loss. It's a common characteristic throughout the movie.
The most painful depiction in the movie occurs when Ingrid's boyfriend, whom she loved deeply, decides to leave her and all of reality for a "better," albeit artificial, virtual reality where everything, including feelings and emotions, are synthetic.
The story strives to depict something about contemporary life that is above the mere observation that people spend too much time on their phones. Thanks to the saturation of social media, every person is treated like an island. No one really seems to know or care much about empathy, charity, compunction, or anything similar. All that seems to matter is a constant feed of likes, pointless scenarios, and other people's misfortunes recorded for everyone else's amusement.
And the only hero trying to rally some troops to not only save humanity but remind the world how to interact in reality is this time traveler who would otherwise be considered that crazy guy on the street corner shouting about the end of the world, or some such thing.

"Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die" is directed by Gore Verbinski, who directed some pretty well-known movies, including "The Ring" (2002), "Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl," "Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest," "Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End," "Rango," and "The Cure for Wellness."
This is the kind of science fiction story I kind of wish I had thought of myself. I like the premise a lot. Nothing about it, and I mean nothing, is predictable. That is, I couldn't figure out where the movie was going as it nonchalantly takes more and more bizarre left turns as it progresses. It's a real trip!

What the movie hits right on the head, underneath all the craziness, is its satire of a society that makes itself more and more stupid and oblivious thanks to constant and consistent distractions.

Sam Rockwell's performance is perfect. He's committed to the insane claims of this guy from the future, who completely believes himself and, as it turns out, is absolutely right. He's not crazy at all.
He isn't treating the ridiculous and absurd things he's shouting as absurd or ridiculous. He believes he's living through a very real threat. That's one hell of a performance coming from Rockwell. I have to add his role as the man from the future to my mental list of favorite performances.
The movie so aptly points out that people just aren't really living together anymore. Rather, we're occupying the same space while still feeling isolated.
"Good Luck, Have Fun, Don't Die" is a unique, nerve-hitting satire that wants its audience to pay attention through the absurdities. It gives it's audience a bittersweet laugh at themselves as society establishea and embraces such ripe conditions for our own dehumanization through our love affair with technology. Societies seem to prefer screens often than the company of other people. The AI apocalypse in the story is the logical conclusion of habits that already exist. If only we could just put the phone away for a while. I couldn't even avoid glancing at my phone while watching this. 

The movie is funny because its absurd vision of society isn't all that absurd. There's almost a bit of tongue-in-cheek humor amidst all the ridiculous action and attempt to save humanity. In the end, it's all a big pile of tangled wires, electricity, flashing lights, and useless gadgetry. 
I do love a good satire. This hit the spot!

41) Slapstick of Another Kind (1984)

(0.5 out of 5)

"This is a very weird planet. It's just confusing to us because it's good to be dumb and it's bad to be smart. You know, do as the Romans do...when in Rome." 

Director

Steven Paul

Cast
Jerry Lewis - Wilbur Swain / Caleb Swain
Madeline Kahn - Eliza Swain / Letitia Swain
Marty Feldman - Sylvester

John Abbott - Dr. Frankenstein
Jim Backus - The President of the United States
Samuel Fuller - Col. Sharp
Merv Griffin - T.V. Anchorman
Pat Morita - Chinese Ambassador Ah Fong

Orson Welles - Voice of The Beaver 

The nostalgia and marketability of the 1980s and 1990s still linger. I've discussed it before: the kids of the '80s and '90s are today's movie producers and toy marketing executives. The IP that was popular when I was a kid still lurks around in toy aisles, on movie screens, and wherever other merchandise is sold. Sometimes it's like watching geriatrics shuffle around the nursing home trying to convince the youths they're still culturally significant. In reality, by "nursing home," I mean YouTube and podcasts.
Some properties, however, are remembered more for being odd than for actually being worth remembering. They fall into the "Hey, do you remember..." category when it comes to film and television. Videos about these oddities are given the biographical treatment with documentary videos about how they were made, why they were made, and what happened while they were being made. I think a lot of people simply call that stuff "cult."
Well, one '80s movie that nobody seems to remember, even barely, is director Steven Paul's 1984 sci-fi comedy "Slapstick of Another Kind." And yet, here I am writing about it.
This is no small comedy. It's loosely based on author Kurt Vonnegut's 1976 novel, "Slapstick." It stars three giant comedy legends—Jerry Lewis, Madeline Kahn, and Marty Feldman.
It also features Mr. Miyagi himself, Pat Morita, along with the voice acting of none other than Orson Welles.
But who still talks about this movie? Does anyone who lived through the decade even remember hearing about it?
Honestly, I don't know. I don't think it's even considered a "cult classic."
Regardless, if anyone does recall this movie, my heart goes out to them. This is one of the worst movies I have ever seen. I sincerely mean that! 

Madeline Kahn and Jerry Lewis as
Eliza and Wilbur Swain in "Slapstick of Another Kind."

