"Tick Tock". is an excellent example of a film where less would have been best. What are obviously intended be taken as ultra clever plot twists eventually become so unbelievable that their impact is lost. Flipping back and forth in time is another distraction, and eventually the entire movie becomes "so what", due to the plot contrivances. Acting by Megan Ward, Kristin Minter, and Linden Ashby is acceptable, while David Dukes is superior. Don't get me wrong, the film is totally watchable, and if some of the plot twists that were piled on, were toned down or eliminated, this would be a neat little thriller. There is full frontal nudity, several attempts at dark humor that seem way out of place, and an unexpected ending that helps somewhat. MERK
25 Reviews
Attractive thriller that no one talks about.
makenai2 December 2000
I have to accept that this movie got my attention because Megan Ward was in it. Otherwise, I am sure I would not watch it. Luckily, I did, and let me tell you what I found.
From the beginning to the end, the movie maintains the suspense by revealing the plot gradually from different characters' standpoints. Therefore, you do not have the whole history until the director goes back in time and presents what happened from other character's viewpoint, which is necessary to be known to explain the story. Additionally, characters' motives are not so clear, giving the movie another conflict factor. I liked this way of developing the story as well as some transitions from one scene to another using a common object to both.
Respect to the story itself, it begins with M. Ward (Rachel) and D. Dukes (Holden) having sex. After that, he tells her he will be out for a couple of days to visit her daughter Anne (H. Burress) and he goes to take a shower. Then, Rachel calls her friend Carla (K. Minter) and they talk about doing something together; but Rachel is not sure. Later, Rachel drops Holden at the airport where he (knowing she talked with Carla) tells her to not spend time with Carla because she is a bad influence. From there, the story complicates when Rachel and Carla meet at a bar and casually get in touch with Travis (L. Ashby.)
Talking about the negatives, cast performance is not the best (but I expect that) and I did not like how the writer justified certain characters' conducts, although I believe it is probably me. Overall, I give this movie a solid six (6) using IMDB's user ratings as scale.
From the beginning to the end, the movie maintains the suspense by revealing the plot gradually from different characters' standpoints. Therefore, you do not have the whole history until the director goes back in time and presents what happened from other character's viewpoint, which is necessary to be known to explain the story. Additionally, characters' motives are not so clear, giving the movie another conflict factor. I liked this way of developing the story as well as some transitions from one scene to another using a common object to both.
Respect to the story itself, it begins with M. Ward (Rachel) and D. Dukes (Holden) having sex. After that, he tells her he will be out for a couple of days to visit her daughter Anne (H. Burress) and he goes to take a shower. Then, Rachel calls her friend Carla (K. Minter) and they talk about doing something together; but Rachel is not sure. Later, Rachel drops Holden at the airport where he (knowing she talked with Carla) tells her to not spend time with Carla because she is a bad influence. From there, the story complicates when Rachel and Carla meet at a bar and casually get in touch with Travis (L. Ashby.)
Talking about the negatives, cast performance is not the best (but I expect that) and I did not like how the writer justified certain characters' conducts, although I believe it is probably me. Overall, I give this movie a solid six (6) using IMDB's user ratings as scale.
Good for a Lifetime Movie Network flick & for a Amazon Prime Offering
Jakealope10 October 2021
Usually LMN movies show some plucky woman escape from some psychopaths, usually a mother protecting their kids. But in this case the two female leads are cheating, conniving murderous females who are also lesbian lovers. See Rachel wants to do in her older patronizing husband Holden who is kind of a jerk but otherwise treats her okay. So she conspires with her childhood friend and lesbian lover Carla to do him in. So to do this, they rope a hapless cowboy, Travis this is set in Bakersfield CA, their C&W rodeo town. Carla makes Travis think that they just want to blackmail rich cheating Rachel with photos of them getting it on. There is also a private detective Clay, played by Cliff from Cheers who was hired by Holden to check on his wife, The 2 scheming women use his tailings and notes as part of their alibis and evidence to frame their cowboy accomplice. There is a scene where naked Carla bludgeons Rachel's husband to death using an elephant tusk, with the plausible explanation she doesn't want to get blood on her clothes. That is the closest I've seen to porn in a LMN movie.
Events cause their plans to unravel but Carla stays one step ahead and keeps thinking of new ploys to compensate. The title. "Tick Tock" comes from the use of an old wind up clock spinning backwards to indicate this scene is a flashback. Though the endless twists become a bit too much, the dark ending is well worth the wait!
Events cause their plans to unravel but Carla stays one step ahead and keeps thinking of new ploys to compensate. The title. "Tick Tock" comes from the use of an old wind up clock spinning backwards to indicate this scene is a flashback. Though the endless twists become a bit too much, the dark ending is well worth the wait!
