984: Prisoner of the Future (1982 TV Movie) User Reviews

Weston's super 'mare.

[BA_Harrison · 5/10 · 27 May 2013]

Successful executive Tom Weston (Stephen Markle) is taken to a high security detention centre, accused of being in cahoots with a group of rich businessmen dedicated to toppling current ruling regime The Movement, whose leader Dr. Fontaine (Andrew Foot) seeks to punish the rich and powerful for past indiscretions and recondition them for life in his 'new world'. Weston continually denies his involvement, even after undergoing torture, but although the warden (Don Francks) secretly believes that his prisoner is innocent, he has his own reason for continuing with his sadistic game.

Directed by Tibor Takacs, the man who gave us entertaining 80s popcorn horrors The Gate (1987) and I, Madman (1989), this dystopian made-for-TV sci-fi has a cool central idea that might have been extremely effective as a half hour episode of a Twilight Zone-style series, but doesn't work as well stretched out over 76 minutes. Alternating between flashbacks and confrontations between prisoner and warden, the story becomes frustratingly repetitive, and the final revelation—which proves to be such a shock for Weston—is far too easy to guess for anyone paying the slightest bit of attention.

4 out of 10, rounded up to 5 for the hilarious roller-skating robot guards.

A film that suffers from being a pilot for a TV series that never was

[Red-Barracuda · 3/10 · 28 August 2013]

An executive is taken as a political prisoner and detained in a detention centre. He, along with others, is accused of being a conspirator who wishes to topple the new dictatorial communist-like government who have taken control. From here he is tortured in an attempt to make him confess to his involvement.

984: Prisoner of the Future is an unnecessarily confusing film. Its story is really fairly straightforward but it's told in a way that results in more questions than answers. In quite a few other films this would be a pretty good thing but this one doesn't have the overall pay-off to really justify this approach. In fairness to it, this story-telling method was very probably a result of this being the pilot for a TV series. They obviously wanted to whet the audience's appetite with several unresolved plot threads that would get them excited enough to generated enough interest in a series. Unfortunately for the film-makers no series came of this, so this is all we have and this explains the vague nature of it. It's very possible they quickly put together the ending too, so that this pilot could go out as a standalone feature film. Whatever the case, the result is a pretty unsatisfying film. The low production values don't really help – the low budget would have been less of a problem in a TV series to be fair – but mainly it's the fact that the overall story seems to have little point that sinks this one.

Confusing Mess with a Hint of Wasted Potential

[brando647 · 3/10 · 24 May 2016]

984: PRISONER OF THE FUTURE was the pilot for a Canadian television that never went to series but was instead released as a TV movie in 1982. Having watched it twice now, I can understand why it was never picked up but I also want to be clear that I respect what they were trying to do. Buried somewhere in the poor direction, poor editing, and poor script is a story with the potential to have made for an interesting show. With a budget and proper filmmakers behind the scenes, this could have been a cool dystopian science fiction drama. Instead it's a bit of a mess with the occasional flicker of interesting material. It drops you right in the middle of the story from the very beginning. When we first meet our protagonist Tom Weston (Stephen Markle), he's locked in a nondescript prison cell. He's been assigned a prisoner number (984, obviously) and his only socialization from comes prisoner #30 in the cell next door. It's obviously sometime in the future because the guards are some sort of robot on wheels with glowing red laser eyes (also, it's stated plainly in the title) but otherwise there's little to see because the entire film looks as if it was shot in an abandoned warehouse. There's nothing but brick walls and concrete floors, and I'm pretty sure the prisoner intake flashback scene was shot on the loading dock. I found myself distracted by this obvious fact but, to be fair, I'd have been willing to forgive the low budget location restrictions if the movie had been executed better.