I never heard of it until I saw it pop up on the Hoopla app as I went looking for sci-fi movies to watch and comment on.
In this movie, Jerry Lewis and Madeline Kahn play the wealthy and beautiful couple Caleb and Letitia Swain, whom the press has dubbed "the most beautiful of all the beautiful people." Well, they're about to welcome a set of twins into the world.
However, their newborn twins, Wilbur and Eliza, are born grotesquely deformed. The doctors think they'll be mentally disabled. Their personal doctor, Dr. Frankenstein (John Abbott), thinks the twins won't survive past a few months.
So, Caleb and Letitia isolate their children inside a mansion with a private staff. However, the twins, also played by Jerry Lewis and Madeline Kahn, end up living in the mansion for 15 years, acting completely stupid in imitation of the staff's behavior. The staff, by the way, is headed by the butler, Sylvester (Marty Feldman), who certainly fits the position perfectly.
Meanwhile, the People's Republic of China has cut ties with other nations because they've made a scientific breakthrough in shrinking humans.
The Chinese Ambassador, Ah Fong (Pat Morita), thinks these twins are actually the most extraordinarily intelligent geniuses the Earth has ever known. He thinks if they put their big heads together, they could easily solve every problem in the world. How he comes to that conclusion, nobody in the audience knows.
Caleb and Letitia haven't seen their kids in that entire 15 years.
They learn that Wilbur and Eliza have a telepathic connection with each other and are virtually omniscient when they touch heads.
For reasons I can't explain, this makes Letitia worry that her kids will develop an incestuous relationship. How she comes to that outlandish conclusion is beyond me.
So, she and Caleb decide to separate the twins by sending Wilbur to some kind of military academy where scientific experiments are conducted. Eliza will have to stay in the mansion.
Wilbur and Eliza completely break down emotionally without each other.
So, after an awkward and weird song, Eliza goes to find her brother, and the two are soon reunited.
Then their real father, an alien called "The Beaver" (voiced by Orson Welles), shows up. The Beaver determines that Earth just isn't ready for the superhuman intelligence Wilbur and Eliza collectively possess. So, he takes them back to their true home. The end. Oh, that's a spoiler. Sorry!
There's no creative or impressive way to express my thoughts. This is one of the most painfully stupid and pointless movies I have ever seen. I didn't just pick those two words haphazardly. This movie is stupid and pointless.
I struggled to stay focused on the story and follow along. I struggled not to avert my attention over to my phone or to whatever else was around me. My attention span was stretched thin as I watched. I missed much of the dialogue so some of that was lost on me. But I honestly think I didn't miss anything crucial. 
The story is impressively unfocused. I say "impressively" because while I've seen my share of unfocused movies before, I can't compare any unfocused movie I've seen to "Slapstick of Another Kind."

Lewis and Kahn as Caleb and Letitia Swain along with Samuel Fuller.

This pointless waste of time tosses the audience one weird and nonsensical idea after another. There's the premise of miniature Chinese people, something that has absolutely nothing to do with the ultimate plot of the story; fears of incest; telepathy; world-saving intelligence; aliens; ugly twins; and a random song from Madeleine Kahn. She sings this depressing ditty in the mansion's attic as terrible stop-motion bats fly around her. Oh, and Marty Feldman runs around without his pants on in too many of his scenes. It's one big mixture of pointless and sometimes uncomfortable plot points. All these tropes could support a strange comedy. I am not above watching strange and surreal comedies. I've seen a few that I enjoyed.
But all these ideas and plot points, used so often haphazardly in "Slapstick of Another Kind," do not give the story any sort of coherency. It's just a big bag of disconnected cheap gags, cheesy jokes, and goofy faces made at the camera. I've seen funnier infomercials.
I know this won't sound right, but while watching this, there was a moment when I hoped that no one would walk in on me as I watched Jerry Lewis and Madeline Kahn act like toddlers in baby blue and pink onesies for the first 20 or 30 minutes of their initial screen time. It's embarrassing and awkward to watch.
Surely someone in this movie—maybe Jerry Lewis himself—must have thought to himself at some point, "What the hell am I doing here?"

Speaking of Jerry, back in 2016, the Hollywood Reporter interviewed ten acting legends in their 90s and beyond still alive and working. One of those legends was Jerry Lewis. While the other interviews seemed to have gone well, Jerry's interview is anything but cheerful. I bet if the interviewer from the Hollywood Reporter, Andy Lewis, wanted to really irk Jerry Lewis even more than he alread was, he would have thrown caution to the wind and asked him, "'Slapstick of Another Kind.' Why?" The interview was already unsalvageable almost as soon as it began. I'll share that interview down below. It's better than any clip from this stain of a film. 
The pacing, aside from the comedy, is also awkward. With all this nonsense happening, the movie takes its sweet time establishing its premise. The audience has to sit through 40 minutes of confusing and uncomfortable scenes, such as the opening scene of Jerry Lewis in the hospital waiting room, refusing to look at his deformed children, all played for laughs. I didn't laugh once. Not once! Nothing was funny in this movie. None of the performances. None of the jokes. Nothing. 

The major turning point of the story occurs when it's revealed that the twins actually have extraordinary intelligence. But the movie doesn't do much with that premise. It's like the writers didn't know what to do with this crucial point in the story.
The entire movie deserves to remain in its place of obscurity. Hopefully, that place of obscurity exists several feet underground...or somewhere up in space. Nobody would find it up there.

40) Godzilla, Mothra and King Ghidorah: Giant Monsters All-Out Attack (2001)

(3.5 out of 5)

"The long-lasting peace has dimmed the terror of Godzilla."

Director

Shusuke Kaneko

Cast
Chiharu Niiyama - Yuri Tachibana
Ryudo Uzaki - Taizō Tachibana
Masahiro Kobayashi - Mitsuaki Takeda
Shiro Sano - Haruki Kadokura
Hideyo Amamoto - Hirotoshi Isayama
Mizuho Yoshida - Godzilla
Akira Ohashi - King Ghidorah
Rie Ota - Baragon

I've been anxious to review another Godzilla movie lately. And this one has been at the top of my list for a long time. This is the Godzilla movie with the best title! In fact, it might be the best title of any movie in the history of movies. 