Starts cleverly but the twists get silly towards the end
bob the moo4 January 2002
Rachel is a young woman married to a very rich older man, Holden Avery. However a night out with her friend Carla ends with a one night stand with Travis. Travis is working with Carla and they produce photographs of the two together. Travis tries to blackmail Rachel for $100,000 to destroy the photographs, but Carla is also working with Rachel in a bigger plot involving murder and double-crosses.
I didn't have high hopes for this due to it's unknown cast and the speed with which it reached TV. At the start it looked like another TV film with the same old plot, however it actually gets a bit cleverer than that and has some nice twists and turns, some you expect and some you don't. The clocks winding time back stuff allows us to jump back in forth in time every time a twist occurs - letting us see how the twist came about and a little back story or to see the same events from a different point of view. This is cleverly done but is nothing more than a fancy flashback tool. The twists get a bit silly after a while and aren't as credible the more the film goes on. It's a shame because it starts picking up momentum only to get too fast to be believable.
The unknown cast do a reasonable job, Kristin Minter is the best role (although I felt she was needless shot nude just to keep viewers interest). Megan Ward is not great, she is too tearful and scared at the start and too ruthless at the end, but she does OK. Ashby is also weak with a good ol' boy character. David Duke is one of the worst - not really doing anything with his character or lines. Ratzenberger (best known from Cheers) is good as a private eye but his scenes are often daft and this makes him look bad - for example he is following Rachel as she meets someone in a deserted parking lot, he parks 5 cars lengths away in the middle of an empty lot but doesn't get noticed! Most of his scenes have stupid mistakes like that, things that a real PI would never get away with.
Overall this is cleverer than I thought it would be. The "tick-tock" element makes the flashback idea more interesting, but the twists that are so good at first quickly get silly and a bit tiresome.
I didn't have high hopes for this due to it's unknown cast and the speed with which it reached TV. At the start it looked like another TV film with the same old plot, however it actually gets a bit cleverer than that and has some nice twists and turns, some you expect and some you don't. The clocks winding time back stuff allows us to jump back in forth in time every time a twist occurs - letting us see how the twist came about and a little back story or to see the same events from a different point of view. This is cleverly done but is nothing more than a fancy flashback tool. The twists get a bit silly after a while and aren't as credible the more the film goes on. It's a shame because it starts picking up momentum only to get too fast to be believable.
The unknown cast do a reasonable job, Kristin Minter is the best role (although I felt she was needless shot nude just to keep viewers interest). Megan Ward is not great, she is too tearful and scared at the start and too ruthless at the end, but she does OK. Ashby is also weak with a good ol' boy character. David Duke is one of the worst - not really doing anything with his character or lines. Ratzenberger (best known from Cheers) is good as a private eye but his scenes are often daft and this makes him look bad - for example he is following Rachel as she meets someone in a deserted parking lot, he parks 5 cars lengths away in the middle of an empty lot but doesn't get noticed! Most of his scenes have stupid mistakes like that, things that a real PI would never get away with.
Overall this is cleverer than I thought it would be. The "tick-tock" element makes the flashback idea more interesting, but the twists that are so good at first quickly get silly and a bit tiresome.
Actually not bad
blanche-24 July 2009
I caught this on the Lifetime Movie Network and watched it because Megan Ward of "General Hospital" was in it. It's a pretty clever story with the device of showing the actions of a certain character, then showing a clock moving backwards and showing the actions of another character leading up to the same point. The movie has quite a few interesting twists.
The acting isn't much, and obviously the budget wasn't very big - the biggest name here is David Dukes, who plays Ward's wealthy husband. He doesn't have much to do, and it's surprising that he took the role. Apparently this was a feature film, which I find hard to believe - maybe it went straight to video. It's a strictly TV cast, particularly Ward and Linden Ashby.
If you see it's on and you like mystery and suspense films, you'll probably like it. Or you might want to rent it because the sex stuff is cut on TV.
The acting isn't much, and obviously the budget wasn't very big - the biggest name here is David Dukes, who plays Ward's wealthy husband. He doesn't have much to do, and it's surprising that he took the role. Apparently this was a feature film, which I find hard to believe - maybe it went straight to video. It's a strictly TV cast, particularly Ward and Linden Ashby.
If you see it's on and you like mystery and suspense films, you'll probably like it. Or you might want to rent it because the sex stuff is cut on TV.