Weston is some sort of political prisoner, I think. The events leading to his incarceration are revealed in flashbacks over the course of the movie and exposition comes from Weston's interactions with the giddily psychotic warden (Don Francks). Here lies my biggest problem with PRISONER OF THE FUTURE; thanks to the poor editing, direction, and script (and the less than stellar audio transfer on my DVD copy), I was left completely baffled at the constant nonsensical backstory information. I believe he's a political prisoner who has been imprisoned for crimes committed against something called the Movement. I thought the Movement was a resistance faction but apparently they might actually be the ones in charge. The warden seems determined to squeeze a confession from Weston but Weston holds strong that he has no idea what's going on. He seems 100% convinced that he's been wrongly accused but the warden hits him with evidence that Weston's friends and associates (and mistress?) were all co-conspirators. But then I got the impression from some of the flashback sequences that Weston was actually in trouble for refusing to commit atrocities in the name of the Movement. So was he imprisoned because he refused to play ball with the baddies? At this point, I'm still unclear. Director Tibor Takács and screenwriters Peter Chapman and Stephen Zoller seem to have forgotten that, for the audience to care about our hero, we really should know and understand what he's going through. Since I have no concept of where he stands in all this, I have a hard time sympathizing. Is he a criminal? Or a victim?

PRISONER OF THE FUTURE is a pretty rough watch but I'll give it credit for trying. Unlike a lot of the Z-grade movies I've made myself suffer, at least Takács and cinematographer Alar Kivilo try to get creative in how they shot it. Rarely is the camera locked down while we're forced to watch the same static frame while characters rattle off dialogue. The camera does its part in trying to tell the story and for that it gets some respect. PRISONER OF THE FUTURE may be a lame TV movie but it's giving it an effort. Sadly the cinematography is one of the few positive notes I've got on the movie. But not the only one. I still love the robot guards and my interest piqued whenever they were on screen. There was an especially cool bit in the finale where they're pursuing Weston and flailing at him with karate-chopping action figure skills. The whole use of torture and brainwashing to break the prisoners was pretty cool (we see the effects of it on prisoner #1170, who goes from smarmy businessman to sniveling wimp over the course of his stay) and we get an interesting reveal at the end about Weston's imprisonment that I would've like to delve into further. I'm guessing that would've been the ongoing thread if this ever went on to become a full-fledged series. Really, that's the most frustrating part of this movie. It doesn't get truly interesting until the very last few minutes but by then it's too late and the credits are rolling. I can't really imagine where 984: PRISONER OF THE FUTURE could've gone with a full series run and I'm left to wonder if it was doomed from the start, but using this confusing mess of a movie pilot probably wasn't starting them off on the right foot anyway.

No Wonder The TV Show Idea Was Axed - Boring!

[Rainey-Dawn · 1/10 · 10 November 2016]

This movie (TV show pilot) is BORING! It started out interesting and then turned into one long borefest! I can see why the idea for the TV series was axed. The film makes no sense whatsoever... they should have reveled why in the heck they were really prisoners beside this "enemy of Dr. what's his name" stuff. I mean the potential was there for a good film and maybe an okay TV series but this pilot pretty much sucks.

I felt nothing for any of the characters. The one's that were captured and imprisoned for no real reason - I didn't feel bad for at all! They were very flat characters that I didn't care if the "bad guys" killed or let go. I really didn't care! That's one of the biggest problems with this film - flat characters in suits and ties that you can't sympathies with at all. It's like "who cares if they are imprisoned, they probably deserved it anyway but I really don't know because they aren't letting us know really anything solid about them".

1/10

spoiler free

[wildcarddaemons · 7/10 · 26 January 2014]

this made for t.v. or pilot episode was well made and enjoyable.Stephen Markle I was impressed he was solid and enjoyable. it follows the rules of show don't tell as well it reminds me of some other sci-fi shocker films I've seen. the reason i rate this so high is the acting is fantastic one or two spots of hammy but other then that,the sound of the film (at least My copy) was very quiet at times.The visual slightly in sepia around the left side of the screen. But with patience and an open mind you can see the enjoyment in a lot of films if you like decent writing and decent acting with a well proposed end i hope you enjoy as i have.

Confused nihilistic vision of the future.

[OtakuPancake · 10/10 · 20 February 2006]

I had never heard of this obscure title until picking it up at a run-down video rental store, but I'm glad that I didn't pass up this rare opportunity. Other than the laughably bad effects (particularly the "enforcer robots"), this film has quite a lot of entertainment value, and tells a gripping (albeit incredibly confusing) story of one man's descent into madness in a post-apocalyptic future. For the incredibly limited budget it looks to have had as a TV movie, the film is definitely effective beyond its presupposed boundaries.