We have Godzilla, Mothra, AND King Ghidorah in one epic showdown film. And not being satisfied with name-dropping these three monumental icons on Japanese monster movies, the title continues with more description. Giant monsters! Hell yeah, giant monsters! Bring me some of that! And what are these giants doing? They're attacking! But they're not just "attacking." They're all-out attacking. Only monsters of a smaller stature "attack." These are giant monsters. No mercy. No pulling any punches. It's all-out destruction and giant monster-attacking madness - sort of! 

This is the 26th Godzilla movie, and the 3rd movie of the Millennium era of Godzilla movies. I go into depth on the various Godzilla "eras" over on my other platform, 1000daysofhorror.blogspot.com where I reviewed the first 15 Godzilla movies in a thread I titled, "Halloween 2022's Godzilla-Maniapalloza Extravaganza #13...For the Love of Godzilla. All Hail, the Monster King!" Just look for my review of the first Godzilla movie, "Gojira" from 1954. 

Before I launch into this review like a guy whose idea of culture is a monster movie marathon suddenly asked to critique high art, I'll mention that I threw those older Godzilla reviews onto my horror blog. I've reconsidered that life decision. Godzilla seems to fit just as well in the Sci-Fi realm. So. I'm including this review on this platform. Plus, I haven't reviewed a Sci-Fi movie in a while. I'm overdue. This movie will do just fine!

"Godzilla, Mothra and King Ghidorah: Giant Monsters All-Out Attack," takes place fifty years after Godzilla first terrorized Japan, caused all sorts of destruction, and roared his way into all our hearts back in 1954. While I love this title rolling off my tongue, I'll shorten it from here on out to "All-Out Attack." Or maybe I'll refer to it as "GMKGGMAOA." Or maybe not. I'll stick with "All-Out Attack."  

This time, Japan is staring into the scary eyes of a reborn monster. And not only is Godzilla on a warpath, but he's also possessed by the restless and angry ghosts of those who were killed during the Pacific War. 

Godzilla rises from the depths of the ocean to decimate Japan. One old Japanese mystic named Hirotoshi Isayama (Hideyo Amamoto) awakens the three guardian monsters of Japan to protect the nation - Baragon (God of the Earth), Mothra (God of the Sea), and King Ghidorah (God of the Sky). These monsters certainly have Japan's back on this. 

Godzilla takes on King Ghidorah as Mothra flies in from behind in
"Godzilla, Mothra and King Ghidorah: Giant Monsters All-Out Attack."

Meanwhile, an overzealous TV reporter, Yuri Tachibana (Chiharu Niiyama), digs deep into the facts of Godzilla, trying to find out why he's coming back now. While she's journalism-ing, Japan's military forces break out all the big guns as they fight alongside their nation's monster guardians to take down Godzilla. 

Battles are waged. Things explode. Buildings are ripped apart. Civilians are lost. Monster battles monster. Can they take down the "King of the Monsters?" And if they do, will he truly die once and for all? It's an "all-out attack" indeed as monster, monster, and monster take on possessed monster! 

Based on the title, I initially expected a cavalcade of attacking monsters. But stupid me, I was paying more attention to the "giant monsters all-out attack" part of the title. I failed to consider the fact that only three monsters are named at the beginning of the title. Those are the three monsters who appear in the movie. So, I can't fault the movie for not meeting my poorly deduced expectations of seeing a lot more monsters duking it out. That's on me. So, the movie delivered exactly what it said it was going to deliver. 

Plus, the movie has Godzilla take on Baragon who's not even in the title. 

Baragon is a horned, dinosaur-like, burrowing monster who first appeared in Toho's 1965 kaiju movie, "Frankenstein vs. Baragon," also known by the American title, "Frankenstein Conquers the World." It's a real movie!

He would later show up in the 1968 film "Destroy All Monsters" which is a much more monstrous monster brawl in the Godzilla-verse than this movie is. It's also Baragon's first appearance on-screen with the King of the Monsters himself. And now, Baragon returns again for this new round! 

"All-Out Attack" came out soon after the release of the 1998 American movie "Godzilla" with Matthew Broderick. I call it, "The Simpsons Godzilla" as the film stars several of the voice actors from the sitcom "The Simpsons." It's a movie that's often despised and looked at with disdain among Godzilla fans, and for good reason.

"All-Out Attack" opens with an exchange between two Japanese soldiers sitting in on a military briefing as a General explains what happened to the U.S. just a few years prior. It sums up the sentiment a lot of people have towards the Simpsons Godzilla. 

"At the end of the last century, a similar monster to Godzilla attacked the United States. The existence of abnormal organisms have since been reported around the world," one solider says. 

"That was Godzilla after all, right," the other soldier says. 
"The Americans reported it as that. Our academics don't agree."

Burn! The 1998 movie was terrible!

"Godzilla 2000: Millenium" came out in 1999, sandwiched between the Simpsons Godzilla and "All-Out Attack" but I don't think it addresses the American version. "All-Out Attack" certainly did. 

This movie, like a lot of other Godzilla movies, builds up to the big climax at the end. 

The movie does drag on a bit, but it delivers action, carnage, and explosions. All the stuff audiences what in a Godzilla movie. 

The special effects that are at times dated and obvious while at other times impressive and satisfying. It's a mix when it comes to the special effects. Plus, the miniatures are well made and really impressive! 

And as I mentioned, the title doesn't deceive.   

Godzilla appears much more frightening, especially as he is all-out evil with his Linda Blair from "The Exorcist" looking milky white eyes. All that's missing is Godzilla speaking in languages he never studied and telling his enemy monsters where their deceased mothers are and what they're doing down there. 