Provably Laughably Bad
lwmswm19 August 2021
Warning: Spoilers
It takes only one example to demonstrate how laughably bad this movie is. The movie ends with one of the female killers beating some poor 1/2 way handcuffed sap to death with a shovel. The big twist is before he dies he clicks the empty end of the handcuff to her ankle. The movie ends with their skeletons handcuffed together. Simple question: why didn't she use the shovel to chop off his dead hand and just walk away? Beyond stupid.
Chained for Life
sol-kay24 April 2011
Warning: Spoilers
***SPOILERS*** Very much like Stanley Kbrick's 1956 crime thriller "The Killing" the made for TV flick "Tic Tock" or "A friendship to kill for" uses the movie technique of flashbacks in real time to reconstruct it's very complicated plot making it easy for its audience to follow it.
In the film lesbian lovers Rachal & Carla, Megan Ward & Kristin Minter,plan to knock off Rachel's rich husband Holden Avery, David Dukes, who's known in these parts, the West Coast, of the country as the potato king. It's Holden who supplies most of the restaurants in California Oregon and Washington state with top grade Idaho potatoes that he personally inspects for any defects to make sure that their top grade.
Holden in fact is suspicious that his wife Rachel is cheating on him and had employed private detective Clay Fairfield, John Ratzenberger, to check her out. Fairfield comes up with this urban cowboy type Travis Brewer, Linden Ashby, who's been trying to get friendly with her since he introduced herself to Raciel at a local bar. As we soon find out Travis is part of the plan that the manipulating Carla, in fact he's her secret lover, is using both Rachel & Travis to not only knock off Holden but have Travis, a two time loser already, end up taking the rap for it!
Everything works like clockwork with Holden getting his skull smashed in by Carla with Travis who was told to go to Holden's mansion for his payoff money, in him blackmailing Rachael, being spotted by PI Fairfield where he'd end being the prime suspect in Holden's murder! As things soon turned out Holden's daughter Anne, Hedy Burress, showed up unexpectedly at the Holden Mansion complicating things for the two murderesses! What's even more disturbing for Rachel & Carla is that Travis, in finding Holden's body, had cleaned up the bloody mess hiding Holden's battered and bloodied corpes in the woods thus taking him out of being a suspect in his murder!
****SPOILERS**** With their perfect crime unraveling both Rachel and Clara start to unravel themselves in trying to cover it up! With Travis,the designated fall guy, being the only one who can finger the girls in Holden's murder he's then set up to be murdered himself by Carla & Rachel only to end up , by the skin of his teeth, getting away. It's when Travis runs out of luck and is about to be gunned down by Rachel who had earlier murdered her partner in crime Carla, for cheating on her with him, that he ends up not only getting away in a sense but taking his potential murderer,Rachel, along with him! In a most unusual both together and unexpected way!
In the film lesbian lovers Rachal & Carla, Megan Ward & Kristin Minter,plan to knock off Rachel's rich husband Holden Avery, David Dukes, who's known in these parts, the West Coast, of the country as the potato king. It's Holden who supplies most of the restaurants in California Oregon and Washington state with top grade Idaho potatoes that he personally inspects for any defects to make sure that their top grade.
Holden in fact is suspicious that his wife Rachel is cheating on him and had employed private detective Clay Fairfield, John Ratzenberger, to check her out. Fairfield comes up with this urban cowboy type Travis Brewer, Linden Ashby, who's been trying to get friendly with her since he introduced herself to Raciel at a local bar. As we soon find out Travis is part of the plan that the manipulating Carla, in fact he's her secret lover, is using both Rachel & Travis to not only knock off Holden but have Travis, a two time loser already, end up taking the rap for it!
Everything works like clockwork with Holden getting his skull smashed in by Carla with Travis who was told to go to Holden's mansion for his payoff money, in him blackmailing Rachael, being spotted by PI Fairfield where he'd end being the prime suspect in Holden's murder! As things soon turned out Holden's daughter Anne, Hedy Burress, showed up unexpectedly at the Holden Mansion complicating things for the two murderesses! What's even more disturbing for Rachel & Carla is that Travis, in finding Holden's body, had cleaned up the bloody mess hiding Holden's battered and bloodied corpes in the woods thus taking him out of being a suspect in his murder!
****SPOILERS**** With their perfect crime unraveling both Rachel and Clara start to unravel themselves in trying to cover it up! With Travis,the designated fall guy, being the only one who can finger the girls in Holden's murder he's then set up to be murdered himself by Carla & Rachel only to end up , by the skin of his teeth, getting away. It's when Travis runs out of luck and is about to be gunned down by Rachel who had earlier murdered her partner in crime Carla, for cheating on her with him, that he ends up not only getting away in a sense but taking his potential murderer,Rachel, along with him! In a most unusual both together and unexpected way!
time shifting ad nauseum
vandelaygoods27 April 2001
this movie had a great premise, but failed to develop it in an intelligent manner. the crazy time shifting was the main frustrating element. the best performance was given by the sly pi, and since he wasn't a central character - this gives you an indication of the films quality. the plot was developed so plainly, it was almost insulting to the intelligence - leaving nothing to the imagination. the time shifts were also guilty of this - leaving the viewer frustrated "get on with it!!!". a great movie for those who have trouble working out difficult plot construction - ie six year-olds, but the violence precludes this unfortunately.
