Terror from the Year 5000 (1958) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
31 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
4/10
Not THAT bad...
planktonrules26 April 2017
AIP and 2.5 statue 5200 ad Florida swamps future---medallion asking for help

Currently, "Terror From the Year 5000" has an abominably low score of 2.5. This would indicate that this is a truly horrible film...but it isn't. Now I am not saying it's a good movie, but the picture clearly is suffering from "Mystery Science Theater 3000" syndrome. In other words, when a film is made fun of my the show, huge numbers of the viewers of the show go online and bombard IMDb with scores of 1. If you look at the bottom 100 films on IMDb, you'll also see that nearly all of the American films from the 1950s, 60s and 70s were skewered on that TV show as well. Often, much worse films manage to stay off the list simply because of exposure. So, if you are looking for a film as wretched as "Plan 9 From Outer Space" or "Robot Monster", well, you should keep looking.

The film is about a weird experiment going on in the middle of nowhere in Florida. Why this odd location? Because the project requires so much energy it would tend to interfere with the equipment of folks living nearby. And what IS this huge power draw for....well, to make contact with folks from the future! Eventually, they are able to bring objects from the year 5200! And, a bit later, they get a medallion that is begging for help! So is this future trying to contact us? And, is this a good thing?

Now I am not going to say that this is a great film. The 'monster' is silly but there are much worse examples from the era. Overall, an okay movie but certainly not an awful picture. The acting and direction are competent...not really good, but competent.
6 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Another nice little gem from American International - so bad it's good
chris_gaskin1235 April 2005
Terror From the Year 5000 is of American International's poorer efforts from the 1950's. It is one of those movies that is so bad it's good.

A scientist experimenting with time travel on a remote island in the Everglades manages to bring back a mutated woman from 5200 AD! She starts killing people and after replacing her face with that of a nurse she killed, she heads back to the future.

The cast includes Ward Costello, Joyce Holden, Frederic Downs and Salome Jens as the woman from the future. I've never heard of any of these.

Despite the very low budget, I rather enjoyed watching Terror From the Year 5000 and taped it when it came on BBC1 during the early hours some years ago. Luckily, I still have it on video.

Rating: 2 stars out of 5.
10 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Awful isn't a strong enough word.
13Funbags25 April 2017
If you look past all the plot holes and things that just don't make sense,you still have a terrible movie here. A guy has invented a machine that can send things to the future and apparently future people have these machines and they send stuff back. One guy decides to send his phi beta kappa key into the future(because they are very unimportant) and the future sends back a coin asking for help.When a woman from the future comes through the machine she makes it clear that she can read Greek yet she has no clue what a phi beta kappa key is.The only good thing is that people in the future can rip off a persons face and use it as their own,brilliant.
2 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Good movie, bad DVD presentation
pmsusana14 May 2004
RE: The DVD edition of 1958's "Terror From the Year 5000" recently issued by Incredibly Strange Film Works (ISFW) of Jamestown, MO: Those of you who've been waiting for a pristine-quality DVD edition of this fun Sci-Fi oldie will have to go on waiting. The very fuzzy picture and sound quality (with contrasts so bad that some night scenes are nearly impossible to make out) make this ISFW DVD a big disappointment, especially considering the $24.99 price tag! (The Horror/Sci-Fi fans among you may also remember ISFW's equally unsatisfactory VHS video edition of 1964's "Horror of Party Beach", mastered from a toned-down TV print with all the gore removed!)

I'd say that any DVD or VHS video bearing the ISFW logo should be approached with caution.
24 out of 31 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A shade better than most AIP sci-fi quickies from this period.
youroldpaljim23 June 2001
As far as I know, this is the first American feature film about time travel via a time machine. A time machine was featured in the American serial BRICK BRADFORD (1947) and in the English comedy TIME FLIES (1944). Film firsts should be noted and applauded even if the films they appear in are otherwise unremarkable. TERROR FROM THE YEAR 5000 is a somewhat lackluster production with uneven performances and direction. I say that this film is shade a better than most other low budget quickies from 1958 in that its story slightly more imaginative. The time machine was something new to films in 1958, the bit with the hypnotic finger nails is certainly unusual and don't forget the four eyed mutant cat from the future. I thought the idea of having the future women at first mistakenly speaking Greek was a clever idea, since the present people had sent the future people with trinkets that had Greek writing on them. The make up for the future woman is quite poor, no wonder the director mostly kept her face hidden throughout. There is one scene where the scientists leave the island and go to a movie on the mainland. AIP studio heads must of come up with this scene to insert a little promotion. The film they go to see is AIP's I WAS A TEENAGE FRANKENSTEIN. Oh, by the way, I like the 1958 Edsel Corsair that Ward Costello drives.
22 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
cheap knock-off disaster
Andy Sandfoss31 January 2000
One wonders if the people who make films like this really care if audiences like them or not.