Seriously, this evil detail matches his relentless anger and destructive tendencies. It's worth noting that there have been Godzilla movies before this where Godzilla turns out to be the good guy in the story. Not in this movie. "All-Out Attack" makes the audience want to see Godzilla taken down, especially as civilians suffer all the more. 

Godzilla versus Baragon because giant monsters all-out attack, 
as the title suggests.

The movie doesn't rely completely on the giant monsters fight nor on scientific explanations as to why this is happening. Instead, it embraces Japanese folklore as Godzilla is possessed by the restless spirits of those killed during World War II. Meanwhile King Ghidorah, Mothra, and Baragon are the guardian monsters that protect Japan.

The commentary on Japan's memory of World War II is another stand-out theme of the film. In one scene, Admiral Taizô Tachibana recalls the time Godzilla first attacked Japan back in 1954 as seen in the first movie. 

He says, "I vividly remember as if it were today. Fifty years ago. The sky was a bloody red... buildings and railroads trampled... and a huge, dark mass... slowly advancing through the flames. Its face looked like a devil, furious with hate. I ran and ran among the crowd helplessly seeking refuge. When I realized it, I was separated from my parents. I never saw them again. Not a single day goes by where I don't remember the wretched cries of the dying."

He warns that Japan has forgotten the sacrifices of those who died in the war and recognizes that Godzilla has become an angry vessel for those forgotten souls. "All-Out Attack" is a rare gem of a Godzilla flick since it embraces Japan's memory of the past rather than simply putting on another monster brawl.

But it is, in the end, a Godzilla movie. So, it needs that epic monster fight. 

This movie restores a strong and welcomed sense of danger and suspense. Being possessed, Godzilla is unstoppable. And the human casualties aren't mere casualties to be forgotten. The movie pays more attention to those victims so the audience can cheer all the more for Godzilla's final take-down. 

I admit I'm more familiar with the initial era of Godzilla movies than I am with the Millenium era, which starts with "Godzilla 2000: Millennium" (1999) and ends with "Godzilla: Final Wars (2004)." 

"All-Out Attack" is the third movie in the era. So, I don't know how this compares with the other movies in there. But it does entice in me a desire to check out those movies. Unlike the previous Showa era and the Heisei era, the Millenium era consists of standalone films. 

Speaking of Baragon up above, my complaint is that he disappears way too quickly. 

He shows up and doesn't survive Godzilla's warpath. It's a missed opportunity for a three-way brawl against Godzilla! 

As die-hard kaiju fans probably already know, director Shusuke Kaneko previously sat in the director's chair for a rival Japanese monster franchise, Gamera. Kaneko directed "Gamera: Guardian of the Universe" (1995), "Gamera 2: Attack of Legion" (1996), and "Gamera 3: Revenge of Iris" (1999). 

This is definitely one of the better Godzilla movies in the entire franchise, even as it adds a more, albeit darker, fantasy element as continues the story directly from the very first Godzilla movie. When Godzilla returns, Japan is depicted as a stronger nation 

And it certainly has the best title of any Japanese monster movie! I love a good Godzilla movie, especially on a Sunday afternoon with sunlight spilling through the blinds into the living room. This one delivered everything I want from a Godzilla film.

39) Invaders from Mars (1986)

(3  out of 5)

"Oh, boy! This is going to be a mess."

Director

Toby Hooper

Cast

Hunter Carson - David Gardner
Karen Black - Linda Magnuson
Timothy Bottoms - George Gardner
Laraine Newman - Ellen Gardner
James Karen - Gen. Climet Wilson
Louise Fletcher - Mrs. McKeltch
Bud Cort - Dr. Mark Weinstein
Jimmy Hunt - The Police Chief


Steven Spielberg's recent alien flick, "Disclosure Day," hit theaters on June 12, just a few days ago. Spielberg's sales pitch among many for his movie was that it would shake people's faith, particularly that of Christians. I'll get to that absurdly stupid statement when I comment on his movie. 

Anyways, everyone has been talking about his fourth alien movie after "Close Encounters of the Third Kind," "E.T. The Extra-terrestrial," and "War of the Worlds." Not me, though. Not yet, anyways. No...I'm going back to another flick that, thankfully, didn't try to stir up faithlessness. That's the 1986 movie, "Invaders from Mars," directed by Tobe Hooper. How has it shaken people over the years? In a nutshell, it hasn't. In fact, with all this IP from the 1980s still alive and well and selling seemingly fine at Walmart, Target, and wherever else nostalgic stuff is sold, "Invaders from Mars" is a movie that doesn't seem to be very well remembered.

Occasionally, I find myself wondering if Hollywood's obsession with 1980s nostalgia will only end once every movie, television show, toy line, and any other character or mascot from that decade—which was 40 years ago—has been remade, rebooted, reimagined, or recycled. Maybe the entertainment industry will simply keep remaking remakes until everyone who actually remembers the 1980s is gone.
What I never really considered is that in the 1980s, Hollywood was remaking movies from 30 to 40 years prior. The 1986 sci-fi horror movie "Invaders from Mars" is a remake of the 1953 sci-fi horror movie of the same name, directed by William Cameron Menzies.
The 1986 remake is as typical an 80s movie as such a period film can be. I haven't seen the original movie, but I assume it's a typical 50s sci-fi film as that decade was the atomic age of horror and science fiction. Back then, aliens and giant mutant monsters were the main staples of scary movies.
In this movie, Hunter Carson plays young David Gardner, a rather happy kid fascinated with space and astronomy. He has two loving parents, George (Timothy Bottoms) and Ellen Gardner (Laraine Newman), who support his interests—though not as much as he would like after David witnesses a UFO land in the woods behind their house. They don't believe him when he wakes them up after seeing the massive spaceship land late one night.