Tick Tock is a Good Title
whpratt16 January 2006
Viewed this film which was called "A Friendship to Die For", and through out the entire picture you noticed a clock in quite a few scenes and I wondered why, now I find out the picture was really called "Tick Tock" and it makes more sense. There seemed to always be a rush against the clock in this film about two females who were great friends and had a wonderful deep love for each other which was boiling over and over. Megan Ward, (Rachel Avery), "Mirror Man",'03 and Kristin Minter,(Carla),"Pissed",'05 were the two lovers who had a clever plan and a poor sucker of a guy gets roped into all kinds of situations. There is a private detective who drives around a beat up piece of junk something like a "Colombo" style vehicle only Worse. All kinds of murders happen and bodies are transported here and there. You will simply love the ending, which I thought was simply Great. Enjoy
Made In Bakersfield
grimmgirl31 February 2009
I caught this movie on Lifetime Movie Network. I really only watched it because it's opening screen was the Bakersfield street sign. As a new Bakersfield resident, I was fascinated to find out how many places I could recognize in this movie. Not much. But I do believe it captured some of the "Nashville West" culture, with the cowboys, the country-western bar, Tony Llama sign. It also shows that the typical "armpit of America" slam I sometimes hear about Bakersfield does not take into account the many affluent citizens who own high-dollar extravagant homes. As for the movie, it kept my attention until the end, which is rare in my case for TV. I enjoyed the ending, where the ditsy blond turned out to be cold as ice. And the kinky twist, how she was in love with her female friend was revealed as she shot her to death. Oh, and of course, you had to love the gory handcuff scene in the end! This must have been along the road somewhere heading to Kernville, along the Kern River. That's it, pretty good movie, a cold-blooded Thelma and Louise.
Somewhat Entertaining, But Loses Ground
Mehki_Girl12 April 2021
Warning: Spoilers
***Spoilers***
They lost me when they stupidly retrieved the husband's body.
All kinds of things could go wrong - there's something called lividity, blood splatter analysis, trace evidence, so unless CSI and the cops are idiots, there's going to be uncomfortable questions these idiots won't be able to answer.
They lost me when they stupidly retrieved the husband's body.
All kinds of things could go wrong - there's something called lividity, blood splatter analysis, trace evidence, so unless CSI and the cops are idiots, there's going to be uncomfortable questions these idiots won't be able to answer.
Nifty genre thriller driven by Kristin Minter as a bad girl.
CraigA2321 April 2001
This is a nifty, no nonsense thriller that starts out almost like Thelma & Louise and then veers sharply into darker territory. Megan Ward gets top billing but the movie is driven by a strong performance from Kristin Minter (E.R.) as a bad, bad girl. The plot is the usual tangle of cross and double cross that typifies the genre, but director/writer Kevin Tenney keeps the audience on its toes with some clever editing that yanks the viewer around in the timeline and shows events from the viewpoint of different characters. There's plenty of blood and violence and some dark humor. There's also an unexpected and quite gratuitous nude scene by Kristin Minter but, hey, who's complaining. Worth a look.
Worse ways to spend a couple of hours
caa8211 September 2008
This was a decent flick to watch at the beginning of a holiday weekend, just before getting ready to head-out. It was a "double-cross," followed by "double-cross," followed by "double-cross..." story, with flashbacks/re-playings of scenes, introduced by a backward-spinning clock face (with fancy Roman numerals, yet!!), sort of a "poor man's 'Roshomon'."
A lot of Lifetime movies have the psychotic, murderous neighbor or babysitter or student, etc., or a heroine dealing with a spouse with a secret pass, and/ or fleeing great danger. This story was a refreshing change in this regard. It had some holes, but was actually as good a mystery/thriller as some of the big-screen, mega-buck, "A"-list movies.
But it did, somewhat amusingly, have one quality which about 98 or 99% Lifetime presentations contain: the male characters were vacuous, clueless and possessed a level of intelligence far inferior to the ladies of the cast.
Anyway, the leads were attractive, and the two gals deliciously "bad," especially the one who was the prime author and leader of the devious undertakings.
I didn't recognize any of the thespians, except for John Ratzenberger, but apparently they have histories in some popular day- and night-time TV fare which weren't programs I ever watched.
