User reviews

I saw this soon after its original release and would love to see it come out on DVD for Region 2.

It is a low-budget gem: well written, very well acted, with an interesting and surprising storyline.

The film moves steadily without breaking into much of a sweat until the rapid build up to the revelation to the 'reason'.

It is strangely engaging. I had something else to complete urgently but the 90 mins. seemed much more important.

I'd love to see it again. If you get the chance, then do so as you'll enjoy it.

A gem.

This film succeeds in that it goes where it goes and doesn't take itself too seriously science-wise. It doesn't try to figure things out, doesn't try to explain paradoxes, doesn't attempt to fit all the pieces together. It just takes us where the story-teller wants it to go... and I'm fine with that.

We've seen soooo many time travel films, and the majority of them share the same issue: logic problems. The real problem though is that they try to make an illogical subject logical, so when they stumble all over the plot with time paradoxes and other drivel, it spoils the film. This show doesn't do that. It just shoves paradoxes to the side and dismisses them... and gets on with the storytelling. Kudos.

It's a simple rule of science fiction: accept the fiction part. Don't try to answer unanswerable questions; just tell the story.

I found this "scientifically opaque" film rather refreshing, because of the very fact they didn't try to explain everything. They just kept it interesting. It was a fun watch. Good for them.

I saw this film on TV and it reminded me of a Sci-Fi story I had read many years ago in a Sci-Fi magazine called, at that time, "Astounding Science Fiction". The title of the story was "Vintage Season" and I believe the author was Lawrence O'Donnell. Incidentally, I still have the magazine. This information may be of use to followers of this genre and if anyone knows how I may be able to obtain a copy of a later published book by this author containing this story I would appreciate it.

As far as the film is concerned I must add that, in my opinion, it was cleverly directed and the acting by Jeff Daniels was up to his usual good standard. There is no need for me to outline the plot as this has already been done except to say that, although I personally have always been interested in time travel stories and/or films, there is no need to be acquainted with this genre to follow the plot and enjoy the film. I saw the film under the title "Timescape" which is elusive enough to attract attention. In my opinion the film has a softer and more acceptable ending than the story but otherwise adheres to the original quite well. I would give it full marks as a film which does not contain any far-fetched sequences so often included in other films of this genre.

It took me two tries to finish this film. I'll explain.

In the 1940's John W Campbell's Science Fiction magazine ASTOUNDING was in its Golden Age. It seemed that every issue contained material that moved the genre forward in some way. Anthologies of classic SF are crowded with stories from around that time. Among those stories was September 1946's VINTAGE SEASON, attributed to Lawrence O'Donnell but actually written by the husband and wife team of Henry Kuttner and Catherine L Moore.

VINTAGE SEASON is really a mood piece, rather than a hard-plotted story. It has an atmosphere of decadence and languid eroticism that probably pushed the limits of what could be printed at that time in a magazine that was mainly read by children and young adults. Just as Hollywood at that time had to portray sex by implication rather than in explicit detail, so a more subtle approach was also required in print.

So the first time I saw this film I threw the remote at the screen after 15 minutes. This wasn't the VINTAGE SEASON I knew and loved; this was just some crummy TV movie leeching off a classic original idea. I forgot about it – literally. That's why I taped it when it came around again, based on a decent write-up in the TV guide.

This time around I must have been feeling a bit more mellow, as the remote stayed safely on the sofa. I reflected – could anyone actually film VINTAGE SEASON as it was written? And show it to an audience that had seen the BACK TO THE FUTURE films? I considered what I would do if I were the writer charged with developing the original story into a script that could be filmed with an adequate but not enormous budget and actors with mostly TV movie credentials.

Taken on these terms, TIMESCAPE (its title in the UK) has to be judged a success. There is more sentimentality than I like and the plot elements are not handled with the rigour demanded by genre Science Fiction. But the story and characters that have been wrapped around Kuttner and Moore's original idea are sufficiently interesting and involving to compensate and the acting, production standards and effects work are more than good enough for a TV film.

In summary, TIMESCAPE is a decent SF-based drama that viewers expecting a slam-bang FX epic will probably find dull but which will appeal to those who appreciate its more human-scale charms.