Hunter Carson in "Invaders from Mars."

The next day, his dad seems to be acting unusual. He's certainly not himself and suddenly seems eager to take David out into the woods. David takes his concerns about his dad to his mom, who at this point still seems like her normal self. That soon changes, though. His mom isn't concerned, and only starts to worry when George doesn't come home the following evening. 
David notices other people in town acting as strangely as his dad, including his teacher, Mrs. McKeltch (Louise Fletcher). As more people in town stop acting like themselves and instead behave as though something else is controlling them, David discovers that the aliens who landed behind his house have created an elaborate underground base. 

He sneaks inside this base and sees the aliens along with what they're up to. 

Now both of his parents are under alien control, just like his teacher and many others in town. So he goes to his school nurse, Linda Magnuson (Karen Black), for help. David doesn't have anyone else he can trust. Of course, she has trouble believing his claims, but it doesn't take long for her to realize David's outlandish claims are actually fact..
With what they each know, David and Nurse Magnuson go to military authorities at a nearby base where David's dad works. It becomes a race against time for the military to take down these Martian invaders and destroy their base before they conquer the world. 

Krang from "Teenage Mutant
Ninja Turtles" bears a striking 
resemblance to the head alien in
"Invaders from Mars."

For me, this is the "Poltergeist" of sci-fi movies—minus Steven Spielberg trying to destroy my Catholic faith with some fantastical movie based on pure speculation. 

Unfortunately, "Invaders from Mars" doesn't feel thought-through or rehearsed. The line delivery in many scenes sounds scripted. While being an alien movie, it's more of a hodge-podge of horror, fantasy, sci-fi and comedy. The transitions don't work smoothly. It's hard to tell of some of the movie's flaws were done on purpose or not. Seeing as how the movie over-all is over-the-top, I'll give Hooper the benefit of the doubt. 
The effects are practical, and the overall storyline moves along smoothly. And being over the top, "Invaders from Mars" is a quintessential, worthwhile popcorn alien flick. The audience gets exactly what it expects.
It's also a typical 80s movie. What does that mean? What is a "typical" 80s movie? When it comes to the current trend of marketable 80s nostalgia still bringing in the dough in 2026, a "typical 80s movie" has a storyline with a string of characters who are, well, very marketable. Those characters and storylines can bring in large audiences—or at least they could in the 1980s. The good guys are easily distinguishable from the bad guys.
Like many other "typical 80s movies" the plot can be explained in one sentence. For this movie: aliens arrive from Mars to invade until a kid catches on to their plan.
Like most other 80s movies, there's an optimistic tone, even when all humanity is threatened. There's usually a heroic memorable lead to provide the sense of optimism common.
Unlike many 80s movies—which is what makes this one stand out a little—it doesn't have a happy, uplifting ending. The rest of the 80s formula is present:as an ordinary hero makes a fantastic discovery, and of course, nobody believes him (except, in this case, his school nurse and a military general who happens to know his dad).
As the threat emerges (invasive Martians), the action escalates to an epic showdown. But, as I said, the ending is neither happy nor optimistic in the way today's audiences might expect from a 1986 off-the-wall alien flick. Kudos for some originality. Or perhaps Tobe Hooper was aiming for a sequel. Add in practical yet detailed special effects, and "Invaders from Mars" fits squarely as a typical 80s movie.
The special effects are worth the experience since they're done with puppetry rather than CGI. The aliens were created by Stan Winston, who also worked on "The Terminator," "Jurassic Park," "Aliens," "The Thing," and "Predator." They give the movie a B–sci-fi feel. 

Louise Fletcher as Mrs. McKeltch in "Invaders from Mars."

And speaking of typical, the film is also typical Tobe Hooper. It demonstrates his storytelling style just as much as it reflects the "typical 80s" mold. Like his other movies, this one centers on a terrifying event seen through the eyes of an ordinary person—in this case, David. This approach is also seen in Hooper's other films such as "Poltergeist" and "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre."
Like those movies, there's a helpless, nightmarish tone. David is initially the only person who catches on to what's happening. Not only is that a major burden on his shoulders, but he also has to convince adults that aliens are taking control of people. Who's going to believe this kid? On top of that, those he trusts most—his parents and his teacher—are now like strangers to him.
By the way, Mrs. McKeltch, played by "Nurse Ratched" herself, Louise Fletcher, is a truly unforgettable character. She's a stereotypical teacher of the Silent Generation who completely has it in for young David. Honestly, she should be a sci-fi/horror movie icon. She's strict, authoritative, and a monster behind her powdered face. 

Fletcher, well known for playing rigid characters, was superbly cast. She glares at David without blinking, with a rigid posture and sudden unhinged bursts of anger. And when she does smile, it's only when she has David right where she wants him. Fletcher takes this character go from strict to predatory. Some of the most memorably frightening scenes involve Mrs. McKeltch.

There is a call-back to the original movie. In the 1953 movie, Jimmy Hunt plays David. Hunt has a cameo in this remake as a cop who stops at David's house after his mother calls police when George doesn't come home after work. Hunt has the line in that scene, "I haven't been up around here since I was a kid" clearly referencing his role in the original movie. So, that's fun!

