Prisoner X (2016) User Reviews

A notch or 2 above your typical SyFy channel original movie

[HoLeeChit · 5/10 · 17 June 2017]

The best way to describe this movie would be if you took an average episode of The Outer Limits TV series (1995–2002) or the remade Twilight Zone TV series (1985–1989, 2002-2003), and extended it to a 2- hour format.

Sometimes time-travel movies are overly convoluted as a way to come off as original or smart, but Prisoner X handles it in a very straightforward manner.

The actors are unknown, but the majority do a good job. The story is creative, and the budget is high enough to provide believable sets and decent props without looking like something you'd see on MST3K.

Some of the scenes felt rushed, so better editing plus cutting out unnecessary side stories would have allowed other scenes to be extended.

You'll be disappointed if you expect a Michael Bay pew-pew fest or a Hollywood action/thriller film. It's definitely a notch or 2 above a typical SyFy channel original movie though.

Overall, Prisoner X is a good way to kill a few hours of boredom.

Time is not what it seems.

[nogodnomasters · 4/10 · 10 November 2017]

In 2002 Ramiro (Romano Orzari) is captured in Montana with 10 pounds of bomb grade uranium. He is placed in a black ops site in the US and is interrogated by Fischer (Damon Runyan). Years later he asks Carmen (Michelle Nolden) a former lover to help him. We already know he is a time traveling Jihadist. But what is the plan? Most of the film takes place in an underground bunker with cell phone service. There are occasional flashbacks and news reports to break up the low budget monotony . The film is basically head games. Nobody whistling "Time is on my side." Guide: F-word. No sex or nudity.

Good story

[curtis-35727 · 5/10 · 13 October 2020]

This is a no special effect movie enjoy the story and acting.

I'm the time traveler.

[westsideschl · 2/10 · 19 June 2017]

1. Cheap effects; what few there were. Cheap production with basically everything filmed in typical underground concrete bunker type room and lots of quick videos & photos of humanity doing harm to itself. So old & overused. Tiresome; not original. 2. So cheap they have no subtitles coupled with poor English enunciation and poor audio level control.Not that it matters that much since the dialogue was created by scientifically illiterate writers to sound scientifically intelligent. 3. Acting was soooo scripted robotic - stereotypical prisoner and interrogation methods. 4. Dumb science: Time traveler here to warn humanity; shows up out of nowhere and convinces interrogators by listing location and times for astronomical events. Cost to show us such overwhelming time traveler advanced capabilities - a piece of paper and a observatory photo. That's it for a civilization so advanced to just show up.

Dark, Dull and Dumb

[compugor · 2/10 · 7 October 2020]

A promising premise, but so poorly presented, with such a cheesey set, dreary dialog and lousy acting, that it quickly becomes almost a satire of a bad melodrama, but takes itself too seriously to warrant watching it beyond when your eyes start to hurt from rolling. This is bad, really bad, with a veneer of intrigue that only adds insult to injury.

Transparent plot, no saving grace

[jan-szafranski · 2/10 · 11 February 2021]

I wouldn't mind the lack of sets, heck I'd even give the poor acting and directing, but the Editting was shocking (thus irritating the story flow), but worse still was the story: obvious from the get go what was happening and going to happen, and the poor character backgrounds being told in obvious flashbacks.

If the editing, directing, and acting was good, then maybe the film could have been okay despite the weak story... it could have been distracted from by subplots or something (and not the cheesy "you killed my sister" ham). In all an inoffensive film if you're bored during lockdown... but don't expect much from this school kid written story

Low budget but good idea

[gjv-60919 · 7/10 · 10 September 2020]

Not your typical super low budget movie. You have to pay attention. It's a novel plot that I mostly couldn't predict. I liked it. My friend didn't like having to think. I'm going to give it a 7 for the novel plot, which is tough to find

I made it 30 minutes before I had to stop watching

[jneiberger-1 · 2/10 · 8 September 2020]

This is a bad, bad movie. It starts out bad and just gets worse. The dialogue is atrocious, trite and full of tropes. It's like a college student movie. From what I can tell so far, it seems like an interesting core of an idea, but the movie is just too awful. I can't wade through this to see how it turns out.

Good movie.

[DrProfessor · 7/10 · 31 August 2020]

I read a review by another user complaining about low budget production cost. I'll remind him, 'Twelve Angry Men', was filmed in two rooms, with no special affects. I have seen tremendously budgeted films that have sucked *alls, 'Battlefield Earth', comes to mind off the top of my head. This was a minimalistic film with the most recognizable actor being 'The Grim Reaper', from Supernatural. But I enjoyed the story.

