In a future where the elite live forever, a vigilante uncovers a conspiracy involving secrets hidden in the deep of space.In a future where the elite live forever, a vigilante uncovers a conspiracy involving secrets hidden in the deep of space.In a future where the elite live forever, a vigilante uncovers a conspiracy involving secrets hidden in the deep of space.
Photos
Tzaddi Allick
- Reggie
- (as Tzaddi Allick Simmons)
Susan Sassi
- Madrid
- (as Susan Rankus)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaWesley Tate Olin was 11 years old when he starred in his first film, "Clonehunter."
Featured review
More cute than anything else.
We've heard of movies being so bad they're good, so bad they're bad, but here's a film that's so bad it's cute. That is all I can really say about Clonehunters; it's cute. Definelty a horrible movie, but cute.
The film is clearly low budget, impossible to any be any higher than a few grand. It's a sci-fi film, the kind that's filmed entirely in a poorly lit warehouse, the kind where every shot is in front of a cheap blue screen that makes the entire thing look like a bad high school broadcast class project, the kind where random downloadable graphics and doohickies run rampant in every scene because THE FUTURE! Anyone who knows bad movies knows the type.
Every aspect of this film is terrible, although it still isn't the worst I've ever seen. The writing is almost something to be admired; it's as if an 11-year-old watched Blade Runner, Pulp Fiction, and Alphaville, and decided to make a script with every single crime-noir cliche in the book: a depressed hardened "badass" main character who drink, the double-crossing twist, a dark city, bad narration, and more, all there.Despite the paint-by-numbers banality of the script, I almost think the film could've been decent, or at least charming, had a competent director helmed it with a modest studio budget. Unfortunately as it is, the film is clueless, with a main protagonist who literally stands around and does nothing, and a tough female sidekick who is meant to bust societal sexism norms but then spends the second half of the movie dressed into sultry revealing lace for literally no reason.
The worst part about this film is the lightning. Every single scene assaults the audience with eye-straining spotlights and artificial oversaturation. I'm not sure why the director thought to light the movie this poorly; maybe he thought more spotlights and sun flares equivalated to more futuristic? Every shot in this film is bleached out and often completely out of focus due the camera unable to process all the light shining directly into it. Perhaps the saddest part about it all is that the behind-the-scenes blooper reel actually shows scenes with exponentially better cinematography than the actual movie, meaning most of this terrible lighting was intentionally added in post.
Speaking of the director and behind the scenes material, there is a director interview that is clearly a self-interview from the director himself, where even THAT is abysmally oversaturated with articifial threshold lighting. The director seems to take his film very seriously, asking himself philosophical questions about the art of filmmaking intended for young inspirational filmmakers who he hopes to be watching, and this egotism ruins the entire film for me.
At least this film is short.
The film is clearly low budget, impossible to any be any higher than a few grand. It's a sci-fi film, the kind that's filmed entirely in a poorly lit warehouse, the kind where every shot is in front of a cheap blue screen that makes the entire thing look like a bad high school broadcast class project, the kind where random downloadable graphics and doohickies run rampant in every scene because THE FUTURE! Anyone who knows bad movies knows the type.
Every aspect of this film is terrible, although it still isn't the worst I've ever seen. The writing is almost something to be admired; it's as if an 11-year-old watched Blade Runner, Pulp Fiction, and Alphaville, and decided to make a script with every single crime-noir cliche in the book: a depressed hardened "badass" main character who drink, the double-crossing twist, a dark city, bad narration, and more, all there.Despite the paint-by-numbers banality of the script, I almost think the film could've been decent, or at least charming, had a competent director helmed it with a modest studio budget. Unfortunately as it is, the film is clueless, with a main protagonist who literally stands around and does nothing, and a tough female sidekick who is meant to bust societal sexism norms but then spends the second half of the movie dressed into sultry revealing lace for literally no reason.
The worst part about this film is the lightning. Every single scene assaults the audience with eye-straining spotlights and artificial oversaturation. I'm not sure why the director thought to light the movie this poorly; maybe he thought more spotlights and sun flares equivalated to more futuristic? Every shot in this film is bleached out and often completely out of focus due the camera unable to process all the light shining directly into it. Perhaps the saddest part about it all is that the behind-the-scenes blooper reel actually shows scenes with exponentially better cinematography than the actual movie, meaning most of this terrible lighting was intentionally added in post.
Speaking of the director and behind the scenes material, there is a director interview that is clearly a self-interview from the director himself, where even THAT is abysmally oversaturated with articifial threshold lighting. The director seems to take his film very seriously, asking himself philosophical questions about the art of filmmaking intended for young inspirational filmmakers who he hopes to be watching, and this egotism ruins the entire film for me.
At least this film is short.
helpful•02
- Joshua_Penczek
- Sep 30, 2018
Details
- Runtime1 hour 25 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content