"Invaders from Mars" feels more like a child's nightmare than a typical, formulaic alien invasion movie. That aspect makes it more suspenseful and engaging. Its strength lies in its nightmarish, unsettling tone rather than just depicting the spectacle of aliens landing and melting peoples brains. It also features a colorful yet creepy atmosphere with its grotesque practical effects as an added bonus.
Underneath everything is a layer of the playful yet frightening tone of 1950s science fiction. As a remake, its love for early sci-fi cinema shines through. It has its campiness while being a fun experience.

38) Coneheads (1993)

(2 out of 5)

"We come from France." 

Director

Steve Barron

Cast

Dan Aykroyd - Beldar Conehead
Jane Curtin - Prymaat Conehead
Michelle Burke - Connie Conehead
Michael McKean - Dep.Comm. Gorman Seedling
David Spade - INS Agent Eli Turnbull
Jason Alexander - Larry Farber
Lisa Jane Persky - Lisa Farber
Chris Farley - Ronnie Guestsetter
Phil Hartman - Marlax Zanthstrom

Laraine Newman - Laarta Zaanthstrom

If you asked me or anyone else who knows a good movie when they see one what the best movies based on a skit from "Saturday Night Live" (SNL) are, the answer will likely be either "The Blues Brothers" (1980) "Wayne's World" (1992) or both. Well, no one asked me, but I'll toss my commentary out there anyways. Those two are the best SNL movies to date.

I've counted 11 movies based on SNL skits including those two I've just mentioned as well as "Wayne's World 2" (1993) and "Blues Brothers 2000." 
There's also the SNL movies "It’s Pat" (1994), "Stuart Saves His Family" (1995), "A Night at the Roxbury" (1998), "Superstar" (1999), "The Ladies Man" (2000), and "MacGruber" (2010). They all stink, but at varying degrees of lousiness. And then there's "Coneheads" from 1993. It's perhaps the strangest of the SNL movie line-up. 

The movie "Coneheads" went through a short-lived life of popularity back when it was released. I place emphasis on the word "short-lived." Now, it's an oddity of the past for those who remember it, or even for those late to the game. 

The concept started on SNL in 1977 with a skit about aliens from the planet Remulak who are stranded on Earth and try to assimilate to the American way of life. The joke is that they can't blend in well primarily because they have big cone-shaped heads. They go through all the motions, albeit awkwardly. 

They also eat a lot of food, or as they put it, "consume large quantities." 

In the skits, Dan Aykroyd and Jane Curtin play parental units Beldar, the familial patriarch and Prymaat, the matriarch. Comedian Laraine Newman plays their daughter Connie on the show. 

And the last name "Conehead" is their attempt at an Angelized version of their Remulak name "Clorhone." The last thing these Coneheads want to do is stand out. Of course, everything about them stands out. There's your comedy! 

The Coneheads speak in a stiff, overly formal, robotic monotone manner. They treat every situation and encounter like someone referring to a technical manual. They take everything literally because they're aliens who don't understand human behavior in general. Social norms aren’t instinctive to them. 

Michelle Burke, Dan Aykroyd and Jane Curtin in "Coneheads."

Basically, they approach everything in day-to-day life such as work, family life and human relationships with rigid logic and alien curiosity trying to figure out the purpose behind it all. This is how the comedy behind the strangeness of human customs surfaces. 

That's what this movie is all about. 

In "Coneheads," Beldar (Dan Aykroyd) and Prymaat (Jane Curtin) crash-land on Earth near Manhattan after they fail at an attempted invasion. So, now that they're stuck here, all they can do is wait to be rescued. 

In the meantime, they try to blend in while their rescue ship arrives. They have a long wait ahead of them. 

What's funny is that other people around them try not to notice their cone-shaped heads. Beldar takes on a fake identity, goes by the name Donald R. DeCicco, and obtains a fake ID and false Social Security number. 

Government agents, however, are aware that these aliens are in town illegally. INS agents led by Deputy Commissioner Gorman Seedling (Michael McKean) and Agent Eli Turnbull (David Spade) make it a priority to apprehend "Donald R. DeCicco."  

Otherwise, the Coneheads live a quiet life, and even have a daughter whom they name Conjaab, or "Connie" for short, played by Michelle Burke. 

Several years later, when Connie is already a teenager, the Coneheads are finally contacted by their rescue ship. 

Beldar is torn between returning to Remulak and conquering the Earth as originally planned or staying where he is on Earth for the sake of his family's happiness. 

Seeding and Turnbull are still pursuing them and won't quit until they have enough evidence to apprehend them. They even go so far as to disguise themselves as Jehovah's Witnesses to get inside their house and ask them questions. 

The late Chris Farley stars as Ronnie, Connie's boyfriend for added hilarity.  

"Coneheads" is nothing more than a ridiculous comedy. That's certainly no revelation, even for those who've never seen it. I'm sure the title alone makes that clear. 

With the topic of illegal immigration where it is in today's social climate, the film certainly says a lot even as a comedy. 

The manner in which the Coneheads speak gets tiring quickly. By the end of the movie, it's grating! And the fish-out-of-water premise is stretched very thin. 

Chris Farley as "Ronnie" in "Coneheads."

I admit I was a little fascinated to see how Beldar and Prymaat would react at seeing Connie act like a typical teenage Earth girl trying to be independent of her parents and do what all her peers are doing. And, thankfully, Connie doesn't speak with the same monotone manner as her parents, but she still has the same superior intelligence as they do. I think she's the best character in the movie. Kudos to Michelle Burke for portraying both a superior intelligent alien with all the mannerisms and personality of a typical teenage girl. She pulls it off well. 

