Avengers Grimm: Time Wars (2018 Video) User Reviews

Another Asylum Dud

[Snootz · 3/10 · 17 July 2018]

If it's got "Asylum" on the credits, it's a dud, every time. Potential viewers be warned: this is no different than typical Asylum schlock. Neither funny nor entertaining... but amazingly not as bad as most Asylum films.

The acting is so-so, not as bad as everyone might present considering the budget, short production time and terrible directing. The script is terrible, which gives the actors little to work with. I actually rather enjoyed the part of Rumple; he was properly villainous. Mag was over-the-top villainous, which such parts require. Mad Hatter and Alice were moderately tolerable. Sleeping Beauty was a blonde bimbo present only for eye candy. Prince Charming was ridiculously and properly hero-prone. Red was fairly cute and decently acted (for a limited-part stone-cold assassin).

The time travel theme and special effects were neither as bad nor as confusing as some have claimed in reviews. The time travel part was actually rather simplistic as far as such plots go. It's Asylum; no one expects cerebral out of them. I don't really understand how other reviewers didn't follow the time-travel pattern; it wasn't at all complex... nor even essential to the plot. It was just sort of thrown in for who knows what reason. So they could tack "Time Wars" onto the title?

This might be good for a chuckle on a rainy Saturday, Mystery-Science style with your friends. Or not. Again: there are far better films. I really don't know why I bother to keep watching Asylum films. Deer in the headlights or the ridiculously-optimistic belief that someday they just might make a good one. Seriously... that is just never going to happen.

The latest Asylum rip-off

[Leofwine_draca · 3/10 · 29 November 2018]

AVENGERS GRIMM: TIME WARS is the latest rip-off from The Asylum, at least for the time being; this one copies the big bucks Marvel flick INFINITY WAR. It's a sequel to an earlier AVENGERS GRIMM which I haven't seen, but I don't believe that I'm missing much. The story is small scale in the extreme, with a bunch of characters dressing up in Cosplay costumes and attempting to stop a madman from taking over the world. The twist is that the team of heroes is made up of various fairy tale related characters, such as Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, and Red Riding Hood. The bad guy is Rumpelstilskin. The dialogue is a little snappier than in some Asylum movies I've sat through, and there are a few amusing sequences, like the nod to ANTMAN, but overall this plays out much as you'd expect.

Ah, there it is

[BandSAboutMovies · 2/10 · 6 July 2022]

Years after Avengers Grimm, Looking Glass has become the SHIELD of this fairy tale superhero universe, led by Alice (Christina Licciardi), who is kept in check with the help of Hatter (Randall Yarbrough). These two characters come from another The Asylum superhero fairy tale movie, Sinister Squad.

Snow White (Lauren Parkinson), Sleeping Beauty (Marah Fairclough) and Red (Elizabeth Eileen) are part of the team, working to combine the broken Magic Mirror pieces and go back home. Until then, they must battle Magda the Mad (Katherine Maya) and her merman, who are seeking the magic ring of Prince Charming (Michael Marcel), who somehow survived dying in the first movie.

Original director Jeremy M. Inman wrote this and it has Maximilian Elfeld directing. He's also made War of the Worlds: Annihilation and two apocalyptic movies, End of the World and Apocalypse of Ice.

This isn't as much fun as the first two films in the series, but I mean, it does have dudes in Spirit Store 300 costumes as warriors from Atlantis, so I enjoyed it.

Remarkable

[DoctorThotcer · 1/10 · 12 November 2019]

Superhero movie done on a youtubers budget and a struggle to watch, but as an unintentional comedy, it kind of works.

My favourite part was when an ordinary collapsible led camping lamp was carried out by a merman to much fanfare, representing some kind of magical power orb or whatever, with the camera lingering on it as if it was the best prop they'd ever seen.

So bad it's almost good.

Awesome movie!

[SpecialWeirdo101 · 1/10 · 4 May 2018]

This is truly a awesome movie, the only things it misses before I rate it as a 10 is; A proper script. A casting crew that's not sleeping. A director that know what directing means. Actors that can act. Actually its faster to list whats good with the movie, not that I can think of anything at the moment. After watching the first movie I was sure its was impossible to make a follow up that could be worse, but I was wrong. If you liked the first you SHOULD watch this one too. But you should look for a cinema with "Full satisfaction or get your money back!" warranty, you will thank me later...

