Stephen-Tobolowsky Movie Reviews

THE PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT is a pretty good, solid piece of B-Movie sci fi. Loosely based on actual events during World War II, the U.S. government tests a naval battleship to see if it can disappear from radar by using high powered electromagentic energy. The writers, producer (John Carpenter i.e. HALLOWEEN), and director, have used these events to create an entertaining time travel story in which during the experiment, two of the crewmen are transported through time to 1984 and must find their way back. At the same time, the experiment in 1943 is affecting a similar experiment in 1984 Nevada conducted by the same scientist, Dr. James Longstreet, (Eric Christams as the elder Dr. Longstreet in 1984 Nevada, and Miles McNamara as the young Dr. Longstreet in 1943 Philadelphia) creating a vortex and distruption in the space/time continuim. There are characters you care about, decent if not conventional time travel plot devices, just the right amount of special effects, the usual government personnel chasing the innocent time travel victim(s), and a love story thrown in for good measure. Michael Pare shows some pretty good emotional depth as David Herdeg, one of the crewmen sent into the future and he and Nancy Allen as Allison Hayes have pretty good onscreen chemistry. Bobby Di Cicco has a great supporting role as the other crewmen sent along with Micheal Pare. He practically reprises a role he played in the Steven Speilberg WWII comedy film "1941" as he uses the dancing skills he learned during the filming of that movie and uses it in the opening scenes of 'EXPERIMENT (Perhaps it was an in-joke?). Overall, an entertaining sci fi, time travel film that delivers.
Movie should be noteworthy because released the same year he produced this movie, John Carpenter wrote and directed STARMAN with almost the same kind of pathos and romance/road trip film. Instead of a a man far from his time period (PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT), we have an extraterrestial far from home (STARMAN).

As implied in the name there is an experiment in Philadelphia (1943) to make a navel ship invisible to the enemy. The experiment goes beyond its parameters and sends the ship into the future. David Herdeg (Michael Paré) and Jim Parker (Bobby Di Cicco)
Jump ship in the process. What will become of them? Will this time travel effect others and can they get back? If not will they adapt?
It can not hurt to have a relationship with Nancy Allen you may not want to go back.

The story is based on a real conspiracy theory to cover-up the real thing. Even tough there are records to show that the destroyer was no where near the aria at the time, that just fuels the fire for the conspiracy.

The Philadelphia experiment is a classic in the Sci-Fi genre. What makes this movie really interesting though, is not the action, plot, or special effects. It is the fact that this movie is based on an actual military experiment. During an experiment to make a ship invisible to radar, the ship did just that, but it also became invisible to the naked eye as well. This may or may not be true, but it does make the story more interesting when this is considered. Even without it, it is a thought provoking story, with good visual effects.

THE PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT is a pretty good, solid piece of B-Movie sci fi. Loosely based on actual events during World War II, the U.S. government tests a naval battleship to see if it can disappear from radar by using high powered electromagentic energy. The writers, producer (John Carpenter i.e. HALLOWEEN), and director, have used these events to create an entertaining time travel story in which during the experiment, two of the crewmen are transported through time to 1984 and must find their way back. At the same time, the experiment in 1943 is affecting a similar experiment in 1984 Nevada conducted by the same scientist, Dr. James Longstreet, (Eric Christams as the elder Dr. Longstreet in 1984 Nevada, and Miles McNamara as the young Dr. Longstreet in 1943 Philadelphia) creating a vortex and distruption in the space/time continuim. There are characters you care about, decent if not conventional time travel plot devices, just the right amount of special effects, the usual government personnel chasing the innocent time travel victim(s), and a love story thrown in for good measure. Michael Pare shows some pretty good emotional depth as David Herdeg, one of the crewmen sent into the future and he and Nancy Allen as Allison Hayes have pretty good onscreen chemistry. Bobby Di Cicco has a great supporting role as the other crewmen sent along with Micheal Pare. He practically reprises a role he played in the Steven Speilberg WWII comedy film "1941" as he uses the dancing skills he learned during the filming of that movie and uses it in the opening scenes of 'EXPERIMENT (Perhaps it was an in-joke?). Overall, an entertaining sci fi, time travel film that delivers.
Movie should be noteworthy because released the same year he produced this movie, John Carpenter wrote and directed STARMAN with almost the same kind of pathos and romance/road trip film. Instead of a a man far from his time period (PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT), we have an extraterrestial far from home (STARMAN).