So let's see...we've got a museum curator who gets a statue in the mail along with a request to do radiometric dating on it. If he were competent in the field he would send it back since radiometric dating is unlikely to produce a meaningful date on a manufactured metallic object. But he goes ahead and does it and somehow determines that the piece is from the future (5200 AD). Never mind that radiometric dating doesn't work like that and couldn't give a future date for anything. He also is told later that the piece is dangerously radioactive. Well, again, if he were competent at the radiochemistry needed for the dating, he would have found THAT out right away. But ANOTHER scientist has to tell him that after the fact.

The piece is the product of a scientist and his financial backer working alone in the Everglades. If everything that comes though the time machine is so hopelessly radioactive, why aren't they both dead, or at least very sick? If the statue is so dangerous, why do the scientists who produced it (and who know it's radioactive) leave their amazing discovery lying around, and don't notice when it turns up missing? And if the apparatus used for this time travel is so powerful that it screws up TVs, lights, and motorboat engines, how is it possible for the young backer to be using it without anyone else's knowledge? And why 5200 AD? Don't the scientists have any control over the time period they explore? What's so interesting about 5200 AD as opposed to other times? Why not a hundred years in the future, or a billion years for that matter? Why not go backward in time?

Nothing much happens in the middle of the movie so it branches out into desultory explorations of jealousy and voyeurism, only to drop these themes when it comes time for "science fiction" to rear its head again.

And then the Terror shows up - an ugly woman. Somebody's got some issues with women I think! She speaks Greek from a few letters on a Phi Beta Kappa key, then conveniently switches to modern English when that doesn't work. She can hypnotize you with her sparkly fingernails. Oh, yeh, and she can kill you and steal your face. Which she does to the lovely and talented Salome Jens (the only actor in this wretched mess to deliver a well-crafted performance). From here on the script backfills furiously in a hurried attempt to generate meaning in this meaningless heap of trash before the budget runs out.

Time travel is an enormously complicated plot device for a science fiction film; few have done it well. "Terror from the Year 5000" is not one of them. It tries to cover its obvious shortcomings in pointless and unexplained plot diversions.

But again, it's unlikely the makers cared. Thank God it didn't wreck Salome Jens' career at the outset.
12 out of 29 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Laughable fun for those who are game.
Nightman8516 January 2006
Scientests living in rural Florida build a teleportation device that brings out a freaky woman from the year 5000 A.D.

Admittedly Terror from the Year 5000 is a completely hokey low-budgeter, but it's one of those old drive-in flicks that has an unintentionally funny edge that makes it a riot of a watch. The effects are all very low budget, after all our villain is a weird screeching woman in a sequined suit! The cast is OK, but everything else is a bit silly!

Still those that enjoy old schlock flicks will find it a decent laugh.

** out of ****
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Worth a look for genuine fans of 1950s American sci-fi
ebeckstr-16 January 2019
(FYI, I caught this movie on YouTube.)

The average IMDb ranking is currently 2.5 for this movie, which is twice as low as it ought to be. This is not a great movie, it's not even a particularly good movie, but it is not in the same abysmal league as truly bad grades Z 1950s scifi.

Other reviews have noted some of the cool moments in the movie, such as the woman from the future at first speaking Greek, not knowing exactly what language is being spoken in the time frame to wish she has returned from the year 5000. There are a few other such moments, which exhibit more cleverness than the scripts from a good many other super low-budget movies of the era.

That's not to say the script is good. It's too talky, and there are long moments of melodrama which in the hands of a decent script writer could have been replaced by moments of Science Fiction plot and dialogue instead (without adding a dime to the budget). The acting is better than in many similarly low-budget movies, but it's still not good. The one exception is Joyce Holden, who has talent, and mostly succeeds in imbuing her lines with personality.