All-in-all not the worst way to spend a couple of hours relaxing.
A lot of Lifetime movies have the psychotic, murderous neighbor or babysitter or student, etc., or a heroine dealing with a spouse with a secret pass, and/ or fleeing great danger. This story was a refreshing change in this regard. It had some holes, but was actually as good a mystery/thriller as some of the big-screen, mega-buck, "A"-list movies.
But it did, somewhat amusingly, have one quality which about 98 or 99% Lifetime presentations contain: the male characters were vacuous, clueless and possessed a level of intelligence far inferior to the ladies of the cast.
Anyway, the leads were attractive, and the two gals deliciously "bad," especially the one who was the prime author and leader of the devious undertakings.
I didn't recognize any of the thespians, except for John Ratzenberger, but apparently they have histories in some popular day- and night-time TV fare which weren't programs I ever watched.
All-in-all not the worst way to spend a couple of hours relaxing.
Going back in time to reveal plot twists was unique.
sol8712 June 2004
The many time shifts reminded me of the book "Slaughterhouse Five", by Kurt Vonnegut, but this movie was not as confusing as that book. Using those time shifts into the past in order to reveal some plot twists kept it interesting. Showing the spinning hands of a clock in order to alert the viewer of the upcoming time shifts did get old though. Carla's (played by Kristin Minter) constantly repeated comment "this will be better than what we planned" (or some variation thereof), which she used whenever things went wrong, also got old quickly.
John Ratzenberger's performance as P.I. Clay Fairfield, was refreshing in a non-Cliff Clavin role.
I must have missed something, but can anyone e-mail me to tell me how the body got out of the trunk about 3/4 of the way through the movie? (when shortly after that, Rachel Avery found it laying alongside the road).
John Ratzenberger's performance as P.I. Clay Fairfield, was refreshing in a non-Cliff Clavin role.
I must have missed something, but can anyone e-mail me to tell me how the body got out of the trunk about 3/4 of the way through the movie? (when shortly after that, Rachel Avery found it laying alongside the road).
Should have stopped twisting earlier
wolftxusa30 March 2024
Warning: Spoilers
Up to halfway through the movie I would have given it a 10. Interesting story, interesting twists, surprising elements (like killing someone naked).
But in the latter half, things fell apart. Some scenes were unbelievable, like a piece of cloth hanging out of the trunk. They wouldn't have noticed that when they stowed the body? And the cop would not have asked to see the trunk? Or the jealousy from seeing Carla with Travis - didn't she know that Carla would put out to get Travis involved in her scheme? Carla called him a good lay earlier. And didn't she know that Travis needed to be distracted at that point? The lesbian aspect hasn't been given enough emphasis to cause such a reaction. You'd think that a corpse in her trunk would be more important than an emotional reaction.
The end was as witty as it was stupid. Handcuffing her was a smart move by Travis, but what's stupid is that they were shown decomposed. Wouldn't the cops search a radius farther than how much they walked from the car? Wouldn't joggers have found them in the time it takes to rot so much? And most importantly, wouldn't she have used sticks, rocks, teeth or anything to sever his hand and free himself (the shovel was gone at that point)?
I'd still recommend the movie, but the ending is a bit chaotic and disappointing.
But in the latter half, things fell apart. Some scenes were unbelievable, like a piece of cloth hanging out of the trunk. They wouldn't have noticed that when they stowed the body? And the cop would not have asked to see the trunk? Or the jealousy from seeing Carla with Travis - didn't she know that Carla would put out to get Travis involved in her scheme? Carla called him a good lay earlier. And didn't she know that Travis needed to be distracted at that point? The lesbian aspect hasn't been given enough emphasis to cause such a reaction. You'd think that a corpse in her trunk would be more important than an emotional reaction.
The end was as witty as it was stupid. Handcuffing her was a smart move by Travis, but what's stupid is that they were shown decomposed. Wouldn't the cops search a radius farther than how much they walked from the car? Wouldn't joggers have found them in the time it takes to rot so much? And most importantly, wouldn't she have used sticks, rocks, teeth or anything to sever his hand and free himself (the shovel was gone at that point)?
