Portia Hilton Blistering performances.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Allison Davies The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

Tymon Sutton The acting is good, and the firecracker script has some excellent ideas.

Cristi_Ciopron The antagonism between Haldeman and the director is easily understood: one wanted a thoughtful conjecture about robots, faithfully transposed on screen; the other wanted mindless fun, and the director got his wish fulfilled, won. It was a clash of intentions and views. But regardless, the flick can very well be enjoyed for what it is, a yarn about robot jockeys. In terms of low—budget Sci—Fi, it's likable and exciting. Merely ordinary low—brow Sci—Fi; I used to search for such things. (Remember the Hauer Sci—Fi, the Van Damme Sci—Fi? Well, it's as mindless, and as likable.) Haldeman feels his chance was wasted. So give the director a break. It's not as if he had betrayed some matchless script; anyway, Haldeman's script can still be shot by another director. There are other two robot flicks from the early '90s, unrelated—but enjoyable as well.In his autobiography, 'Interim Report. An Autobiographical Ramble' (which every Sci—Fi fan should read), Haldeman wrote at length about the movie; he seems only moderately grudging. He enjoyed working with the leads—Graham and Mrs. Johnson.

udar55 In the future all national battles are settled on the robotic battlefield by ten story robots commanded by human robot jox. The battle is on for Alaska's resources and it is up to USA's Achilles (Gary Graham) to take it to the evil Russian rep and dirty fighter Alexander (Paul Koslo). This was Stuart Gordon's fourth film for Charles Band's Empire and the most expensive (rumored to be $10 million) in the company's short history. Was it the film that broke Band's bank? Possibly. It was filmed in 1987 but didn't get released until 1990 (via Triumph theatrically and RCA/Columbia on video) after Empire had gone bankrupt in 1988. Regardless, it is still a pretty entertaining film and - even though I've never seen a single second of Michael Bay's TRANSFORMERS films - I know it is a better film. The screenplay by sci-fi author Joe Haldeman touches on some good stuff, like genetic engineering and the gladiator mindset. Sure, there is some really cheesy stuff ("we can live"), but the cast is all game and you have to love Koslo's villain. The stop motion effects by David Allen are the real showstopper and they hold up pretty well. The miniatures are great too. Look for Stuart Gordon in a cameo as a bartender and Jeffrey Combs as an overly excited bystander. Crash and burn, my friends, crash and burn.

Coventry If you're going to make a cheap and cheesy post-apocalyptic Sci-Fi flick, set fifty years after a devastating nuclear war and revolving on political disputes being resolved through giant robotic fights, then you better do it right and make sure it's completely 100% over-the-top and absurd. This is what I missed in "Robot Jox", actually. The idea is totally bonkers, but the film's elaboration and overall tone is rather weighty and even a bit dramatic. At least, that's how I interpreted it. I've seen enough post-nuclear popcorn flicks to know that they should feature lunatic supportive characters as well as flamboyant vehicles and absurd set pieces. This movie has two robots, … and that's it. Apparently Stuart Gordon meant for his film to be a lot more light- headed and clichéd, but ran into artistic differences with the scriptwriter who had ambitions for something a little more sophisticated. See, I don't get that. You're talking to Stuart Gordon here! The man directed two of the coolest 80's horror flicks, namely "Re-Animator" and "From Beyond". Let him do whatever the hell he wants; he probably knows best! The rudimentary idea of "Robot Jox" is downright awesome. I'm sure everyone remembers the tense finale of James Cameron's "Aliens", when Ripley battles the extraterrestrial monster from inside a gigantic mechanical device that mimics her movements? Well, "Robot Jox" pretty much copies that idea and turns it into a 90 minute movie. After WWIII, only the Western Union and Russian Confederation remained, but at least they're no longer sacrificing the lives of human beings in wars when they encounter a conflict. Whenever there's something at stake like, say, the state of Alaska, there's a showdown between two hi-tech equipped robots and their intensively trained jockeys or "jox". The last fight ended inconclusive, as one of the robots tripped over and crushed 300 spectators, but the American jockey refuses to replay the match. The organization wants to replace him with a genetic clone, but she might not be able to defeat the notorious Russian jockey Alexander. The story somehow wants us to have empathy for the slowly (very slowly, actually) developing romance Achilles and the cloned chick, but that's less than interesting. The best parts of the film include Paul Koslo as a mad- raving Russian deliberately crushing people with a robotic foot, and even that footage should have been crazier! Oh well, at least it's still much better than Michael Bay's version of "Transformers".

Savant There are a number of problems with this movie, but the bottom line is that it tried to do too much with too little. The base story is quite good, but the money just wasn't there to do the story justice. The non-existent budget really killed this movie. Stuart Gordon (the writer/director) has writing credit on 'Honey, I Shrunk the Kids', which was a box office smash. However, that movie had some serious cash backing from Disney. Honestly, this is a good example of when to not make a movie. Had he waited a few more years, technology would have made it cheaper to do many of the effects. (not to mention he could have found a company with money.)