I myself don't find this movie worthy of repeated viewing, but for genuine fans of 1950s science fiction it is worth a look.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Seen on Pittsburgh's Chiller Theater in 1964
kevinolzak4 April 2019
The titular menace in AIP's 1958 "Terror from the Year 5000" ('a hideous she-thing!' as the ads screamed) does not come from another planet but from Earth's future (5200 AD to be exact), a novel idea at the time but quite common since. Like her counterpart in "The Astounding She-Monster," both share the radioactive touch of death, this Future Woman revealing that every fifth child is born a mutation, and that their contaminated blood needs a fresh supply from the 20th century. Triple threat writer/producer/director Robert J. Gurney Jr. previously scripted the AIP sci fi comedy "Invasion of the Saucer Men," and does a pretty good job on the low budget, the lab located in an ordinary house on a coastal island in Florida (location shooting in Dade County), where two scientists have been trading objects from our time with those from the future, until the vain, glory seeking younger one brings back something alive, a cat with four eyes that gets dumped in the lake. Joyce Holden, sadly making her screen swan song, is a breath of fresh air modeling a nightgown and two bathing suits, former leading lady in Columbia's 1956 "The Werewolf," but it's the enigmatic Salome Jens in her film debut that audiences recall as the Future Woman, who alas only appears in the final reel. There's enough intrigue to last its hour long running time however, at least for male members of the viewing audience, topping a double billed in certain markets with either "The Screaming Skull" or "The Brain Eaters."
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Not much terror from 5000, let me tell ya.
Aaron13755 March 2003
The movies title is a bit misleading in that there isn't much terror in this movie. In fact, there isn't much of anything going on till the last maybe 20 minutes of this flick. A museum curator gets a mysterious statue and is asked to test it for its age. Somehow he finds out it comes from the future. I don't know if I am right on this point, but I don't believe you can tell if something comes from the future...only how old something is. Well, he also finds out it is highly radioactive so he goes to this professor's house where the statue came from. There the professor and his extremely stupid assistant are doing, of course, time travel experiments. Since the statue was radioactive the professor wants to stop the experiments for the time being, but the stupid assistant wants to keep going. His fiancé eventually goes with the curator and the assistant summons a mutant from the year 5000, which kills people for no reason and then convinces the assistant to go with her to the year 5000 and help out their people. She steals a nurse's face before this and uses it as a mask as she is a bit mutated. All in all a pretty lousy sci-fi flick that has so many inaccuracies it is pathetic.
5 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Inept, dull, monotonous, laughable, clumsy, horrible, etc.
bensonmum226 April 2007
I admit it – if it wasn't for a copy of the Mystery Science Theater 3000 version of Terror from the Year 5000, I doubt I would have ever had the intestinal fortitude to sit through this thing. It's bad in every way a movie can be bad. I've often seen (and even occasionally used) the expression, "So bad it's good". Well that doesn't ring true with Terror from the Year 5000. It's so bad it's bad. If I were asked to do a one word review, "inept" comes to mind and satisfactorily describes the movie. Other fitting one word reviews would include: dull, monotonous, laughable, clumsy, horrible, etc. Skip it at all costs.

The MST3K commentary was actually quite funny. Two of my favorite running gags throughout the episode were the continuous riffing on the male lead each time he found himself shirtless and Servo's announcements and explanations regarding "Terror" being delayed from making an appearance in the movie. Both are laugh out loud funny. Good stuff!
4 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
There's Nothing More Frightening Than A Woman
worldsofdarkblue13 December 2007
As a child I fell in love with 'monster' movies immediately upon seeing my first (Frankenstein Meets The Wolfman) on television. Fortunately for me I grew up in the fifties, an era prolific with cheapie horror and sci-fi films. A neighborhood theatre ran them almost exclusively at the time and I attended every Saturday (and sometimes a couple more days per week in glorious summer). Just couldn't get enough of this stuff.

I could take all the giant ants, scorpions and spiders, all the ghosts and haunted houses, the numerous editions of frankenstein monsters and invaders from space pretty well. For some reason, though, nothing frightened me more or stayed with me longer than the rare feminine monsters. Perhaps it was because women were always the loving caregivers (Mom, Grandma, my teachers, my sisters). When sick, or waking from a nightmare we always call for Mom. So, I think the idea of a woman being a vicious, scary thing was such a perversion of all I otherwise knew, the effect on me was especially chilling. I had no problem with the mutilated faces of men as in 'Horrors Of The Black Museum', 'The Black Sleep', 'The Unearthly' and so forth. But the visages of the female victims in 'The Hypnotic Eye' and of the niece in 'Frankenstein's Daughter' always made me squeeze shut my eyes.