Had potential, didn't deliver. Don't watch it.

[pbsocialconnect · 2/10 · 1 February 2024]

Low level directing and bad actors. The idea of the movie seemed interesting, but the movie couldn't achieve its purpose: to execute it.

Scientific accuracy and persuasiveness: Despite its attempt at scientific use, this film falls short, offering a poorly researched and inaccurately portrayed depiction of scientific concepts.

Relatedness to the real world: The display of political intrigue fails to grasp the complexities and realities. The depiction of presidential and CIA characters lacks authenticity and fails to capture the intricacies of their roles in real-life politics and intelligence operations.

Acting and characters: Michelle Nolden. Horrible to watch. Being the main character, she's the biggest fail of the movie. If the given dialogue was bad, improve it. If she improvised, even worse. Great actors have great skills for acting. They have a high EQ and are skilled at character analysis, observation, psychological insight, subtext interpretation, and physicality. They master dialect and language, voice control, tonality, modulation, body language, improvisation, and adaptability. Michelle Nolden doesn't demonstrate any of this.

Michelle Nolden portrays her character with such inconsistency that it becomes unbearable to watch. Every scene with her in it will make you cringe and want to look away. Ultimately, she ruins the story and demolishes the potential of the movie.

Now, the other characters weren't great too, but that's what you can expect from a low tier movie. They're just good enough.

Recommendation: Warning: Do not watch.

It's not a recommended movie to watch. If you just stumble upon it and decide to watch it, you will regret it. You deserve quality, this isn't it.

A nifty sci-fi movie, a unknown gem, give it a watch

[CmdrCody · 8/10 · 15 March 2019]

A lesser-known movie with unknown actors but the premise really put the hook in me. After watching the movie for five minutes, I was thinking...wow...where is this going? I won't get into the plot except to say that after watching and thinking about the film, I began to appreciate the little bits of logic interwoven into the narrative. There are things left unexplained including the implications of the ending, but the screenwriter leaves that up to you. I haven't told you much about the plot to let you experience it as I did: no prior information. If like well-written sci-fi, give PrisonerX a watch. Obviously, I enjoyed it.

Not bad at all

[loxford-53999 · 7/10 · 26 November 2020]

An odd little plot with an odd twist. Worth a watch.

A prisoner who is gone?

[bigdeb48-77-274140 · 3/10 · 24 February 2019]

This one film I tried to like it because I like futuristic movies, but couldn't hold my attention. No I donot recommend this. Jeez

Simplistic Drivel

[thales-63045 · 3/10 · 5 March 2024]

A sci-fi that seems intriguing but fails so miserably on the dialogue and story. It seems to be written by a teenager who has watched too many conspiracy theory movies. For lovers of pure scifi not grounded in any kind of reality then this is for you. If you like realistic scifi this won't be for you. All I can say is watch the scene where one of the characters is sneaking weed from one room to another and nobody in an ultra high security building can smell it. Really? You can smell that stuff in a passing car with the windows wound up. The rest is hokum. If life was that simplistic it'd be a revelation but hey this is a movie and the director doesn't want to confuse the audience. And the ending? A Jihadist who is afraid of death ? And what's with the yellow suits ? As I say simplistic drivel.

Pure Sci-Fi, Strong Story

[craigbenting · 8/10 · 28 August 2019]

I had this movie on my list-to-buy for a long time, just never got convinced to take the risk. There are no critical reviews for this movie and only a few hundred reviews on IMDB. And those reviews are wildly varied from low to high.

But, I finally took a chance on this movie today and watched it. I watched the whole movie from beginning to end, and I can honestly say it's a little sad that a movie this good seems to have been ignored by so many people, probably for the same reasons as I did.

After watching this whole movie, which I'm convinced most of the people who left low ratings did not bother to do, I can say this movie has one big thing going for it: pure science fiction. Not all the science is accurate, but it's much better than most movies that are considered sci-fi. Blended with the sci-fi was some decent drama. Together, they give this movie a very strong underlying story. This story is the kind of sci-fi story I can imagine paying to read.

The budget for this movie seems kind of low, but I expected that. And it doesn't really matter for this story. The acting was surprisingly very good considering I didn't recognize anyone in it, and I kind of expect poor acting in a low budget movie, but I saw no real sign of that. There were a couple of parts that had "OK" acting, but maybe only about 5 minutes out of the whole movie.

There were a few times during the movie when it seemed like it was getting predictable, like I knew where it was going and I'd been there before. But, that's the key with movies like this -- you have to take the whole thing in before making a judgement. In the end, it was not predictable, I didn't know where it was going until I got to the end, and I was very satisfied with that ending.