As implied in the name there is an experiment in Philadelphia (1943) to make a navel ship invisible to the enemy. The experiment goes beyond its parameters and sends the ship into the future. David Herdeg (Michael Paré) and Jim Parker (Bobby Di Cicco)
Jump ship in the process. What will become of them? Will this time travel effect others and can they get back? If not will they adapt?
It can not hurt to have a relationship with Nancy Allen you may not want to go back.

The story is based on a real conspiracy theory to cover-up the real thing. Even tough there are records to show that the destroyer was no where near the aria at the time, that just fuels the fire for the conspiracy.

The Philadelphia experiment is a classic in the Sci-Fi genre. What makes this movie really interesting though, is not the action, plot, or special effects. It is the fact that this movie is based on an actual military experiment. During an experiment to make a ship invisible to radar, the ship did just that, but it also became invisible to the naked eye as well. This may or may not be true, but it does make the story more interesting when this is considered. Even without it, it is a thought provoking story, with good visual effects.

THE PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT is a pretty good, solid piece of B-Movie sci fi. Loosely based on actual events during World War II, the U.S. government tests a naval battleship to see if it can disappear from radar by using high powered electromagentic energy. The writers, producer (John Carpenter i.e. HALLOWEEN), and director, have used these events to create an entertaining time travel story in which during the experiment, two of the crewmen are transported through time to 1984 and must find their way back. At the same time, the experiment in 1943 is affecting a similar experiment in 1984 Nevada conducted by the same scientist, Dr. James Longstreet, (Eric Christams as the elder Dr. Longstreet in 1984 Nevada, and Miles McNamara as the young Dr. Longstreet in 1943 Philadelphia) creating a vortex and distruption in the space/time continuim. There are characters you care about, decent if not conventional time travel plot devices, just the right amount of special effects, the usual government personnel chasing the innocent time travel victim(s), and a love story thrown in for good measure. Michael Pare shows some pretty good emotional depth as David Herdeg, one of the crewmen sent into the future and he and Nancy Allen as Allison Hayes have pretty good onscreen chemistry. Bobby Di Cicco has a great supporting role as the other crewmen sent along with Micheal Pare. He practically reprises a role he played in the Steven Speilberg WWII comedy film "1941" as he uses the dancing skills he learned during the filming of that movie and uses it in the opening scenes of 'EXPERIMENT (Perhaps it was an in-joke?). Overall, an entertaining sci fi, time travel film that delivers.
Movie should be noteworthy because released the same year he produced this movie, John Carpenter wrote and directed STARMAN with almost the same kind of pathos and romance/road trip film. Instead of a a man far from his time period (PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT), we have an extraterrestial far from home (STARMAN).

As implied in the name there is an experiment in Philadelphia (1943) to make a navel ship invisible to the enemy. The experiment goes beyond its parameters and sends the ship into the future. David Herdeg (Michael Paré) and Jim Parker (Bobby Di Cicco)
Jump ship in the process. What will become of them? Will this time travel effect others and can they get back? If not will they adapt?
It can not hurt to have a relationship with Nancy Allen you may not want to go back.

The story is based on a real conspiracy theory to cover-up the real thing. Even tough there are records to show that the destroyer was no where near the aria at the time, that just fuels the fire for the conspiracy.

The Philadelphia experiment is a classic in the Sci-Fi genre. What makes this movie really interesting though, is not the action, plot, or special effects. It is the fact that this movie is based on an actual military experiment. During an experiment to make a ship invisible to radar, the ship did just that, but it also became invisible to the naked eye as well. This may or may not be true, but it does make the story more interesting when this is considered. Even without it, it is a thought provoking story, with good visual effects.

THE PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT is a pretty good, solid piece of B-Movie sci fi. Loosely based on actual events during World War II, the U.S. government tests a naval battleship to see if it can disappear from radar by using high powered electromagentic energy. The writers, producer (John Carpenter i.e. HALLOWEEN), and director, have used these events to create an entertaining time travel story in which during the experiment, two of the crewmen are transported through time to 1984 and must find their way back. At the same time, the experiment in 1943 is affecting a similar experiment in 1984 Nevada conducted by the same scientist, Dr. James Longstreet, (Eric Christams as the elder Dr. Longstreet in 1984 Nevada, and Miles McNamara as the young Dr. Longstreet in 1943 Philadelphia) creating a vortex and distruption in the space/time continuim. There are characters you care about, decent if not conventional time travel plot devices, just the right amount of special effects, the usual government personnel chasing the innocent time travel victim(s), and a love story thrown in for good measure. Michael Pare shows some pretty good emotional depth as David Herdeg, one of the crewmen sent into the future and he and Nancy Allen as Allison Hayes have pretty good onscreen chemistry. Bobby Di Cicco has a great supporting role as the other crewmen sent along with Micheal Pare. He practically reprises a role he played in the Steven Speilberg WWII comedy film "1941" as he uses the dancing skills he learned during the filming of that movie and uses it in the opening scenes of 'EXPERIMENT (Perhaps it was an in-joke?). Overall, an entertaining sci fi, time travel film that delivers.
Movie should be noteworthy because released the same year he produced this movie, John Carpenter wrote and directed STARMAN with almost the same kind of pathos and romance/road trip film. Instead of a a man far from his time period (PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT), we have an extraterrestial far from home (STARMAN).