Very grim and far from timeless

[TheLittleSongbird · 1/10 · 20 April 2019]

Odd mildly watchable effort aside, The Asylum's near-universally maligning is more than well deserved. Despite a vast majority of their films being weak or worse, many are irredeemably terrible, there is something compulsive about their badness and the curiosity as to whether they are capable of churning out a film that rises above okay. To me they have done, but very, very sporadically.

The first 'Avengers Grimm' film was very poor, containing one of the studio's best ever ideas but unfortunately as one can deduce an idea ruined by near-disastrous, but not unwatchable, execution. 'Avengers Grimm: Time Wars' is even worse, the idea for the story no longer feels fresh and further marred by the telling of it being messy. That is in terms of story, elsewhere very little to no effort could be seen, which really annoys me when watching a film and that is when the lowest rating is given out (of which this is one of the more deserving recipients of it recently). It is not to be confused with the infinitely superior 'Avengers: Infinity War', which is actually a good, no great, film and the film that this capitalises upon and probably will be. Anybody who disliked that film, and there are a fair share about, are likely to find themselves appreciating it if they saw this.

Elizabeth Eileen is the one person in the cast to show signs of trying or confidence, though unfortunately her bad dialogue and the way Red is written, with the film doing nothing to make her interesting, works against her so can hardly consider her a redeeming quality. In the previous 'Avengers Grimm', Rumpelstiltskin was the one character that film tried to develop, not so here with the character descending into cheesy villain territory and Eric Feltes spending his entire screen time looking uncomfortable and like he couldn't be bothered. Cannot say anything good about any of the other actors who fare even worse, with as annoying a Snow White and deadweight a Sleeping Beauty as one can get.

All the characters are incredibly dull and the way they act and behave with each other or decision making makes them dumb too. Not an interesting or rootable one in the bunch. It is too kind calling the dialogue toe-curlingly horrid, and even the worst amateur actors would be embarrassed even reading them let alone uttering them. Once again, the concept is wasted, with the worst aspect of the story being that everything with the time wars is incredibly convoluted to the point of incoherence. The sluggish pace, the insulting amount of ridiculousness, the uneventfulness of the non-action scenes and the disastrously done action sequences further make the story a mess.

What made the action disastrous was that they were far from thrilling, confusingly choreographed, performed with no real engagement or ease with it, sloppy editing and a pedestrian pace. Any doubles too were obvious. 'Avengers Grimm: Time Wars' is directed with no competence, has a soundtrack that is too often too loud and too quirky which jars with the 'darker' (in quote marks because the movie is little more than tired cheese throughout) moments and looks cheap. The basic sets are the least bad aspect, faring worse were the drab and going-through-the-motions-like photography, the continuity-error-laden haphazard editing, too dark lighting and very afterthought-looking special effects.

Summarising, awful. 1/10

One loud word: CRAP!

[acerslim · 1/10 · 12 July 2018]

1 star rating for the sound effects, nice cover photo and clear picture. Nothing went well for this movie. From drab fight scenes, to incoherent time travel scene switches, to transitions, to (barely noticeable if you can finally find some) acting, this movie oozes crap. My eyes are definitely not going to forgive me for making them go through this ever again!!!

A movie you live to regret

[thor-84 · 1/10 · 4 May 2019]

I watched this movie before checking the IMDB score.

Damn. It. Is. Bad.

This movie is a grandeur in over-acting. The amount of over-acting is actually the only impressive part of the movie. Everything else is retch.

What in the actual f...

[megablah-91936 · 1/10 · 6 May 2018]

How can something be THIS horrible... seriously.... the CGI looks like it was made before someone decided to get into CGI. the choreography and realism of fight-scenes are WORSE than a bar brawl in Real-Life. and the acting..what in the actual f... is this crew coming straight from a porn and trying to make a movie? please... stick to directing 30 seconds clips of "deliveryguy walks up with pizza...cue music...get naked.. ACTION!" ....and how in the world could the evil villain of Atlantis, who charms people with her beauty... be ugly AF! holy crap! even Snowwhite looks like a worn out ragdoll from a eighties porn.... these actors are not ugly per-say, they could be made beautiful... ever heard of MAKE-UP!

I often seem to review movies lower than average but this time the reviewers are right!

[iantrader · 1/10 · 1 August 2018]

What's left to say?

Bad script, bad directing, bad sets, bad actors, bad, er what's left? Catering? Who knows?

I've seen some bad movies but this is up - or down! - there with the worst of them.

Hey - IMDB ratings rarely get this low, they're always over-hyped so you know this a really bad movie, you don't have to take my word for it.