I'd still recommend the movie, but the ending is a bit chaotic and disappointing.
gripping
genieinabottle8 June 2007
Warning: Spoilers
Tick Tock was a lot of fun to watch and kept me interested throughout. Two main roles are played by beautiful actresses that give very good performances. Carla (Kristin Minter) and Rachel (Megan Ward) scheme to kill Rachel's wealthy husband, Holden (David Dukes), to get the whole inheritance. All they need is a patsy who would do the dirty work for them. Carla's lover, Travis (Linden Ashby), seems a perfect choice. The two female characters have strikingly different personalities - Carla is devious and cold-blooded, she does the planning and keeps her cool when things go out of hand. She's the mastermind of the scheme. Her partner Rachel, on the contrary, is tearful, unsure of herself and loses her cool whenever something goes wrong. She completely depends on Carla for instructions what to do. She gets a bit annoying when she is constantly saying things like 'Now what?' 'Now what's the plan?' 'Are you sure?' 'What are we doing now?' 'Do you think that's a good idea?' 'I don't know,' I was thinking that maybe we should wait?' I don't think I can go through with this,' 'I don't think I can keep this up,' 'No, I can't, I can't, Carla,' 'What are we doing?!' and ... 'I think I peed my pants.'
The events in the movie are not presented in order but the series of flashbacks provides the viewer with a more comprehensive insight into the intricacies of the plot and make the movie more intriguing.
I enjoyed watching Tick Tock even though it has some flaws, the ending being the major one. Why would indecisive Rachel want to kill Carla when throughout the movie it was Carla who planned and managed the whole thing and encouraged Rachel to keep at it every time she was about to chicken out? What was she trying to achieve by doing so? Now that she's lost her smart partner she completely blows her chances of getting away with the crime. At that moment the movie lost logic to me. And it is beyond me why faint-hearted Rachel would hack Travis to death bashing him hard so many times with a shovel if earlier in the movie she was clearly disgusted at the way Carla killed Holden. Also, there was only one scene showing that Carla and Rachel were lesbians. The motivation for the crime would be more convincing if their relationship was developed better. Aside from the ending, Tick Tock is great fun to watch.
I found the soundtrack pretty good.
The events in the movie are not presented in order but the series of flashbacks provides the viewer with a more comprehensive insight into the intricacies of the plot and make the movie more intriguing.
I enjoyed watching Tick Tock even though it has some flaws, the ending being the major one. Why would indecisive Rachel want to kill Carla when throughout the movie it was Carla who planned and managed the whole thing and encouraged Rachel to keep at it every time she was about to chicken out? What was she trying to achieve by doing so? Now that she's lost her smart partner she completely blows her chances of getting away with the crime. At that moment the movie lost logic to me. And it is beyond me why faint-hearted Rachel would hack Travis to death bashing him hard so many times with a shovel if earlier in the movie she was clearly disgusted at the way Carla killed Holden. Also, there was only one scene showing that Carla and Rachel were lesbians. The motivation for the crime would be more convincing if their relationship was developed better. Aside from the ending, Tick Tock is great fun to watch.
I found the soundtrack pretty good.
Cleaver (no spoilers)
fedrulez18 December 2002
The only reason I watched this film was because of Megan Ward but I'm glad I did. The film is good to pass the time I like these types of flicks. I think it can be compared to 'Wild Things' its got a ton of plot twists and some twisted humor.
Well worth the watch. The cast is good as it needs to be with the two female leads doing well. All the film needed was an actual 'scary' bad guy figure none the actors came across that way.
Well worth the watch. The cast is good as it needs to be with the two female leads doing well. All the film needed was an actual 'scary' bad guy figure none the actors came across that way.
Exceptionally intriguing plot and two lovely actresses
drbill-114 August 2004
When I started watching this movie on TV, my first thought was, "Never heard of any of these cast members." However, I realized that at one time Bogart, John Wayne, Tom Hanks, and Sean Connery had not been heard of either, so I was patient.
What a densely woven plot! What intrigue and double-crossing. I would not believe anyone who told me he or she figured out the ending ahead of time.
And what lovely actresses. They could energize a dull movie pretty quickly, and in this lively movie they were something else!
I would watch this one again, and try to figure out all the nuances, because there are plenty of them!
What a densely woven plot! What intrigue and double-crossing. I would not believe anyone who told me he or she figured out the ending ahead of time.
And what lovely actresses. They could energize a dull movie pretty quickly, and in this lively movie they were something else!
I would watch this one again, and try to figure out all the nuances, because there are plenty of them!
Director hits his mark
jamesb-1521 April 2001
I found the film to be pleasingly acted and very well crafted. It seems to set out as an old fashioned "who dunnit, mystery plot, blackmail plot,etc" but with very modern twists. The director really hit the mark. The ending was excellent, in its own right, understated, but still able to put its point across towards its audience.
Great! Very interesting story!
minunimion2 December 2022
I thought of watching a boring movie without any meaning and with a bad story. No way! It has been great! Very intriguing plot, very well developed, good acting and directing. A really wonderful surprise!