Timescape is a charming, fairly overlooked early 90's bit of escapism. It's directed by David Twohy (his first feature) a guy known for super fun, out there sci fi stuff, like Below, The Arrival, A Perfect Getaway and the Riddick franchise. Here he reigns it in a bit in a family cemeteries story of time travel and intrigue, but loses none of the invigorating nature of storytelling found in his work. Jeff Daniels, an actor who grew on me immensely in the last few years and who I now consider one of my favourites, is excellent as Ben Wilson, a blue collar single father fixing up an old inn with his young daughter Allison (Ariana Richards of Jurassic Park!). They get strange visitors who appear out of nowhere and seem to be in their town for a very specific, ominous reason. They are odd, spacey weirdos led by a flamboyant old bird (Marilyn Lightstone) and soon Ben suspects not only are they not from the region, but not even from the same time as them. Daniels plays the Everyman so well and carries the film with his skills. Ben has a tragic past involving the passing of his wife, and is forced to deal with a tyrannical father in law who blames him, wants to take custody of Allison, and also just happens to be a judge. Richards, younger here than in Jurassic Park, is super talented and intuitive beyond her years and lights up every frame, especially with the wonderful chemistry her and Daniels have. Vague disaster looms over their town and Ben is forced to uncover the secrets that the mysterious 'tourists' hold, and use the powers of time to navigate himself, Allison and the entire town to safety. The dimension bending third act is given down to earth, thought out reverence that treats its audience with respect, challenging them and aiming to please at the same time. "There is purpose to Time, you know... Keeps everything from happening all at once", one of the travelling strangers imparts to Ben. Indeed. It's a thoroughly fun piece, and should have a little more recognition than it does these days.

This movie came out in 1991 and while the age of it does show with regard to the special effects the acting and the story make up for it providing you with an enjoyable watch where you are entertained throughout the 99 minutes. What is surprising is that it has not been remade today.

I will keep this short. Grand Tour is a very enjoyable science fiction film. It relies on thinking as opposed to special effects. It is a good story with vivid characters. This film is a great, solid sci-fi story and is worth the watch.

Some movies are made by brain, some by heart, some by money.

SF, as a genre, doesn't exclude automatically heart, but it usually isn't in the first place. So, brain and money are there to decide what will the movie look like.

Movies made without a lot of money need brain or otherwise there would be no movie. These movies have to contain wise plot, intelligent dialogs, interesting characters, and more than everything: a story. As there is not much money invested, special effects are poor or absent, and the story must refund this shortage; if the story is good, it isn't a failure at all.

Movies made by money have a lot of visual effects, and as they are expensive, the producers like to see them as much as possible, so they replace a story in certain footage; if not so, the producers would ask what did they give money for. Certainly, a good director can use this effects as a part of a movie, emphasizing the story, and not only as a decoration, or even the only purpose of the movie. If they succeed, a movie becomes a legend like "Raiders of Lost Arc", "Armageddon", "Star Wars". Otherwise the movie will return and earn some money (depending on the quality of effects), but will be forgotten as soon as some new effects appear on market and screen.

Having special effects in mind, "Timescape" is as poor as average Bergmann, Hitchcock, Visconti or Wilder movie. Comparing this movie with such names doesn't make it fit in their class, but the story was a bit old-fashioned, like SF novels from 50's or 60's... and that means good, intelligent, far from usual brain-insulting activities that can't even be called stories in many modern SF works (I can't force myself to say they are films). The authors don't offer us space battles or the end of Universe. They tell us a simple story about a very ordinary man in very unusual circumstances. (Has someone mentioned Hitchcock...?) They are also brave enough to go on thin ice of some difficult SF paradoxes (like meeting yourself in different time), and manage to do it with logic (but this is the only moment when dialogs don't look so persuasive).

Daniels is perfect for a role of loser that can hardly cope with everyday life, can't respond to troubled situations (like traffic accident and death of his wife), and now he has a destiny of his own city in his hands. The rest of the cast doesn't seem so well casted. Some of the characters (judge, sheriff, deputy, doctor) look as if they were dragged from some forgotten versions of O.K.Corral and repeated in movies like "Red Rock West" or "Hard Rain". Marilyn Lightstone tries to look more SF-ish, but her role would also be applied better in 60's B-production (including outlook and acting style). Jim Haynie is suppressed, as he is supposed to be in his role. However, Ariana Richards is far ahead from average American child star (almost close to Scandinavian kids).

This is a story which would probably make bigger pleasure if read, but watching the movie - if this is a sort for you - won't leave you crying for wasted time.

Because it seems that only the viewers who were positive about this film have reacted thus far, I feel compelled to hand over my own, once again grouchy contribution. First of all, the way time traveling is portrayed here is laughably besides any possible reality. Of course, most time travel movies suffer in this regard, but in Timescape they take it far too seriously. Some reviewers talk about a witty, intelligent story that will make you think. Well, no, it rather makes me sleep. Jeff Daniels is very middle of the road and the disaster groupies, though coming from the future, do not make a smart and well-prepared impression, to say the least.

This excellent science fiction is well worth watching. The acting is very good, especially Jeff Daniels, and the story line keeps you interested right from the start. It is a film the family could watch, but it is not Walt Disney style. While this film is not a blockbuster, it rises way above the junky B grade movies. If you do not usually like science fiction flicks, don't be put off since this film does not have any weird effects or monsters.

