Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Cheryl A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

Billy Ollie Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Francene Odetta It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

hellholehorror This is not a good film. It is so bad that it occasionally becomes good. The acting is truly awful. The production quality is also very low. There is a huge problem with the script - most of it just does not stand up to scrutiny. Accept the story and you may enjoy it but start thinking about it and you will end up wondering how such a story full of holes and illogical elements could be made into a film.

Alexander Moon You love good time travel stories with time paradox and entertaining SFX ? Avoid this like the plague ! Anything in it is not worth a Z Movie at all ! The acting is appalling, the lead actor is as talented and expressive as a tooth pick, so is the rest of the cast to be honest. The script is horrible, all characters are one dimentionnal and badly acted with no conviction at all. Even worse, you don't see a single "time travel" scene in the whole flick ! I know it is a "tv" movie but come on, not a single time travel scene shown on screen ? I know Z Movies that do offer at least ones despite their ultra small budget... To cut it short : if you want to enjoy some real and legit good Time Travel sequences, acting and stories MADE FOR TV...DOCTOR WHO AND The Twilight Zone are your friends and one billion times superior to this bad april fool joke !

damien-16 Zapping through the movie channels last evening, I came across: Next feature presentation: Thrill Seekers with Martin Sheen. I wonder if one could sue the channel for this kind of tendentious (but not factually wrong) publicity? Anyway, it made me decide to watch. Hardly any Martin Sheen, but entertaining for sure, and with surprisingly decent special effects for a TV movie. The plot is intelligent, and would be a good starting 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 worse would happen? And how would it affect your own life? Would you still exist, even? (My parents met because of the war.) Or: if you go back to a time after you are born, can you meet yourself? All of this is hardly original, of course. SF writers in the golden age (which was sadly ended by Star Wars, shifting from intelligent writing to blockbuster special effects) frequently tackled the issue, for instance describing the butterfly effect: a firm organises time trips to the Jurassic, where thrill seeking (again!) hunters can kill a dinosaur a fraction of a moment before it would have died, thus not altering the time line. But one hunter stumbles and accidentally kills a butterfly. He gets back to his starting date, but the killed butterfly has changed the time line and this new line turns out to be the hunter's worst nightmare. Something similar happens in Thrill Seekers. But here the protagonist has the means to go back in time to change a future he has already experienced. This, of course, was already obvious from the moment they take the laptop from the disaster tourist. In fact, Merrick could have used that device to go back to before he boarded the plane and, using some kind of subterfuge, a bomb alarm for instance, avert the plane crash, and the subway crash, and the fire... But we wouldn't have had the same film then.One question of logic though. If Merrick goes back into his original time line, the time guards would also be in there, but unaffected by what will happen later. In the film, they follow Merrick back from the future. The film does not explain this. But the question doesn't end there. If you go back to when you were 3 hours earlier, you would also not yet have any memories of what was going to happen those next 3 hours. Merrick and the time guards should not have had any knowledge of the disaster happening 3 hours in the future.I also wonder how the title sequence relates to the film. I admit I wasn't paying a lot of attention, trying to figure out when Martin Sheen would be mentioned, but in retrospect I wonder if there wasn't any subtle message in the sequence?

Jugu Abraham I will not remember this film for the performances or the direction even though these departments were not awful. What made me like the movie was the appeal of the sci-fi story. The plot was good and of course could have been burnished into an elegant film with some effort. The film leaves you satisfied right up to the last frame of the film--don't miss it.I particularly liked the development of the character of FBI agent Stanton with his watch. I only wish the director had thought of giving the character more time on screen.