And we're not talking about quite bad, but very bad. There are three reasons why Supercollider isn't rated any lower. The concept is a good one, plus it doesn't feel as stereotypical as it could have been in comparison to other relatively similar disaster movies. There are moments of nice locations, and the music is a step above the generic, overbearing and ponderous music that you'd kind of expect from a movie in the genre that is low on budget, it's actually driven and atmospheric. The photography and editing can be choppy however, around the halfway mark there was some real sloppiness, one too many scenes were too darkly lit and the movie looked like too often that it was set in a refurnished basement. The script does suffer from clichéd writing- though thankfully not as badly as other movies seen recently, particularly on the SyFy channel- and it is never here the sort of writing that grabs you or stop you from rolling your eyes. A lot of it was stilted and ham-fisted. The story does have a twist and it wasn't completely predictable from start to finish. What it was though was very dull and by-the-numbers with no heart, fun or tension, everything just felt indifferent. To be honest, I was losing interest by the half-way mark but being the sort of person who never judges a film without seeing the whole of it stuck, with it. And the second half didn't improve, if anything it was the opposite. The direction is far too slack with no attempt to keep things tightly paced and taut. The characters are barely developed, charisma-free and just don't engage. The actors look as though they didn't want to be there or that they didn't care for what they'd been given. Robin Dunne especially gives an expressionless and one-note lead performance. So to conclude, not terrible but another movie that joins the long line of movies that had good ideas but bad execution. 3/10 Bethany Cox
10 Reviews
Not what I expected
lanechaffin-964-631906 September 2020
There's not a lot of great things to say about Supercollider, but the one big positive is the interesting subject matter. That said, this movie is not really what I expected. It is watchable, I didn't stray from the viewing or lose interest at any point. I really don't care for special effects: low budgets are of small concern but there were some holes in the script and some of the acting could've been better. Character development minimal and unsatisfactory. Still, it was put together well enough to hold my attention. I wish that they would have devoted a little more screen time explaining what happened or theorizing, but maybe that is part of the intrigue. Also, I have to say the timing of the love scene between Victor and Natalie seemed a bit awkward.
A big effort on such a small soundstage.
face-819-9337268 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
This is not that other Supercolider movie that was made by the SyFy channel, this one is actually better very barely but better, especially in the effects. The story is one of alternate dimensions, and sort of Time travel-ee. This is not a smart movie though, there are no end to the simple mistakes that they have made trying to make the 2 different worlds possible. The basic story works, however from the moment we enter this other dimension, or parallel Earth it is obvious that it could not possibly be real. There is a huge leap that you have to take to believe that this world could possibly exist (like the dark universe in Star Trek but not as well thought out), the world is on fire, and tornados are ripping apart buildings in down town Kiev or where ever the sound stage is, and you are forced to believe that a civilization has actually been able to grow to the same level as ours (nearly). So in my opinion the production quality is just barely passable because of the poor set's that look only moderately larger than doll houses, with 6-8 inch curbs. (You need to have an advance crew check things before you get to the set after being locked into a contract to work there.) However the acting is passable as you can tell that even though some of the actors appear just as mixed up as the story, they really do seem to be trying to make things work, trying to make a street 10 feet wide appear to be a full sized street. I really don't recommend this for more than a laugh, and filler on a rainy weekend, and by no means should you pay more than $1 to see it ever, but if you are a fan of movies made by companies like Asylum, and SyFy channel, then you might Enjoy this more than I did.
Something collided alright...
paul_haakonsen5 April 2014
"Supercollider" started out interestingly enough, then the air seeped out of the balloon quite fast and the movie turned unfathomably boring and ridiculous.
The idea of the movie did have potential, but it was really badly put to the screen. The story is about a machine that accidentally causes a distortion in time and space, creating a new reality and thrusting people into this new reality to a bleak and broken world.
I suppose it was the script and the direction of the movie that took a blow and caused the movie to crash down a steep hill abruptly and without warning.
As for the acting, well it was adequate at least. Just don't expect award-winning performances here.