I keep finding real gems of films on late-night television here in England, and Grand Tour was no exception. Anyone can enjoy this film, whether they're a major sci-fi buff or not. As a matter of fact, I didn't figure out until I was pretty far into the movie that it was sci-fi at all! Which is to say--this movie might be the closest representation of what *would* happen if visitors from the future or outer space or somewhere showed up. Hollywood makes no appearance in this film. The story is intelligent, coherent and easy to follow. Every detail is taken care of easily and completely, so the story hangs together marvelously, unlike some sci-fi movies I could name. Everyone acts well and believably. Jeff Daniels proves his worth as a serious actor, and Adriana is one of the cutest and least-annoying child actors I've seen. The character of Oscar adds just the right amount of humour the movie needs. The script avoids cliches, as does the concept. I think the producers should've gone ahead and released Grand Tour theatrically, instead of merely on cable TV. Then maybe a wider audience would've (or could've) seen and enjoyed this fine example of what a good director can do with good actors acting a good script from a good story. What can I say?--the movie's good.

I wasn't too sure what was going to await me here. What a pleasant surprise! Jeff Daniels and Ariana Richards make up a team with lots of intensity as father and daughter. Suspense is gained without many special effects, what a relief in all this overkill of technology. Great little sci-fi/mystery spoof, very enjoyable, and the DVD looks just outstanding (just like almost everything done by Anchor Bay)

Timescape (as it was called here in the UK) was one of the late night films here on BBC T.V. It was well worth staying up to watch this one. This is one of those films that just gets better as it goes along.

If you are a big science fiction fan, especially for those interested in time travel. Timescape talks about how anyone travelling from the future cannot come back and change the past, as this would change the future itself. The movie is a little slow in the beginning, and could have been much better technically. But it is not bad for a television series (though it was shown as a film here!). It answers many questions and also questions many of the theories that currently exist in the scientific world.

If you liked the 'twelve monkeys' or '12:01' you MUST watch this! (and vice-versa)

This is a film I often think about. There aren't many sci-fi films from this era that are so accessible, it has good family drama as well as mystery elements. The setup of a single father and daughter is very typical of 1990s films but I can't think of any other story quite like it. It's not perfect, and there are some moments that were a little corny at the time and will feel even moreso now, but overall it's charming and has some great performances.

Now let me justify that bold summary. Sure, PITCH BLACK and CHRONICLES OF RIDDICK have a zillion bucks of special effects up there on the screen. And I did actually enjoy PITCH BLACK for what it was. But it was pretty hard for me to get involved with the characters and care much about what happened to them between all the explosions and monsters and whatever. Let's face it, balancing truck loads of creatures, spaceships and other eye candy with a script (yes, these things do have a script) - and I mean the story in that script - is a tough job. Even Spielberg lost control of his story in a couple of films.

I'm really not putting down what director David Twohy has done since. I just think, in many cases, that a film can benefit from having technical limitations. It forces the director - and everyone else in the cast and crew - to focus on what really makes a great film: the story. THE GRAND TOUR has that big time.

It has characters that you can care about, because they're written well in the story. Ariana Richards is just right in this pre-JURASSIC PARK role, for example. Plus we get nice performances from character actors like George Murdock. There are some fairly decent twists to the story, because, well, there is a story. Which means the actors get some decent lines and don't spend the time screaming or saying things like "gotta kill a few people", or something just as insightful. The effects shots are kept to a minimum, most likely due to budget. So they matter less here, and we get nearly all of the camera time on the characters. And that makes the film work.

So what's my point? First, if you like sci-fi, especially low-key character driven sci-fi drama, then GRAND TOUR is a film worth seeing. Second, I think David Twohy the director is better when he lets David Twohy the writer really go to town. The only thing I like better of his, would be THE FUGITIVE (he wrote it but did not direct). Now GRAND TOUR is not perfect, and it's no FUGITIVE, but it's pretty entertaining and for Twohy in the director's chair, it's my favorite.

I do understand the need to "give 'em what they want" with the CGI and all, but one can balance story and visuals. I hope to see a Twohy film written this well get a real budget. Who knows, maybe folks would even go see it.

No one I know, outside my family of 4, has ever heard of this film; what a tremendous loss that is to science fiction, ideas, thoughtful and intelligent stories, and old-fashioned entertainment. The film is based on a fine old short-story, "Vintage Season," which, like the movie, is probably not reprinted in any current anthology. I am happy to have the tale in print, and happy to own a copy of this well made film created from it (I taped it 2 or 3 years ago from, I believe, HBO). Search this one out--perhaps it'll be on one of the premium cable channels again one day?--and enjoy clever, witty, and surprisingly memorable movie-making. You'll ponder the end of this one for weeks, guaranteed.

Grand Tour AKA Disaster in Time AKA Timescape

This movie is more obscure than it deserves to be, as evidenced by the retitling.

Made for TV, on a made-for-TV budget, this VERY SMART, but easy-to-follow time travel story makes outstanding use of of its modest funding by focusing on the human story. If not for a single (and important) effects scene - and we must keep in mind this was made in the 1990's - you wouldn't even notice this, the production could have just as easily been for theatrical release.

Time travel stories tend to slog themselves in plot holes and bad logic or trying too hard to blow your mind. Disaster In Time manages to respect the audience's intelligence, suspending disbelief through good storytelling and direction.