Otherwise, the comedy is repetitive. Look how the Coneheads act in this situation. Now look how they act in this new situation. Look how better they are at everything than humans are. Do you see how humans pretend not to notice their oddities and quarks? That's the comedy through the whole movie. And after being on Earth for eighteen years or so, they still act just as nieve and surprised at the encounters that fall before them.    

Their cone shaped heads is the only truly funny setup in the movie, save for a few random jokes here and there. It's not enough though to carry the movie along all the way to the end. 

The site gags littered throughout, particularly how much food these aliens eat, did get some laughs out of me but they don't help save the picture. That gag of the Coneheads consuming large quantities of food is used over and over again as well.  

To its credit, Aykroyd and Curtin are great in their roles, reacting comedically as best as they can, and just doing as much as they can with what they have to work with. Plus, there's a cavalcade of cameos and stars in the cast, including a lot of former cast members from SNL. 

Everything else, including a lot of the comedy, is simply weak or overly used. 

"Coneheads" is another alien sci-fi comedy that only stands out among the rest simply because it's based on SNL content. Otherwise, it's not that different than any other ridiculous alien comedy. 

37) Time After Time (1979)

(4 out of 5)

"First, Zodiac. And now this."

Director
Nicholas Meyer

Cast
Malcolm McDowell - H.G. Wells
David Warner - John Leslie Stevenson
Mary Steenburgen - Amy Robbins
Charles Cioffi - Police Lt. Mitchell
Patti D'Arbanville - Shirley
Joseph Maher - Adams
Corey Feldman - Boy at the museum

In my post titled "My Basement Picks" over on my platform dontfastforward.blogspot.com in which I list my favorite movies, I included the 1979 mystery-thriller movie "Murder by Decree." It's a crime thriller in which Sherlock Holmes investigates the Jack the Ripper murders.  

In that commentary, I mention that Sherlock Holmes versus Jack the Ripper is a fitting and somehow familiar rivalry though the two never really went up against each other in any literary work or film adaptation...except "Murder by Decree." I did mention in that same post the 1965 movie "A Study in Terror" as it depicts Holmes and Watson investigating the Whitechapel murders and tracking down a fictionalized Ripper-like figure.

Otherwise, "Murder by Decree" is the only movie that I can find depicting Holmes investigating the Ripper. Still, Holmes and Jack seem just as familiar a feud as Batman and the Joker, or Van Helsing and Count Dracula.
In the 1979 sci-fi movie "Time After Time," it's H.G. Wells who's in pursuit of Jack the Ripper. 

Back in my bachelorhood era 15+ years ago, I had this habit of perusing my local library for movies I had never seen nor heard of and checking them out. That's how I came across titles like "The Triplets of Belleville," "Everything Is Illuminated," and the Wes Anderson movies "Bottle Rocket" and "Rushmore." I find Wes Anderson's movies painfully boring, by the way. Just saying. I've seen a few and either found myself bored, asleep, or both. 
Anyways "Time After Time" was one of my finds. I've only watched it once before but never forgot it.

It's an underrated movie. It plays out like a novel. And it has an imaginative underlying "what-if" premise. 

What if H.G. Wells actually created a time machine, and then Jack the Ripper jumped into that time machine, travelled to modern day (well, 1979 modern day) America, and tried to blend in while continuing his killing spree? What would that be like? 

Malcolm McDowell as H.G. Wells in "Time After Time."

This fish-out-of-water science fiction movie starts in 1893 London as the notorious Jack the Ripper has committed yet another murder. A police officer happens to be close as Jack has just strangled a streetwalker as is his modus operandi. Now, the law is practically on his tail.

Meanwhile, writer H.G. Wells (Malcolm McDowell) has some colleagues over to his home for dinner and to show off his latest invention, a working time machine. His friend, John Leslie Stevenson (David Warner) arrives late to dinner. I wonder why?

The local constabulary are in the neighborhood hunting down Jack since he just struck again nearby. They come by Wells' home to search for their killer. 

Wells welcomes them in, and they find a doctor's bag that belongs to Stevenson. But they don't find Stevenson. 

This bag contains evidence pointing to Jack the Ripper due to the manner of the murders and the tools he must have used. 

Stevenson escapes the cops by jumping into Wells' time machine and travelling to the future. However, he fails to take a key Wells made to prevent the machine from returning automatically. It returns back to Wells home, and he can chase his old friend wherever in time he has fled to. 

It turns out Stevenson is hiding in San Francisco in the year 1979. When Wells travels to the future, he finds himself in a museum exhibit dedicated to himself. That's where his time machine is kept in the future. 

Wells doesn't waste time trying to hunt down Stevenson, stop him from murdering anyone else, and bring him back to his own period. 

Wells is also disappointed (for lack of a better word) to find out his utopian theory that by 1979 the world will be free of crime, war, and violence is completely wrong.

Bewildered and intrigued by the modern world and how advanced civilization has become; he seeks out Stevenson/ Jack the Ripper around San Francisco while observing how the modern world behaves. 

Since Wells can't spend old British money, he steps into a Bank to exhange it. There, he meets Amy Robbins (Mary Steenburgen) who falls in love with him thinking he's just a tourist from Europe. Little does she know his true identity. But she's willing to help him maneuver around the big city. 

When Wells catches up to Stevenson, who believes he's in his element thanks to the violence and crime around him in the city and throughout the world, Wells struggles to capture him and convince authorities that Jack the Ripper himself is going on a murder spree around San Francisco. 

Soon, Stevenson sets his crosshairs on Amy, primarily to dissuade Wells from continuing his pursuit. Wells will need to risk everything, including is utopian idealism, to save her, stop Jack the Ripper and get him back to the time machine. 