As implied in the name there is an experiment in Philadelphia (1943) to make a navel ship invisible to the enemy. The experiment goes beyond its parameters and sends the ship into the future. David Herdeg (Michael Paré) and Jim Parker (Bobby Di Cicco)
Jump ship in the process. What will become of them? Will this time travel effect others and can they get back? If not will they adapt?
It can not hurt to have a relationship with Nancy Allen you may not want to go back.

The story is based on a real conspiracy theory to cover-up the real thing. Even tough there are records to show that the destroyer was no where near the aria at the time, that just fuels the fire for the conspiracy.

The Philadelphia experiment is a classic in the Sci-Fi genre. What makes this movie really interesting though, is not the action, plot, or special effects. It is the fact that this movie is based on an actual military experiment. During an experiment to make a ship invisible to radar, the ship did just that, but it also became invisible to the naked eye as well. This may or may not be true, but it does make the story more interesting when this is considered. Even without it, it is a thought provoking story, with good visual effects.

THE PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT is a pretty good, solid piece of B-Movie sci fi. Loosely based on actual events during World War II, the U.S. government tests a naval battleship to see if it can disappear from radar by using high powered electromagentic energy. The writers, producer (John Carpenter i.e. HALLOWEEN), and director, have used these events to create an entertaining time travel story in which during the experiment, two of the crewmen are transported through time to 1984 and must find their way back. At the same time, the experiment in 1943 is affecting a similar experiment in 1984 Nevada conducted by the same scientist, Dr. James Longstreet, (Eric Christams as the elder Dr. Longstreet in 1984 Nevada, and Miles McNamara as the young Dr. Longstreet in 1943 Philadelphia) creating a vortex and distruption in the space/time continuim. There are characters you care about, decent if not conventional time travel plot devices, just the right amount of special effects, the usual government personnel chasing the innocent time travel victim(s), and a love story thrown in for good measure. Michael Pare shows some pretty good emotional depth as David Herdeg, one of the crewmen sent into the future and he and Nancy Allen as Allison Hayes have pretty good onscreen chemistry. Bobby Di Cicco has a great supporting role as the other crewmen sent along with Micheal Pare. He practically reprises a role he played in the Steven Speilberg WWII comedy film "1941" as he uses the dancing skills he learned during the filming of that movie and uses it in the opening scenes of 'EXPERIMENT (Perhaps it was an in-joke?). Overall, an entertaining sci fi, time travel film that delivers.
Movie should be noteworthy because released the same year he produced this movie, John Carpenter wrote and directed STARMAN with almost the same kind of pathos and romance/road trip film. Instead of a a man far from his time period (PHILADELPHIA EXPERIMENT), we have an extraterrestial far from home (STARMAN).

As implied in the name there is an experiment in Philadelphia (1943) to make a navel ship invisible to the enemy. The experiment goes beyond its parameters and sends the ship into the future. David Herdeg (Michael Paré) and Jim Parker (Bobby Di Cicco)
Jump ship in the process. What will become of them? Will this time travel effect others and can they get back? If not will they adapt?
It can not hurt to have a relationship with Nancy Allen you may not want to go back.

The story is based on a real conspiracy theory to cover-up the real thing. Even tough there are records to show that the destroyer was no where near the aria at the time, that just fuels the fire for the conspiracy.

The Philadelphia experiment is a classic in the Sci-Fi genre. What makes this movie really interesting though, is not the action, plot, or special effects. It is the fact that this movie is based on an actual military experiment. During an experiment to make a ship invisible to radar, the ship did just that, but it also became invisible to the naked eye as well. This may or may not be true, but it does make the story more interesting when this is considered. Even without it, it is a thought provoking story, with good visual effects.