All in all, then "Supercollider" was sort of a waste of time, because it turned really stupid really fast, and it just lost all appeal and any sense of coherent and believable storyline. I found myself ending up with my phone in hand, because the movie failed to keep my interest fairly quickly and never really managed to get back on track.
"Supercollider" gets a mere 2 out of 10 stars.
The idea of the movie did have potential, but it was really badly put to the screen. The story is about a machine that accidentally causes a distortion in time and space, creating a new reality and thrusting people into this new reality to a bleak and broken world.
I suppose it was the script and the direction of the movie that took a blow and caused the movie to crash down a steep hill abruptly and without warning.
As for the acting, well it was adequate at least. Just don't expect award-winning performances here.
All in all, then "Supercollider" was sort of a waste of time, because it turned really stupid really fast, and it just lost all appeal and any sense of coherent and believable storyline. I found myself ending up with my phone in hand, because the movie failed to keep my interest fairly quickly and never really managed to get back on track.
"Supercollider" gets a mere 2 out of 10 stars.
Dreadful film.. but then, you weren't expecting a masterpiece
capcanuk15 November 2013
Warning: Spoilers
This film, Supercollider.. there's just no other way to say it: it's terrible. The strange thing is, it's no worse than most Sy-Fy channel flicks, or the bevy of Asylum mockbusters.
What really sets this film apart from the others is an absolutely painful-to-watch "performance" by the awful-as-usual Robin Dunne. His idea of acting is to stand slack-jawed and hope no one notices he has absolutely no expression. And yes, the "slack jaw" comment is for real. Dunne stands there with his mouth hanging open as though this were a valid acting technique. Of course, his "acting" here is no different from his painful presence on Sanctuary.
The story is cheesy, which is OK. Films that are so-bad-they're-fun can be enjoyable. The effects are typical low-calibre TV fair SFX. So no surprise there. And even the basic premise of the film (based, as for all of this type of film, on very, very poor understanding of science) is quasi-original. I was expecting a typical "evil/stupid scientists inadvertently cause the imminent end of the world" scenario, where the hero gallantly saves the world through a series of increasingly implausible acts of heroism.
No. This was actually sort of interesting, with a twist about parallel universes thrown at you right from the start. So points for taking a rather original direction with this script.
But Dunne... /shakes head. The points we generously gave for script? Yeah, 10 points deducted from Gryffindor for having Robin Dunne on their Quidditch team.
There is simply no way to really describe how painful it is to watch him struggle through this film. The other actors aren't really much better. No, I take that back. The other actors are far better than he, since they at least live up to Sy-Fy/The Asylum standards (not that this film was produced by either of those entities).
I can't recommend this film in any way. If it's on TV and you don't have an appointment for a root canal, then take a gander, try it. See if you can get past the first hour. I actually made it through 90 minutes (after having taken a 20 minute break to do some laundry).
You might think it unfair of me to lambaste a film despite not having seen the entire thing. Except Robin Dunne's "performance" fits into the category "cruel and unusual punishment".
What really sets this film apart from the others is an absolutely painful-to-watch "performance" by the awful-as-usual Robin Dunne. His idea of acting is to stand slack-jawed and hope no one notices he has absolutely no expression. And yes, the "slack jaw" comment is for real. Dunne stands there with his mouth hanging open as though this were a valid acting technique. Of course, his "acting" here is no different from his painful presence on Sanctuary.
The story is cheesy, which is OK. Films that are so-bad-they're-fun can be enjoyable. The effects are typical low-calibre TV fair SFX. So no surprise there. And even the basic premise of the film (based, as for all of this type of film, on very, very poor understanding of science) is quasi-original. I was expecting a typical "evil/stupid scientists inadvertently cause the imminent end of the world" scenario, where the hero gallantly saves the world through a series of increasingly implausible acts of heroism.
No. This was actually sort of interesting, with a twist about parallel universes thrown at you right from the start. So points for taking a rather original direction with this script.
But Dunne... /shakes head. The points we generously gave for script? Yeah, 10 points deducted from Gryffindor for having Robin Dunne on their Quidditch team.