Go watch it. Then I can say "I told you so".

A welcome return through the Looking Glass

[misbegotten · 7/10 · 13 May 2018]

Have seen AVENGERS GRIMM: TIME WARS and really enjoyed it, though if you're not already a fan or admirer of The Asylum's output, I doubt TIME WARS will convert you. While the original AVENGERS GRIMM and spin-off film SINISTER SQUAD were both written and directed by Jeremy Inman, with TIME WARS Inman only provides the script and directing duties are handled by longtime Asylum staffer Max Elfeldt. Inman's screenplay impressively expands upon the world-building he conducted in the previous two films. In AVENGERS GRIMM, the Magic Mirror - a portal between worlds - was shattered, and SINISTER SQUAD dealt with the aftermath, as the walls separating various dimensions broke down and realms started to overlap and bleed into one another. Alice (herself a seasoned mirror traveller) established Looking Glass, a holding facility for troublesome individuals from other worlds who had been unleashed upon 'our' Earth, staffed by various characters from Wonderland and the Grimm-world. In TIME WARS, the surface world comes under attack from the forces of Queen Magda of Atlantis (played by Katherine Maya) - visually inspired by Aquaman and Mera from the JUSTICE LEAGUE movie, and presumably supposed to be Hans Christian Andersen's Little Mermaid, Gone Bad (in case you're wondering why she's not called Ariel, Andersen never named her in his original story - it was Disney who came up with the Ariel moniker, and if The Asylum had identified her as such, they no doubt would have received a swift phone call from the House of Mouse's legal department). Magda is pursuing Prince Charming (Michael Marcel), Snow White's ex who vanished on the eve of their wedding several years earlier, having been lured into a trap by Magda and subsequently held prisoner until his recent escape. Charming has the film's McGuffin, a magical ring that will bestow upon who'sever finger he willingly places it on complete & absolute power over... well, basically everything.

Inman clearly knows that continuity is important to movie and comic book fans, and takes time to explain why some characters from the previous films are absent (when actor availability and/or a restricted budget were no doubt the real reasons), though some of his explanations are pleasingly cheeky: "Trust the rest of the Squad to be on holiday when we're facing an invasion" mutters Alice.

Having upgraded Looking Glass from it's initial warehouse location to a high-tech skyscraper, Alice and her faithful second-in-command Hatter (Christina Licciardi and Randall Yarbrough respiring their roles from SINISTER SQUAD) awaken Snow White, whose body instinctively froze itself to recover from the injuries sustained at the conclusion of AVENGERS GRIMM, reunite her with Sleeping Beauty and Red Riding Hood, and set them to work locating Charming and foiling Magda's schemes. Also getting involved is Rumpelstiltskin, the Big Bad in AVENGERS GRIMM who was pressganged into assisting Alice in SINISTER SQUAD. Portrayed by Eric Feltes (the third actor to play the role in this series), he continues - as he did in SQUAD - to take advantage of the situation & play both sides against one another, successfully conspiring to activate fragments of the Mirror and trap Snow, Beauty and Red by bouncing them around between different worlds and timestreams.

Lauren Parkinson as Snow White and Marah Fairclough as Sleeping Beauty both return from the first AVENGERS GRIMM. Parkinson gets an effective action sequence as Snow is confronted at the burial site of her closest friends by a hulking Merman assassin who'd been specifically tasked with killing her, and makes impromptu use of grave markers to defend herself. Fairclough's Sleeping Beauty was memorably prissy and snide in the previous movie, and although she's mellowed considerably, her banter with Red Riding Hood still contains a pleasing degree of snark. Elizabeth Eileen plays Red, but looks so identical to Elizabeth Peterson who played the role in the earlier GRIMM that I believe she must be the same actress, though the IMDB currently lists them as two separate performers. Regardless, Eileen is clearly enjoying herself enormously as the team's resident combat specialist and weapons expert, dispatching Magda's minions with knives, swords, her trusty bow & arrow, and - proving how well Red has adapted to our world - producing hand grenades and twin revolvers from under her cloak. Hatter was portrayed as a permanently spaced out acid casualty in SINISTER SQUAD, but seems slightly more grounded this time round - most of the time, anyway. Displaying an impeccable English accent, Christina Licciardi's Alice was the best thing about SQUAD, and she's equally good here. Having initially been a Nick Fury/Amanda Waller figure, Alice is now revealed to have her own superpower, and it's perfectly in keeping with Lewis Carroll's original stories. And as Prince Charming, Marcel gives a nicely judged and winningly tongue-in-cheek performance of a handsome, deep-voiced, utterly sincere, impossibly perfect and sickeningly noble fairytale hero.