this movie is so full of horrible acting, idiotic writing, and pathetic southern accents that I forgot I was watching a movie about vietnam veterans. the movie bastardizes what should be a solemn moment- when the hillbilly family visits The Wall while discussing barbeque for lunch. I am from Kentucky and I do not know anyone who speaks the ways these idiots do; i noticed in the credits that they had a dialect coach whom I hope is out of a job! Samantha is so full of annoying energy you don't even get the feeling that she is affected by her dad's death- she speaks about it at the dinner table with her grandparents while smiling and passing the mashed potatoes and gravy! did this actress have any clue what the movie was about? the battle scenes look like they took place at someone's lake house, not the in the jungle. to say the movie is oversentimental and trite is an understatement. bruce willis serves no purpose in this movie except to remind you it's about a veteran, not just about his hick niece who jogs all over town and dreams about going to the mall someday. to sum it all up, this movie is not about the pain left from the vietnam war. it is about who can do the worst accent, yell "woo hoo" the most times, and make the most obvious stereotypical references to southern culture. this movie is an utter joke. i threw it in the trash after i saw it, and have resumed my pledge to never watch another bruce willis movie again- or any movie with the other actors/writers/directors. I would recommend this movie to anyone who wants to watch and make fun of one of the most hideous movies ever made, if it were not for the fact that it is about supposed to be about such a serious topic-vietnam.

A good attempt at post war but failed in many ways. the past faze shots are so fake its unbelieveable. ...the best post vietnam is 'born on the forth'. NOT this movie. Bruce Willis plays a Vet but the acting was overdone that it look fake. It works for DIEHARD, but not here. The part is beyond him as he tries to get all the attention, as well as screen shots. Emily Lloyd didnt get enough time thanks to the almighty bruce demand to be the center of attention. The ending is somewhat touching but the rest is boring and a waste of time. Save ur time and money by watching Born on the Forth.

take care all

This highly underrated movie is a treasure. I have watched it at least a dozen times. Emily Lloyd is unforgettable as the daughter of a soldier who was killed in Vietnam before she was born. Her post-high school search for a post-death relationship with him makes this film is unbearably moving and powerful. It is inexplicable why it is so unknown. Bruce Willis is at his best as a subtly and irreparably damaged Viet vet. The closing scene with the Vietnam Memorial tears me apart every time. This movie is the other anthem to our Viet vets.

David W. Lee Edmond, OK

this movie is so full of horrible acting, idiotic writing, and pathetic southern accents that I forgot I was watching a movie about vietnam veterans. the movie bastardizes what should be a solemn moment- when the hillbilly family visits The Wall while discussing barbeque for lunch. I am from Kentucky and I do not know anyone who speaks the ways these idiots do; i noticed in the credits that they had a dialect coach whom I hope is out of a job! Samantha is so full of annoying energy you don't even get the feeling that she is affected by her dad's death- she speaks about it at the dinner table with her grandparents while smiling and passing the mashed potatoes and gravy! did this actress have any clue what the movie was about? the battle scenes look like they took place at someone's lake house, not the in the jungle. to say the movie is oversentimental and trite is an understatement. bruce willis serves no purpose in this movie except to remind you it's about a veteran, not just about his hick niece who jogs all over town and dreams about going to the mall someday. to sum it all up, this movie is not about the pain left from the vietnam war. it is about who can do the worst accent, yell "woo hoo" the most times, and make the most obvious stereotypical references to southern culture. this movie is an utter joke. i threw it in the trash after i saw it, and have resumed my pledge to never watch another bruce willis movie again- or any movie with the other actors/writers/directors. I would recommend this movie to anyone who wants to watch and make fun of one of the most hideous movies ever made, if it were not for the fact that it is about supposed to be about such a serious topic-vietnam.

A good attempt at post war but failed in many ways. the past faze shots are so fake its unbelieveable. ...the best post vietnam is 'born on the forth'. NOT this movie. Bruce Willis plays a Vet but the acting was overdone that it look fake. It works for DIEHARD, but not here. The part is beyond him as he tries to get all the attention, as well as screen shots. Emily Lloyd didnt get enough time thanks to the almighty bruce demand to be the center of attention. The ending is somewhat touching but the rest is boring and a waste of time. Save ur time and money by watching Born on the Forth.

take care all

This highly underrated movie is a treasure. I have watched it at least a dozen times. Emily Lloyd is unforgettable as the daughter of a soldier who was killed in Vietnam before she was born. Her post-high school search for a post-death relationship with him makes this film is unbearably moving and powerful. It is inexplicable why it is so unknown. Bruce Willis is at his best as a subtly and irreparably damaged Viet vet. The closing scene with the Vietnam Memorial tears me apart every time. This movie is the other anthem to our Viet vets.