I'm keen on the entire "fish-out-of-water" element of the story with Wells experiencing the modern day - seeing how society functions, eating at a McDonald's, and experiencing what the socio-political atmosphere is like. Though I would love to have seen more of that, I appreciate that more depictions and focus on it would have distracted from the actual plot

So, I can't fault the movie for keeping Wells more focused at the urgent task at hand rather than wandering around 1979's San Francisco and playing up the out-of-place role.  

David Warner and Mary Steenburgen.

I also get a personal kick out of seeing specific locations around San Francsico  as they were back in 1979. I grew up across the Bay in Oakland so I'm very familiar with San Francisco. Some places still look the same. Plus, there are ash trays on the tables inside the McDonald's that Wells goes into when he stops for something to eat. It's also comical seeing this literary giant depicted ordering a burger, fries and a cup of tea at a McD's. 

The movie doesn't stray far into the premise of Wells outside his own time. It stays focused on his pursuit of Jack the Ripper. 

As I mentioned, the layout of the movie feels like a novel, especially when the romance between Wells and Amy Robbins develops. The story is based on Karl Alexander's novel "Time After Time." So, there's that. 

Plus, the premise, which is an entertaining "what-if" scenario, unfolds in a chapter-like way. The film opens in Victorian London with Wells's philosophy - a philosophy I don't particularly agree with, but I'll save that commentary for another time - and blends into a chase through time. It converges with the other plot point of Wells being that "fish-out-of-water" as he takes in how wrong his prediction of the future based on his philosophy actually is. 

In one scene, Wells figures out that Stevenson is hiding in a hotel room at the Hyatt Regency near the Embarcadero. 

There in the hotel room, Stevenson turns on the television to show Wells how violent the world has become. It's not the social utopia Wells was certain it would be. 
"The future isn't what you thought. It's what I am," Stevenson says. 

When Wells says neither of them belong in that time period, Stevenson says, "We don't belong here? On the contrary, Herbert. I belong here completely and utterly. I'm home."
The story even adds humor to this premise.

When Wells takes his concerns about Jack the Ripper running through San Francisco to the police, he's questioned by a police detective. 

When the cop asks his name, Wells doesn't want to give his real name, and he thinks the cop surely doesn't know about popular literary characters of Victorian England. So, he refers to himself as "Sherlock Holmes" unaware that Holmes is no obscure character even in 1970s American pop culture. 

Then, of course, after the chase, the story shifts to an element of rising danger, climax and resolution.

A romantic arc subplot is thrown in which begins as initial curiosity and some fireworks, leading to emotional bonding. Ideological tension arises that's resoloved in a bittersweet manner. It's very novel-like. 

"Time After Time" is driven by the characters, ideas, and thematic "what-if" exploration. It prioratizes that over being some kind of cinematic spectacle of time travel and novelty. 

It strikes me more as a clash between ideas and worlds from different time periods rather than just the thrill of travelling through time. It does that rather well. And it's entertaining. It has emotion, danger, and intrigue.   

A young Corey Feldman in "Time After Time."

After directing "Time After Time," director Nicholas Meyer went on to sit in the director's chair for another popular and well-respected sci-fi flick, "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan." 

In 1986, he was a writer for "Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home." His Star Trek directing continued with the 1991 movie "Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country." That's a respectable amount of Trek for one's resume!
Meyer also directed the 1997 James Bond movie, "Tomorrow Never Dies" and the animated Bible-based film, "Prince of Egypt" which is a favorite of mine.

British actor David Warner makes a fantastic villain both in this film, and in other roles. He also makes a great sympathetic character as well as seen in his performance as Bob Cratchit in the 1984 movie "A Christmas Carol" acting alongside George C. Scott.  

He's had some dark and sinister roles such as in "The Omen," "TRON," "Waxwork" and especially his role as "the Evil Genius" in the 1981 movie "Time Bandits." 

With his commanding voice that fits well with authoritative characters or evil-doing masterminds, and his dominating presence, Warner makes a great villianous character. Intelligence permeats off of him, and he can shift flawlessly between a terrifying and intimidating presence to a more campy side. When I say "campy," his role as Professor Jordan Perry in "Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles II: The Secret of the Ooze" comes to mind. He's unforgettable in that role, too. 

It's certainly worth mentioning that "Time After Time" isn't the only time Mary Steenburgen plays a character who falls in love with a time traveler. She did it all over again as "Clara Clayton" 11 years later in "Back to the Future III" alongside Christopher Lloyd as "Doc Brown."  

I don't think I've ever seen a Mary Steenburgen performance where she didn't play a character I felt sympathy for - the mother in "Ragtime," Karen Buckman in "Parenthood," and Betty Carver in "What's Eating Gilbert Grape." I remember seeing the 1985 Disney movie "One Magic Christmas" around the time of its release in which she stars in the lead role. All I remember from that movie is Mary Steenburgen's character. So, needless to say, I haven't seen a performance of hers I didn't like. That includes "Time After Time." 

A very young Corey Feldman has a cameo in "Time After Time." According to his filmography, it's Feldman's second film appearance. His first appearance is a small one in the 1978 movie "Born Again." I don't know how extensive his appearance is in that movie, or if he even has a speaking role. Here, he plays a kid in the museum who witnesses Wells's arrival from the past. 
"Time After Time" an underrated movie in the subgenre of  time-travel science fiction. It's a creative idea that manages to work thanks in large part to the brilliant cast, and the chemistry they pull off. And, thankfully, it doesn't come across as neither cheesy nor forced.