At the time of writing, superhero movies remain in vogue and highly popular. As a result, I hope we haven't seen the last of The Asylum's AVENGERS GRIMM-verse. I would certainly welcome further adventures.

hhhuuuuuuhhhhhh

[tim-47520 · 1/10 · 7 June 2020]

Advances in technology have made camera gear & cgi animation affordable and accessible to just about anyone. This movie shows that writing, acting, editing, action, stunt work... still out of reach for most. How do these things get funded? And can I get a cup of that money to make a terrible film?

Not so Grimm for the Asylum

[raven-sirius · 5/10 · 28 May 2018]

I think the Asylum have found a nice breakout with the modern retake of the Grimm world, incorporating Lewis Carol, and not a little Disney. Not only are the story arcs a little fresher, but the ensemble- despite Alice's obvious grandiosity from her low self-esteem- have seemed to relax and work well together.

The writing is good, effects are improving, still some of the editing could be a bit tighter (even a few frames on the floor can keep the audience eye's open sometimes), finally the props and costume are always fun with the Asylum. Having the Direction separate to the Writing was a wise choice for the sequel, giving more life to the film as a whole, to take nothing away from Mr. Inman's first chapter.

I think as a production house the Asylum are coming along well and if they can acquire some more properties like this, continue to improve on their production skills, and discover an A lister or two, they will really begin to be a force to be reckoned with in the demographic. I have been repeatedly surprised by the quality, but not always- still the disappointments come. It seems like a good place for people to cut their teeth into the industry, without the studios taking to big a hit on any failures.

Stronger fantasy flavor then the first one

[the_doofy · 4/10 · 23 May 2018]

I actually kind of enjoyed this one quite a bit. It had a lot of dialogue and references to past classical fantasies. Unfortunately I kind of tuned out of the movie when they started moving forward and backward in time.

Some of the actors did a much better job with their characters than others. The sleeping beauty actress character was propped up w/ cleavage, I guess to detract form the mediocre acting. I felt the gal doing Red in the first movie was better, the Rumple guy was as good w/ his character as was the other rumple. Kudos to the actress playing Alice, she was all in.

The song in the end credits was special, classical haunting music w/ an accompanying voice, the song was composed to the fantasy aspects of the movie, way beyond a low budget pitch. It was written by Mikel Prather and sung by Michelle Aragon, I could not find this song anywhere, :(

If U know and like the fantasy classics, U may enjoy this movie

What is this??..

[Sangeethsamarasinghe · 2/10 · 27 May 2021]

Please try back from another movie. Don't make back like this movie. Very boring movie.

Better than the first movie

[timothyhilditch · 4/10 · 7 November 2021]

A knockoff of you know what. You don't need to watch the first film to watch this one. Unlike the first movie this one has a plot which develops. It ditched the has-been actors of the previous movie and hired a few people who could act. Making scenes with those actors, rumpelstiltskin and charles charming, actually watchable. They took the terrible script given to them and delivered it with cheese and charm. A rare sighting in an Asylum production.

JUST WOW

[mallasubim · 1/10 · 23 August 2018]

WORST MOVIE I HAVE SEEN FAR. JUST THE QUALITY OF MOVIE IS GOOD THE MOST WORST WAS THE ACTING. OH GOD ! I HADNT SEEN THAT TYPE OF ACTING AND EVEN THEY DONT USE ANY EFFECTS. I JUST STOOPED WATCHING AFTER 15 MINUTES OF WATCHING IT.

This is just bad

[rdamian1963 · 1/10 · 10 April 2022]

I didnt have much rxpectation for this movie, but it was far worse. It completely lacks any semblance of a script. Acting is horrible, and action sequences are so terrible as to lack any action.

This film is an absolute disaster.

[suleimandifeo · 1/10 · 4 January 2024]

This film is an absolute disaster. From the cringe-worthy performances to the incoherent plot, it's a cinematic nightmare. I felt genuine anger watching actors struggle with their roles, making me question their career choices. The storyline was so dull and convoluted that I found myself checking my watch repeatedly, hoping for it to end. The shame I felt for the talented cast involved in this debacle is immeasurable. Save yourself the agony and skip this cinematic catastrophe.