There is simply no way to really describe how painful it is to watch him struggle through this film. The other actors aren't really much better. No, I take that back. The other actors are far better than he, since they at least live up to Sy-Fy/The Asylum standards (not that this film was produced by either of those entities).
I can't recommend this film in any way. If it's on TV and you don't have an appointment for a root canal, then take a gander, try it. See if you can get past the first hour. I actually made it through 90 minutes (after having taken a 20 minute break to do some laundry).
You might think it unfair of me to lambaste a film despite not having seen the entire thing. Except Robin Dunne's "performance" fits into the category "cruel and unusual punishment".
Well, it is a disaster
Leofwine_draca31 August 2016
SUPERCOLLIDER is another silly SyFy Channel disaster movie about a Hadron collider going wrong and accidentally opening up another dimension which causes the Earth to be affected by all manner of natural and not-so-natural disasters. This is a Canadian production filmed in Bulgaria which gives you an idea of how cheap it is.
I've seen a lot of SyFy's disaster movies but this is definitely one of the cheapest and poorest-looking. I can think of absolutely no reason that any sane viewer would want to tune in and waste their time watching this. The characters are clichéd and the interactions between them are wooden and poorly staged. The special effects scenes consist of the actors looking on as a bad CGI effect plays out in the background or in the sky. There's never a moment of realism, drama, or excitement that convinces. The only actor I recognised was Amy Bailey, who played the British princess in VIKINGS, and she must wonder why she agreed to star in this junk.
I've seen a lot of SyFy's disaster movies but this is definitely one of the cheapest and poorest-looking. I can think of absolutely no reason that any sane viewer would want to tune in and waste their time watching this. The characters are clichéd and the interactions between them are wooden and poorly staged. The special effects scenes consist of the actors looking on as a bad CGI effect plays out in the background or in the sky. There's never a moment of realism, drama, or excitement that convinces. The only actor I recognised was Amy Bailey, who played the British princess in VIKINGS, and she must wonder why she agreed to star in this junk.
Just so so bad
reikiakavos5 August 2020
Two stars just for general idea and that is it. The plot does not make sense, seems like creators do not even have minimum knowledge about science nor have bothered to do homework. Very visible "low budget" type of filming as well. Watched till the end hoping for something, however, it was a total waste of time.
"Reality is reality, Victor"
hwg1957-102-2657041 October 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Am not sure what this film is about. Why did the 'super collider' go wrong? How was it fixed? If Victor Susskind ended up in the alternative universe why didn't his wife? Why did Victor's phone go through the warp but nothing else? How do some characters like Leo Tarsky and Chuck enter the alternative universe as themselves? What's it all got to do with particle acceleration? How do you get free and clean energy from the 'super collider'? It was all rather confusing really.
The lead character Victor Susskind is played by Robin Dunne and he is uninteresting as are most of the cast. The best player was Enzo Cilenti as the villainous billionaire Leo Tarsky. The movie was only watchable when he was onscreen though mention must made of Jason Francis who plays 'Tough Guy' to the manner born.
The lead character Victor Susskind is played by Robin Dunne and he is uninteresting as are most of the cast. The best player was Enzo Cilenti as the villainous billionaire Leo Tarsky. The movie was only watchable when he was onscreen though mention must made of Jason Francis who plays 'Tough Guy' to the manner born.
Nifty sci-fi flick
Woodyanders6 April 2021
Warning: Spoilers
An enormous particle collider suffers a catastrophic malfunction that opens up a bleak alternate dimension which threatens the entire human race. It's up to scientist Dr. Victor Suskind (a fine and likeable performance by Robin Dunne) to fix this situation before it's too late.