David W. Lee Edmond, OK

this movie is so full of horrible acting, idiotic writing, and pathetic southern accents that I forgot I was watching a movie about vietnam veterans. the movie bastardizes what should be a solemn moment- when the hillbilly family visits The Wall while discussing barbeque for lunch. I am from Kentucky and I do not know anyone who speaks the ways these idiots do; i noticed in the credits that they had a dialect coach whom I hope is out of a job! Samantha is so full of annoying energy you don't even get the feeling that she is affected by her dad's death- she speaks about it at the dinner table with her grandparents while smiling and passing the mashed potatoes and gravy! did this actress have any clue what the movie was about? the battle scenes look like they took place at someone's lake house, not the in the jungle. to say the movie is oversentimental and trite is an understatement. bruce willis serves no purpose in this movie except to remind you it's about a veteran, not just about his hick niece who jogs all over town and dreams about going to the mall someday. to sum it all up, this movie is not about the pain left from the vietnam war. it is about who can do the worst accent, yell "woo hoo" the most times, and make the most obvious stereotypical references to southern culture. this movie is an utter joke. i threw it in the trash after i saw it, and have resumed my pledge to never watch another bruce willis movie again- or any movie with the other actors/writers/directors. I would recommend this movie to anyone who wants to watch and make fun of one of the most hideous movies ever made, if it were not for the fact that it is about supposed to be about such a serious topic-vietnam.

A good attempt at post war but failed in many ways. the past faze shots are so fake its unbelieveable. ...the best post vietnam is 'born on the forth'. NOT this movie. Bruce Willis plays a Vet but the acting was overdone that it look fake. It works for DIEHARD, but not here. The part is beyond him as he tries to get all the attention, as well as screen shots. Emily Lloyd didnt get enough time thanks to the almighty bruce demand to be the center of attention. The ending is somewhat touching but the rest is boring and a waste of time. Save ur time and money by watching Born on the Forth.

take care all

This highly underrated movie is a treasure. I have watched it at least a dozen times. Emily Lloyd is unforgettable as the daughter of a soldier who was killed in Vietnam before she was born. Her post-high school search for a post-death relationship with him makes this film is unbearably moving and powerful. It is inexplicable why it is so unknown. Bruce Willis is at his best as a subtly and irreparably damaged Viet vet. The closing scene with the Vietnam Memorial tears me apart every time. This movie is the other anthem to our Viet vets.

David W. Lee Edmond, OK

The Chevy Chase film, the barely seen MEMOIRS OF AN INVISIBLE MAN (Warner Home Video) was assumed by moviegoers to be a comedy in the tradition of Ghost Busters, is instead a rather serious film that Chase believed would establish him as a dramatic actor. Director John Carpenter's curious adaptation of the Invisible Man concept has cool effects and an unexpected story that is closer to a thriller than a comedy.

Above average story with Chevy Chase playing a stock market investor who becomes invisable due to a nuclear fusion accident. The film maker (Daryl Hannah) who loves him. And the federal agent (Sam Neil) who wants him dead. Rather a successful blend of adventure, comedy, and romance.ILM effects are good and a funny/moving musical score by Shirley Walker.wish it would come to DVD.

I really enjoyed this movie when it came out and was quite surprised by all the bad reviews. I had read the book several years before I saw the movie and thought they did a great job of transfering it to film.

The funny thing is that most reviews criticize the film makers for their wierd story choices, but the film was just following the book.

Others criticize that the movie doesn't know whether to be a comedy, action thiller or an adventure story? The book was the same way and I thought the book and film did a great job of juggling these different styles.

The Chevy Chase film, the barely seen MEMOIRS OF AN INVISIBLE MAN (Warner Home Video) was assumed by moviegoers to be a comedy in the tradition of Ghost Busters, is instead a rather serious film that Chase believed would establish him as a dramatic actor. Director John Carpenter's curious adaptation of the Invisible Man concept has cool effects and an unexpected story that is closer to a thriller than a comedy.

Above average story with Chevy Chase playing a stock market investor who becomes invisable due to a nuclear fusion accident. The film maker (Daryl Hannah) who loves him. And the federal agent (Sam Neil) who wants him dead. Rather a successful blend of adventure, comedy, and romance.ILM effects are good and a funny/moving musical score by Shirley Walker.wish it would come to DVD.

I really enjoyed this movie when it came out and was quite surprised by all the bad reviews. I had read the book several years before I saw the movie and thought they did a great job of transfering it to film.

The funny thing is that most reviews criticize the film makers for their wierd story choices, but the film was just following the book.

Others criticize that the movie doesn't know whether to be a comedy, action thiller or an adventure story? The book was the same way and I thought the book and film did a great job of juggling these different styles.