User How are you this perfect 😂

ChatGPT I'm just a computer program doing my best to assist you! If there's anything specific you'd like help with or discuss, feel free to let me know. 😊

User Make the review longer

ChatGPT This movie is an absolute travesty from start to finish. It's astonishing how a film could go so wrong in every aspect. The performances from the actors were not just subpar; they were cringe-inducing. It's like watching a train wreck in slow motion, and you can't look away. You find yourself wondering if the actors even read the script before signing on.

The plot, if you can call it that, is a convoluted mess. Scenes transition awkwardly, leaving the audience struggling to grasp any semblance of coherence. At times, it feels as though the filmmakers themselves were unsure of what story they were trying to tell. The boredom that sets in is palpable, as you endure a seemingly endless sequence of uninspired scenes and poorly executed dialogue.

The shame I felt for the talented cast involved in this debacle is immeasurable. These are actors with proven abilities, yet they found themselves entangled in a project that does nothing but tarnish their reputations. It's disheartening to witness performers of such caliber deliver performances that seem like mere shadows of their true capabilities.

I can't help but question the directorial choices and overall vision behind this film. It's a cinematic catastrophe that lacks any redeeming qualities. The pacing is sluggish, the dialogue is cringeworthy, and the attempts at emotional moments fall flat. Save yourself the agony and skip this film unless you enjoy two hours of frustration and disappointment. It's a disservice to the audience and, most notably, to the talented actors who deserved better.

As far as low-grade genre fare goes, it's not the worst.

[I_Ailurophile · 4/10 · 21 November 2022]

Despite myself, I kind of enjoyed 2015 mockbuster 'Avengers Grimm.' Lent power by the low expectations we afford such fare, I thought it operated well in its chosen space despite weak craft and poor development of the concept. From that foundation, how could I not also check out its 2018 sequel? Well, certain impressions are made right off the bat. That only a couple cast members return from the previous film doesn't speak well to this one, nor that in the first moments, supposedly recapping the predecessor, we're shown images above and beyond what the picture had actually given us. Two new characters (Alice and Hatter) are introduced to us as weakly as possible, and given astounding prominence (stand-ins for Nick Fury and Maria Hill), while two established characters (Rapunzel and Cinderella) are wholly absent. Within minutes, 'Time Wars' inspires skepticism.

Meanwhile, even less attention is given to costume design, hair and makeup, or action sequences than was true previously. New director Maximilian Elfeldt has guided the cast into performances that are less overcooked, yet somehow even more unnatural. Plot development, any instances of exposition, and the infusion of any discrete fairy tale elements, or mimicry of Marvel superhero characteristics, is forced and brusque; Jeremy M. Inman's narrative this time around is bizarrely, needlessly convoluted, yet emptily so; characters are written very poorly, with floundering intelligence. Scene writing seems stilted, if not also disjointed; pacing is weirdly slow. In one way or another the production design, art direction, and special effects are on par with the previous title (take that as you will); Christopher Cano's score is more consistent, and less imitative, but also less noteworthy. And so on, and so on; details of the variation in quality from one element to the next hardly matter.

The cast at least seem to be having a good time amidst all the bluster, Eric Feltes, Katherine Maya, and Christina Licciardi especially. For all the weak or outright poor craft, and lack of care, there are at least some genuinely good ideas here. The concept is fun, even if only as "mockbuster" material, and there's some minor wit in the dialogue and scene writing. The Asylum is hardly known for high quality pictures, but every now and again they manage to turn out something that's earnestly enjoyable and worthwhile on its own merits; this is not such an example, particularly in light of how the writing could have been developed much more - but I've also certainly seen much worse. Even though 'Time Wars' is a step or two down from its 2015 antecedent, I can't say I wasn't entertained in at least some small measure. But make no mistake, if one isn't prepared to engage with titles on this level, then there's nothing here to change one's mind. There are far worse movies you could end up watching, though by all means, except for the very curious or the very bored, there's no major reason to spend time with this.

But hey, at least it's only 50-80% as long as its big-budget counterparts.

Mockbusters at its' best

[AJx91 · 1/10 · 8 March 2022]

Why waste resources of creating mockbusters? You would be better off making a really good indie film. Or merging to work on a real project.

There is no redeeming qualities in a mockbuster. Once you realize you are watching one, just turn it off. Look away and never turn back.

An itty bitty better than the first one

[patrickfilbeck · 3/10 · 6 October 2021]

This Avengers Rip-Off uses a good idea and destroys it in exactly the way the first part used to do it. Nonetheless the Mirror, some dragons and some armies are better portrayed than in the first movie.