Full of suspense, tension and... many times I thought that I clearly got it, but then I always realized that I was wrong and so eager to know... what will happen then? Who was who? Who really knew? Obviously after a while I had the answers, but then again a new situation and all of this until the end that was really unexpected.
I'm not going to say anything else, as I want that you would discover all the shades, shadows and clues, so no spoiler, just few words to push you to give a look to this quite unknown tv movie, but much better than others more considered known movies. Hope that many people will be able to see it and hopefully enjoyed it as I did.
Recommended, 9 stars... maybe too many, but it deserves a better score than it currently has.
Full of suspense, tension and... many times I thought that I clearly got it, but then I always realized that I was wrong and so eager to know... what will happen then? Who was who? Who really knew? Obviously after a while I had the answers, but then again a new situation and all of this until the end that was really unexpected.
I'm not going to say anything else, as I want that you would discover all the shades, shadows and clues, so no spoiler, just few words to push you to give a look to this quite unknown tv movie, but much better than others more considered known movies. Hope that many people will be able to see it and hopefully enjoyed it as I did.
Recommended, 9 stars... maybe too many, but it deserves a better score than it currently has.
Jaw-dropping
adam-amp-sophie26 September 2004
We stumbled across this movie on TV whilst on holiday in Croatia and watched enthralled as it developed. It's like watching a car crash: you feel awful for the people involved but you still can't tear yourself away.
It's as if the script writer kept attempting to put in ever more unbelievable plot twists all the while thinking "they'll never go for this... or will they...?". The only thing that really annoyed us was the fact that Holden's body managed to extricate itself from the car boot with no help or explanantion.
All in all this film made me appreciate the fact that as British TV has improved, there's now less room for this kind of risible American nonsense - and perhaps we're the poorer for it.
It's as if the script writer kept attempting to put in ever more unbelievable plot twists all the while thinking "they'll never go for this... or will they...?". The only thing that really annoyed us was the fact that Holden's body managed to extricate itself from the car boot with no help or explanantion.
All in all this film made me appreciate the fact that as British TV has improved, there's now less room for this kind of risible American nonsense - and perhaps we're the poorer for it.
A surprisingly enjoyable thriller!
PhantomAgony31 January 2010
Warning: Spoilers
THIS REVIEW CONTAINS MILD SPOILERS TOWARDS THE END, BUT NOTHING CONCRETE AND DOES NOT SPOILER REALLY ANYTHING..
I just watched this film, called 'A Friendship to Die For' on Lifetime and was pleasantly surprised by what an enjoyable thriller it was and the way the director told the story, constantly flashing back in time to view the scenario from a different characters' perspective was creative. There were many twists in this film and it did not follow a formulaic thriller plot which was refreshing. Just when you thought you knew what was going to happen, there would be a twist and then a flashback to show the audience how exactly that twist came to happen.
The story is basically about a murder plot that goes wrong and the antics that happen during the night to try and fix the crime, only things keep going wrong, things keep trying to be corrected and before the killer(s) know it, they are in over their heads.
My one gripe was the ongoing theme to see who could incriminate themselves more with DNA/Fingerprint evidence. The actual murder is committed in the nude telling the audience that said killer(s) is conscious of this type of thing yet once things start going wrong, DNA/Fingerprints don't really seem to be on the killer(s) mind(s) as he/she/they go from object to object touching at will and throw objects like a blood soaked dead body into a car trunk for transportation without even considering the DNA that will be left behind. It became comical at times which I don't really know if it that is a good or bad thing.
Also.. why, once the dead body went MIA, Megan Ward's character of Rachel didn't just call 911 and act like he was missing is beyond me. I guess they wouldn't have had a movie then. Ha.. since had she done that, she probably would have been home free since she had an alibi and the PI man had seen the cowboy's car at the home making him suspect number 1. Plus, the dead body would have eventually been found... Just a thought. It's almost certain that the cowboy would have gone down for the murder..but again, then we wouldn't have a movie. :)
I just watched this film, called 'A Friendship to Die For' on Lifetime and was pleasantly surprised by what an enjoyable thriller it was and the way the director told the story, constantly flashing back in time to view the scenario from a different characters' perspective was creative. There were many twists in this film and it did not follow a formulaic thriller plot which was refreshing. Just when you thought you knew what was going to happen, there would be a twist and then a flashback to show the audience how exactly that twist came to happen.
The story is basically about a murder plot that goes wrong and the antics that happen during the night to try and fix the crime, only things keep going wrong, things keep trying to be corrected and before the killer(s) know it, they are in over their heads.
