Stometer
Save your money for something good and enjoyable
Ella-May O'Brien
Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.
Sarita Rafferty
There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.
videorama-759-859391
I'd be the first to say, that this was one of those sci fi's with much more story than action, and it is, but it's the fascinating story itself, where if you think more and more about, layer upon layer, during or after, it becomes that more rewarding, sugar coated by a few really good performances. None the least is Kristofferson's too dry performance, as a crash investigator where a jet place has crashed (the cover poster for this movie, haunting) where everyone was burnt inside, before horrific and devastating impact ensued, which sees valuables and burnt up corpses, strewn across the crash site. Adding some real sexy spark to the investigation is Cheryl Ladd, (someone you couldn't more perfectly cast) a woman a thousand years (hence the title) from the future, who holds the key, sent back in time, parading as your not everyday hostess to check on how the investigation's going, while suffering a bit of a mishap, prefore, when dealing with a male hijacker. There are people out there, who will no doubt, think Millennium's the pits, where I liked it for it's story and performances, notably Ladd's, Brent Carver's as one ugly human, whose face looks to have been burnt up, who is Ladd's boss on the other side, where we also have an R2 D2 robot (Joy) who of course later on, went onto to play some interesting and vile characters, in some blood and guts horrors of the millennium. It's Daniel (Hill Street Blues) J Travanti's performance that will have you, as an avid and smug scientist, you so do hope, won't get on Kristofferson's nerves. Millennium does make you think, but on realistic ground, it is what it is, fiction, and a one of a kind sci-fi pic, a so unique one, that stands on it's own, and a very good one. Like the millennium itself, this is one you don't want to miss.
jackbenimble
I usually only rate films when they disappoint but this one was pretty good and only got a 5 rating which was undeserved. It's not a '10' film but you could do much worse than spend a bit of time watching this. It makes no pretence to be a great film and is all the better for it. The premise is interesting, the acting is good, and the whole film has a light comedic touch which lets you know it's not taking itself too seriously. Cheryl Ladd is marvellous and delicious! I don't like 'romantic' scenes in films. I find them embarrassing and I close my eyes or go to the bathroom or make a cup of tea in those parts. Here though the dynamic between Kristofferson and Ladd on their date is really good, original and funny. This is a scifi film with lots of character and beats the hell out of contemporary 'serious' politically correct sci fi like Avatar for example.
reiwaz
I saw this movie on opening day -- I was convinced by a fellow Science Fiction fanatic to see it. I still believe that it is the worst movie that I have seen (with an actual budget).Every aspect of the movie was bad: the acting, the dialogue, the plot, the pacing, the special effects (don't blame the year...there were plenty of movies that came out in the same year that had decent effects), ...the list goes on. The theater I was in started full, but did not stay that way. I was actually stunned into staying - I couldn't believe it was so bad. When the movie started showing events from another character's point of view, I lost it. I thought, "Not only can you see through the plot, you get to see it twice!" I started laughing uncontrollably, eventually slipping out of my seat onto the floor. I didn't understand how the movie could have gotten any worse, but it had. There are some who would say that you have to go into viewing this movie with an eye for camp. I would agree, except that this movie was marketed as, and had the tone of, a serious Sci-Fi flick. Also, if it wanted to be seen as camp, there should have been something that seemed intentionally humorous or at least intentionally awful (like a good 'B' movie). Barring that, if the movie had been unintentionally funny (like Battlefield Earth), I might have appreciated it a bit. As it was, it was dull, dry and painful to watch. The only entertainment I derived was from thinking about how bad it was.I'm fine with time travel paradoxes, and can even overlook continuity issues; I was not confused at all by the plot. I just believe that this movie was uninspiringly bad.
sobpatrick
I was literally rolling in the aisles laughing ...and then crying... and then laughing again. It's so bad that it's good ...and then bad again and then finally...after a long, long time (a millennium at least)... maybe good...? It was the two worst movies I've ever seen. Whatever doesn't kill you will only make you stronger. Have no fear - it's horrible - but it wont kill you. It has left me asking several questions - 1)who put money into making this? (it didn't require much) 2)Do they still have a job? 3)If so...why? 4)What bank would lend them the money to finance it? 5) Why besmirch the King of Kensington...Why? Alright this was a total mess on every level - still, it was very, very funny and for that reason I think I could recommend it, caution: in the end you might feel a bit ashamed for laughing so hard at something that wasn't meant to be laughed at. I'm so ashamed of myself!