Stephen Markle plays Tom Weston, an affluent businessman/politician (it is never really clear), content with the current government and his way of life. When "The Movement" (a quasi-fascistic socialist political organization that promises a future of peace) arises behind media mogul Dr. Fontayne, Weston is approached by his representatives, whom he refuses to cooperate with. Upon their rise to power, he soon finds himself thrown into a brutal futuristic prison along with several associates, where he is constantly interrogated by a sadistic warden (Don Francks) that does everything imaginable to psychologically torture him into admitting to crimes he is innocent of. The warden is terrifyingly persistent – Weston is tortured day in, day out for over ten years, with no human contact, until he finally can no longer distinguish between reality and fantasy. Over the years, Weston is tantalized by the sounds of chirping birds and children playing just outside his prison cell, which he hears through a small window high up the cement wall. The only thing that keeps him going is this and the thought of rejoining his wife on the outside world.

Much of the film is revealed through flashbacks during interrogation sequences – we see how Weston was implicated in a plot to overthrow "The New Order" by force due to his association with Michael Roland (David Clement), his friend and politician. It is never made clear whether or not Weston is guilty, forcing the audience to come to their own conclusions. Are we to believe that he is innocent? How do we know that his flashbacks are not simply hallucinations brought forth through suggestion? This could either be the result of inferior film-making, or an intentional construct to force the viewer to experience the same confusion that Weston experiences. I would like to think it's the latter.

Spoiler ahead: Throughout the film there are cryptic implications that the great "New World" outside the prison walls may not be everything the warden has made it out to be, and prison aides make unsettling comments about "the end." When prison guard Jeffries (Stan Wilson) enters Weston's cell, leaving the door open, he encourages him to escape, claiming that "it's over… for all of us." Weston attempts to outrun the security drones and escape this futuristic labyrinth. Finding escape to be impossible, he returns to his cell, climbing up the wall in desperation to peer out the window… to see only a barren desert, and a small speaker mounted on the outside wall, continually piping in the sounds of a once-thriving world.

Apparently this was a pilot for a Canadian television series. It's not hard to see why it failed: the plot is simply too convoluted for all but the most die-hard science fiction fans, and it's dystopian vision too bleak for the audience to be left wanting more.

Other than the aforementioned flaws, 984 (or The Tomorrow Man) is an entertaining film, and should be appreciated by fans of low budget science fiction, the post-apocalyptic, or those with a taste for unhappy endings.

More of a low budget Sci Fi film sold to show on TV than a TV pilot.

[vonnoosh · 7/10 · 10 August 2020]

This movie strikes me more of a low busget Sci Fi film that, as part of distribution, ended up being shown on TV as opposed to the notion that it was a TV pilot, made for the purposes of being a series that wasn't picked up.

One reason is the story has a beginning, middle and end. There are no loose ends to build a series around when it ends. Another reason is that this was filmed in 1978 and wasn't shown on TV until 1982. A TV pilot would've gotten air time quicker even if it wasn't picked up. I've seen other TV movies that were sold to networks as is like George Montgomery's Satan's Harvest. That wasn't a TV pilot either.

Likening 984:Prisoner of the Future to The Prisoner isn't very fair for a few reasons. The Prisoner was a TV series with a budget, 984 really suffers from limitations in that regard. The Prisoner was also more of an allegory while 984 doesn't offer much beyond what is shown. 984 gives you all the pieces to fill the picture puzzle instead of doingnwhat The Prisoner did. In that we were imagining how the picture should look and were carving them up to fit how we think the picture should look. That's what made The Prisoner such a masterpiece. 984 doesn't try to achieve what The Prisoner did so the comparison doesn't work for me. A better comparison is to the various versions of George Orwell's 1984 that made it to the screen. We see who is in charge, we see how he comes to power, we then have to puzzle together what happens much like the protagonist, Tom Weston has to do during his tenure in prison. I do feel there is a homage of sorts to The Prisoner at times. The electronic doors make the same sound opening and closing as Number 6's home in the Village.

984 is about a corporate executive named Tom Weston who gets caught up in a political power struggle and is imprisoned by the side called "The Movement" after its leader comes to power. The ideals of the leader, a college professor named Fountaine are Marxist in that the common man will rise up against those with more power than them and become the power structure themselves. Given Tom Weston's profession, Corporations are one of The Movement's targets but as the story unfolds, neither side look like saints.