Director/co-writer Jeffery Scott Lando relates the enjoyable and engrossing story at a brisk pace, has fun with the grim alternate reality premise, maintains a serious and thoughtful tone throughout, and generates a good deal of tension along with a strong feeling of urgency. Moreover, the plot is told on a very poignant and intimate human level which in turn gives this picture extra depth and emotional impact, with the upbeat ending in particular hitting the moving spot something nice. The sound acting by the capable cast rates as another substantial asset: Amy Bailey as Victor's bitter ex-wife Natalie, Mia Nordstrom as sweet daughter Jessica, Brendon Beiser as easygoing pal Chuck, Enzo Cilenti as rich jerk Leo Tarsky, and Yana Marinova as concerned therapist Dr. Frung. A cool little movie.
Director/co-writer Jeffery Scott Lando relates the enjoyable and engrossing story at a brisk pace, has fun with the grim alternate reality premise, maintains a serious and thoughtful tone throughout, and generates a good deal of tension along with a strong feeling of urgency. Moreover, the plot is told on a very poignant and intimate human level which in turn gives this picture extra depth and emotional impact, with the upbeat ending in particular hitting the moving spot something nice. The sound acting by the capable cast rates as another substantial asset: Amy Bailey as Victor's bitter ex-wife Natalie, Mia Nordstrom as sweet daughter Jessica, Brendon Beiser as easygoing pal Chuck, Enzo Cilenti as rich jerk Leo Tarsky, and Yana Marinova as concerned therapist Dr. Frung. A cool little movie.
Rock-solid sci-fi, could do with SFX remake (in places!)
ulrichburke6 April 2014
Warning: Spoilers
It starts off LOOKING like it's gonna be a genre flick - accident happens, hero knows how to cancel out accident, there's 90 minutes of headless-chickenry from the other characters getting in hero's way, hero finally gets past them all and saves the day.... But then it changes into a VERY neat alternate-reality movie which - MAYBE SPOILER ALERT,DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WOULD BE OR NOT - and this is the bit that impressed me - USES its low budget to great effect by having the whole 'city' filled with broken buildings, country living in fear of the weather. The atmosphere's great.
SFX - now I think they could have done better with those, budget or no, I've seen no-budget movies (Humanity's End, Project London) with awesome SFX. But they're TV-passable. Also, there's a cellphone they could have used far better (NOT a spoiler, I hope!) But overall the story's great. The acting's NOT as bad as people are saying. The story's a lovely sci-fi story (roll with the science, it's not TOO bad) and sod the above guys, it kept me gripped the whole time. In fact I've watched it 3 times now and enjoyed it. If they redid the SFX using the Project London/Asylum/Humanity's End guys, they could have a minor cinematic hit on their hands (and used the cellphone better!) But overall a very respectable piece of sci-fi. You lot've been spoiled by Hollywood blockbusters. Asylum? Which I know this movie ISN'T - give them a chance. I've seen a bunch of pretty darned good Asylum movies in various genres (OK, a few clunkers, but all studios have those.)2 REALLY GOOD Asylum movies? 7th Voyage of Sinbad (cinema hit should've-been) and The Haunting (lovingly crafted atmosphere.) Those guys've got tons better since they started, don't knock 'em! (I own 30 legit. DVDs) ulrichburke
SFX - now I think they could have done better with those, budget or no, I've seen no-budget movies (Humanity's End, Project London) with awesome SFX. But they're TV-passable. Also, there's a cellphone they could have used far better (NOT a spoiler, I hope!) But overall the story's great. The acting's NOT as bad as people are saying. The story's a lovely sci-fi story (roll with the science, it's not TOO bad) and sod the above guys, it kept me gripped the whole time. In fact I've watched it 3 times now and enjoyed it. If they redid the SFX using the Project London/Asylum/Humanity's End guys, they could have a minor cinematic hit on their hands (and used the cellphone better!) But overall a very respectable piece of sci-fi. You lot've been spoiled by Hollywood blockbusters. Asylum? Which I know this movie ISN'T - give them a chance. I've seen a bunch of pretty darned good Asylum movies in various genres (OK, a few clunkers, but all studios have those.)2 REALLY GOOD Asylum movies? 7th Voyage of Sinbad (cinema hit should've-been) and The Haunting (lovingly crafted atmosphere.) Those guys've got tons better since they started, don't knock 'em! (I own 30 legit. DVDs) ulrichburke
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