So, take a chance on this movie if you are a pure sci-fi fan and/or reader. Not only was it worth the money I paid to buy it, but I'll be watching it at least one more time. I honestly didn't believe I'd be saying that when I took the chance, so I'm very happy I took it.

Excellent film...

[mikejallen79 · 10/10 · 6 June 2017]

Yes, it's low budget. No, you probably don't know any of the actors...

But...

This is a fantastic sci-fi film that will keep you guessing, keep you entertained and even give you some ideas to think about.

It's well paced, edgy and claustrophobic with an excellent story line.

The actors work hard and work well together.

No, it won't win any Oscars for anything but it will win your appreciation, of that I am sure.

Unique home grown Canadian film

[davidphillips-75221 · 8/10 · 7 June 2017]

Comes down to what like. For my part, given a home grown Canadian film is not gonna have Brad Pitt or a Marvel Stan Lee block buster bank roll or marketing/releasing company backing them up but with what they had I'd call this a really fascinating product. very entertaining. The unique story and telling of it is their product, not the publicity or cast tours selling it.

Refreshing to find something different

[gunn-wrights · 8/10 · 14 October 2022]

I don't understand the low ratings? Maybe it's because there's only 19 reviews? People probably won't watch due to the low rating... BUT YOU'RE MISSING OUT!

This movie is truly original. I've watched it twice now, and still found little pieces I didn't pick up the first time around. If you're looking for Hollywood effects - cars blowing up, and people shooting 30 rounds from a .22 revolver, this is not for you! If you are looking for something that stimulates the mind, adds suspense, creates many 'what-if' scenarios - this is for you.

RECOMMENDATION: Highly recommend watching if you are looking for a well-written intellectual semi-futuristic (near future) film that will hold your attention - THIS IS THE HIDDEN GEM OF THE YEAR!!!

Great movie a couple of big flaws

[john2121fl · 10/10 · 20 September 2019]

Ok love it but the writer made a couple of mistakes #1 Huge at the end of the movie when Ramiro is being taken to the surface on the elevator they bluff him so he gives up the equation on time travel, first Ramiro could have given them the wrong equation test the equation before letting Ramiro kill himself Ramiro es way to smart for agent Carmen, second he can read their thoughts and has psychic abilities third and most important why would he care if he went to the surface we could always activate his suicide implant on the surface no need to kill himself on the elevator and he could also travel thru time so radiation is not really a threat to him, he could have taken his chances went to the surface and if he could not survive there he could have committed suicide at will but first seek all options, agent Reese is not believable with her bluff.

#2 When agent Reese enters the facilities the guy welcomes her and says can I help you? One of the most secure facilities the appropriate thing would have been is guys with guns waiting for her with the director and something like we been expecting you would have been more appropriate.

Other wise I loved the concept and this could be made into a series.

Gripping sci-fi thriller

[Woodyanders · 8/10 · 21 December 2021]

War and civil strife rage all over the world. Determined CIA interrogator Carem (a sturdy performance by Michelle Nolden) must crack captured terrorist Prisoner X (well played with twinkling menace by Romano Orzari), who claims to be a time traveler from the future who might be responsible for all the chaos.

Writer/director Gaurav Seth relates the complex and compelling story at a constant pace, generates a considerable amount of tension, maintains a dark despairing tone throughout, and makes good use of the gloomy underground base main location. The rock-solid acting from the able cast helps a lot: Julian Richings as no-nonsense facility head Jefferson, Nigel Bennett as concerned president Charles Turner, and Damon Runyan as the desperate Fischer. A real nail-biter.

A decent sci fi flick

[lopezpatricia-06139 · 8/10 · 9 April 2021]

Not bad a little bleak with the sets, but it does pay off close to the end with a twist and that all important 'explanation'

afterwards I thought about it and wonder...

[webhead-97553 · 8/10 · 14 October 2023]

First let me say I found this film VERY entertaining. I give it 8/10.

But afterwards I thought about it and wonder... Could one guy spread so much paranoia in so many countrys as he was given credit for, from an underground bunker, by talking to ONLY OUR SIDE?

I guess this movie had my 'willing suspension of disbelief' in full gear. Take that as a complement.

{need 240 more characters} But afterwards I thought about it and wonder... Could one guy spread so much paranoia in so many countrys as he was given credit for, from an underground bunker, by talking to ONLY OUR SIDE?

I guess this movie had my 'willing suspension of disbelief' in full gear. Take that as a complement.