We get to puzzle together why Weston is a prisoner and the reasons for his imprisonment end up shifting dramatically as the story unfolds. 984 ends up serving a different purpose to The Warden and The Movement while he is there. That becomes apparent in one of the charges filed against him during a flashback Weston experiences while drugged by his captures and the ending tells the rest of the story. It is something I didn't expect though there are clues throughout it that hint to it that I missed.

As I said, this has no real budget at all. The prison itself is at times comical. The robots roll around and we never see more than 2 at a time. We see the same one guard who doesn't seem to age a day even though we see him when Weston is first taken into custody and he remains there after we learn Weston has spent more than 10 years in the prison. The block where Weston's cell is, is the same as all the others with the level number changed. There aren't enough characters for action sequences. The goal seems more to develop atmosphere than anything else. The prison yard where the prisoners get exercise is the same exact location where the prisoners are first detained. It clearly wasn't meant to be seen as the same location but I noticed it. Also there are shots and dialogue that are reused at different times. We are supposed to not care so much about these limitations and concentrate on the story. Being used to low budget movies I can manage this.

There's enough going on to keep me interested. Little asides between characters are clues to what happened when The Movement came to power and there is no doubt about it when it comes to an end.

Thought-provoking, atmospheric sci-fi

[J-bot6 · 7/10 · 4 April 2016]

Many years ago I saw this movie on late-night television. Finally, after all this time I stumbled across it on a compilation. It was a pleasure to see this low-budget yet atmospheric film again.

The lighting is well executed, editing is solid, acting is decent, and the robot designs are very cool. Shot selection is great, with lots of up-angle shots to add to the scale of the prison. This film has a great hard sci-fi short story feel to it. It's as if it was ripped from the pages of a science fiction serial from the 50s or from a plot by Harlan Ellison. It's nice to see something that hasn't been watered down by committee.

However, there's more to this short film than just cool robots and ominous labyrinthine prisons.

There are two factions: One is the corporate establishment; the other is a cult-like collectivist group known as The Movement. The main character (Tom/984) was very much part of the corporate world. He's taken prisoner by The Movement under orders of their leader (Dr. Fontaine). The warden of the prison repeatedly interrogates 984 in an attempt to get him to confess to crimes against humanity. As it turns out, Tom is innocent and was simply in the wrong place at the wrong time. The warden suspects this, but he still persists with the interrogation since his ideology demands it.

The ideology of The Movement is one of language and words. It isn't enough for them to win a war through actions; they must also hold up a defeated example from the opposition who confesses his crimes. This obsession on the part of The Movement is one of the key points in the story and ultimately drives the warden to insanity. His enforcer illustrates this by eventually resigning, leaving the warden to be alone with his robots and the final remaining prisoner.

Many viewers took exception with this production because they had difficulty following the plot. It was intended as a pilot for a series, so the idea of spoon-feeding the audience all the details was counter to the goal of being able to explain things later during the course of the series. However, the series never happened. Regardless, pretty much everything is in the pilot -- for those who look closely.

Tom worked as an investment adviser for a large corporation. Gradually, a collectivist group (The Movement) started to gain control over the government and also started to infiltrate various corporations. The existing corporate heads were not about to stand for this, and they began plotting a strategy for stopping The Movement. Tom's friend invited him to a meeting with the corporate heads in which they revealed their plan to place tactical nuclear weapons in strategic locations and use them as leverage against The Movement. They wanted Tom to help advise them as to the best locations to place said weapons. Tom was shocked by this plan and decided to not get involved in it. In order to persuade Tom to 'play ball', they cooked-up material with which to blackmail him.

Flash forward to Tom's initial capture by The Movement. He's seen with a number of other high-level corporate figures. One of them mentions something about 'what they (the corporations) have done' as being no worse than what The Movement would do. This suggests that perhaps the first strike by the corporate conglomerate had recently been carried out. Based on Tom's demeanor, it doesn't look like he was aware of it.