My one gripe was the ongoing theme to see who could incriminate themselves more with DNA/Fingerprint evidence. The actual murder is committed in the nude telling the audience that said killer(s) is conscious of this type of thing yet once things start going wrong, DNA/Fingerprints don't really seem to be on the killer(s) mind(s) as he/she/they go from object to object touching at will and throw objects like a blood soaked dead body into a car trunk for transportation without even considering the DNA that will be left behind. It became comical at times which I don't really know if it that is a good or bad thing.
Also.. why, once the dead body went MIA, Megan Ward's character of Rachel didn't just call 911 and act like he was missing is beyond me. I guess they wouldn't have had a movie then. Ha.. since had she done that, she probably would have been home free since she had an alibi and the PI man had seen the cowboy's car at the home making him suspect number 1. Plus, the dead body would have eventually been found... Just a thought. It's almost certain that the cowboy would have gone down for the murder..but again, then we wouldn't have a movie. :)
Quite An Interesting Thriller
rosemcgowanrulez200130 October 2001
To start off with my review on this flick I will say that if anyone is expecting an awesome cutting edge thriller then pass on my review. But if you have an open mind when it comes to direct-to-video flicks then read on. Now "Tick Tock" is actually not too bad of a thriller. Getting a pretty face like Megan Ward doesn't hurt at all. The movie does start off slow and it may not catch your interest, but hey it is only for the first about 15-20 minutes. Then when Megan Ward and pal are at the bar and a "cowboy" walks over to them to chat, the first thing Melrose Place viewers will do is laugh because for those of us who watched MP, Megan Ward played Connie and Linden Ashby played Dr. Bret Cooper "Coop" at the hospital, he plays this "cowboy" Travis. Anyhow, the director of this flick makes you think "what the?" when after certain things happen, the clock turns back and we see an in depth type of view of a character which will explain why a certain thing has happening at points in the story. This happens throughout the flick and definitely kept me interested. John Ratzenberger, Cliff from Cheers, is in this and he plays his small role actually good as a P.I. And David Dukes plays the rich husband,Holden,of Megan Ward's character Rachel. The plot is Rachel and Carla are planning to kill Holden and from there the story has lots of twists and turns. Even her husband has a certain plan. So everyone in the movie crosses paths one time or another in this movie and it is really cool how it is done. Sort of like 2 Days In The Valley. The cast is small and that is good so you will keep on getting into this story as each character is not what you think they are. The poorest acting out of this is done by Kristin Minter. Her acting is sub par compared to Megan Ward's and I think Megan is under rated. Was she not good in Encino Man? All in all this is a good thriller/mystery movie but the ending will make you say "what kind of ending is this?" I guess the director just couldn't come up with a great ending, but then direct to video movies/B-movies usually end that way. Oh and yes the usual lesbian type scene is in there. Megan and Kristin both share a kiss, where else, in the women's washroom at the bar. Megan Ward is sexy and maybe she will start to do some more of these types of flicks like Kari Wuhrer. 5 out of 10.
The title is ambiguous, the movie is not.
Rob_P16 March 2001
I flicked on to this movie at about 2 a.m. this morning.
I read the brief overview and thought it warranted closer attention. The reviewer had used the phrase 'gripping thriller'.
The only regret I have about this movie is that is was shown so late at night / early in the morning. Definitely a 9 p.m. showing.
The clock-thing puzzled me but I realized that this was an innovative way of showing a scene from a different person's perspective.
Lots of nice touches and details punctuate the story, especially the final scene.
I won't try to categorize it - it falls into a miscellaneous category of movie. It's not a Citizen Kane, but it's definitely not a B-Movie either.
I read the brief overview and thought it warranted closer attention. The reviewer had used the phrase 'gripping thriller'.
The only regret I have about this movie is that is was shown so late at night / early in the morning. Definitely a 9 p.m. showing.
The clock-thing puzzled me but I realized that this was an innovative way of showing a scene from a different person's perspective.
Lots of nice touches and details punctuate the story, especially the final scene.
I won't try to categorize it - it falls into a miscellaneous category of movie. It's not a Citizen Kane, but it's definitely not a B-Movie either.
Lesbians gone wrong
geoffox-766-41846731 October 2010
This film is so confusing, you don't know who is going with who and eventually you don't really care. There is some interesting casting in this. Megan Ward a dumb blond, Kristen Minter a ruthless bitch and Linden Ashby as the guy in the middle who sleeps with both on their off nights. By the way Ashby is a dead ringer for Chris Potter, also a LMN favorite. Then we have David Dukes wasted, John Ratzenberger wasted in thankless roles. It was such a mix up of plot, focus and intentions. What is the screenwriter trying to say? My favorite part was when the blond bimbo shot the bitch. I cheered for she was that horrible. Ending was silly and ridiculous. No vote on this trite.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