Another scene shows Tom being reprogrammed using electroshock and images. During his reprogramming and memory-wiping session, a nuclear bombardment takes place. The bunker that he's in withstands the attack from the corporate conglomerate. This was referred to as a retaliation -- suggesting that The Movement had already retaliated against the initial strike. Later in the film, the warden's enforcer reminds the warden that they (The Movement) won. This suggests that there was a fourth round of nukes. This final round of nuclear detonations was carried out by members of The Movement, and ended the war. But at what cost? The warden's enforcer mentions that they're all that are left and that continuing to waste time interrogating prisoner 984 is pointless. The warden will hear none of it. He insists that they must stick to their principles and continue. For what are they if they don't cling to their ideology and follow through and get that all-important confession. It doesn't matter whether or not Tom is guilty. He's now just a number and simply another member of the opposition -- the last remaining representative of the corporate structure of the past.

And it's here where the thesis of the film hits its mark. The dangers of the type of ideology that The Movement represents is highlighted. Their blind obsession with assimilating the enemy and the use of language to beat the enemy's mind into submission. The double-standard that their ideology displays with the higher-ranking officials receiving added perks (like the wide assortment of liquor that the warden had available to him -- even in a nuclear bunker), and the cult-like tendency to rattle off brain-neutralizing quotes, memorized from their leader's publications and speeches.

This film isn't just a good example of how to create a solid hard-sci-fi story on a minimal budget; it's also a warning. And on both fronts, it succeeds.

Bleak and interesting low-budget sci-fi obscurity

[Woodyanders · 8/10 · 11 April 2012]

In a grim future, affluent businessman Tom Weston (a fine and sympathetic performance by Stephen Markle) gets taken prisoner and jailed in a dismal penitentiary for some sort of crimes he committed against the government. Despite being subjected to constant physical and psychological torture by the sadistic and eccentric warden (well played with lip-smacking wicked relish by Don Franks), Weston refuses to break and clings to the hope that he will one day be released so he can be reunited with his wife Margaret (lovely Michele Chicoine). Director Tibor Takacs and writers Stephen Zoller and Peter Chapman do an able job of crafting an intriguing, if at times too frustratingly vague narrative and present a powerfully downbeat, paranoid, and nightmarish vision of a dark Orwellian future that's both effective and unsettling in equal measure (the harsh oppressiveness of the prison environment in particular is captured in a strong and vivid manner). Markle and Franks do sterling work in the lead roles, with sturdy support from Stan Wilson as the warden's brutish assistant Jeffries. The central theme about the strength of the human will and its extraordinary capacity for overcoming the worst possible ordeals is both touching and provocative. Alar Kivilio's cinematography makes neat use of stark lighting and overhead camera angles. The surprise bummer ending packs a devastating punch. Although marred somewhat by the modest budget -- the robot security guards on roller skates are alas more silly than scary -- and a muddled plot, it's nonetheless an unjustly forgotten sleeper that's well worth checking out.

Real rating is a B or C, or about 6 or 7 stars. 10 given to compensate for the slow viewers.

[Bababooe · 10/10 · 23 October 2017]

Real rating is a B or C, or about 6 or 7 stars. 10 given to compensate for the slow viewers.

I've seen this movie twice now. First time May, 2016 and at that time I thought it was slow and not much going on and the rating was a C or D. I just rewatched it last week and I must say given the budget it was much better that I originally thought.

This movie basically takes Orwell's 1984 and cuts to the chase. The torture of the prisoner, the wardens addiction to torment the prisoner. The copy that I watched was from a 50 movies set and was not in the best shape but watchable. From what I gathered the Prisoner was a Corporate type that was implicated for not helping the new regime that just took over power. While he was imprisoned, and tortured, there must have been a world war and all that the prisoner knew, his wife and life was all gone. By the time he tried to escape he realized that even if he did get out there was nothing left. So, the prisoner and torture is all from 1984 but the ending is something else.

The main actor did a fine job, some of the other actors were good too. The guard looked the part but his acting was garbage. The cinematography was very good. Music was good. Editing could have been a little tighter. The robots were interesting. There's a lot going on here. This is a low budget and I believe TV production. Imagine if they had some cash behind it. The story is there. And isn't that what most of us want, The story! One more thing. I recently watched 1984, twice, the 1984 version. What a pile of crap. I then watched the 1956 version. Much better. Then the Peter Cushing 1954 British TV version, the best 1984! I've also seen the US TV 1953 version, decent. I'd rather watch 984: Prisoner of the Future than the 1984 version of 1984.

Real rating is a B/C, or 6 or 7 stars. 10 given for compensation for the slow viewers looking for the next Star Wars.