'The Astounding She Monster' is a prime example of these fears - a malevolent, radioactive female relentlessly stalking me, her touch meaning sure pain and death. From the age of seven until seventeen, that particular luminescent character showed up in my nightmares. But the single most frightening thing I ever saw was the female terror that came shrieking out of the time machine in this movie, arms pumping in a marching style, coming right at me. Peeling off another woman's face to wear as a mask was incredibly disturbing. Yep - this was the single-most terror of my childhood movie-viewing. I couldn't even bring myself to keep my eyes open for more than half a second when the movie closes with a close-up of this hideously deformed feminist with a wicked widow's peak. Even at the age of sixteen, surrounded by buddies watching it on the late show, my body kept freezing with fear, though I didn't mention it to them.

Going by most of the reviews here, today's audiences, accustomed to the most graphic horror, just find this monster boring. But I'm still scared of this terror from the year 5000. Oh yeah, and the four-eyed cat gave me the creeps pretty good too.
27 out of 33 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
It's Terrifying!!!
geminiredblue21 September 2011
Warning: Spoilers
Back in the 50s, atomic monster pics were a dime a dozen. Everywhere you turned, filmmakers were slipping in (either subtly or not-so-subtly) their messages about the upcoming nuclear age and all the atomic fallout. Yes, tensions were mounting during that time as East and West raced to have the better nukes, the better space program, the better blah, blah, blah. From that period came some really good ones, like the giant ant movie THEM. In the midst of that period, this little movie was released. The concept is novel. On an isolated island in Florida, a few scientists are experimenting with time travel and nuclear power. Hm... why didn't Doc Brown think of that? And believe it or not, they actually manage to contact someone from the future who sends back little trinkets. One such trinket, a small metal statue is sent to Bob Hedges, a curator in New York. After much deliberating with his "loud and overbearing" secretary, he discovers the statue was produced in 5200 AD. So then it's off to Florida to see what's going on. Through a series of unfortunate events, a badly scarred woman is transported to the present and begins wreaking havoc. Kinda like THE TERMINATOR, in fact. Personally I think she is one of the scariest monsters to ever grace, or is that disgrace?, the silver screen. Late in the film, she kills a nurse and then uses a special mask that removes her face, to disguise herself. Wow, HELLRAISER did the same thing some thirty years later! The monster's make-up is thoroughly creepy. Most of the acting and dialogue is good too. I especially liked the witty repartee between Bob and Claire. Sadly little facts get mixed up, but let's not let the small details deter us... Well okay! What's mind-numbing is everyone's complete nonchalance around all the radiation. None of the scientists wear radiation suits or perform rudimentary decontamination. One character, dopey and brooding Victor, even says "Just because that statue was a little radioactive." A little radioactive? Either something is or it isn't. Factual error: the Carbon 14 test that Bob uses wouldn't really work on metal. Conveniently near the end, one scientist says to Bob "Better put on our anti-radiation suits." Huh, where did those suddenly come from? I know, I'm nitpicking. I hate to gripe but when an enjoyable movie overlooks facts like that, it annoys me. On IMDb the overall rating for this one is pretty low, but don't be fooled. Please track down this movie for some mild entertainment and for one of the best movie monsters!
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
White Hot MST3K for a Lackluster Film
Oosterhartbabe15 October 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Although this movie is pretty dull, the guys were blazing hot when they took on this film. They rapped out one liners that had me laughing uproariously. Fortunately, this made up for how bad the movie is on its own.

The plot seems to be that a scientist on a remote island in Florida has created a time machine(they never go into the scientific aspects of just how he did this) and has contacted the year 5200 A.D.(not the year 5000, as the title states). His purpose..umm...he's supposed to have a purpose? Apparently there's been an atomic or nuclear war sometime in the future, because all of the things that the scientist and his oily pink assistant are bringing back to 1958 are hugely irradiated.

One of these mementos of the future is a statue, which the scientist's daughter sends to another scientist to have it carbon dated. It occurred to me when watching this film that there was no way that the scientist could have used carbon dating, since that tests for carbon particle decay caused by an object's aging. Since this thing was from the future, it would only be as old as the day it was made. You just can't future carbon date something!

Well, we can't. This guy managed the impossible, discovering that the thing dated to 5200 A.D., and that it was heavily irradiated. He took it and headed off to the island, to see the time machine scientist who was a former colleague of his and find out what was going on.

What was going on involved a four eyed cat, a woman in a spangly disco suit who came from the future(twenty years, perhaps?)some tepid horrid love scenes between the daughter and the flat topped carbon dating scientist, and a silly underwater fight scene between Mr. Gym Coach flat top and the old guy's oily assistant. There's also a peeping tom gardener who lives in a shack a la the Unibomber, and a nurse who gets her face ripped off as though she were the cop in Silence of the Lambs. The future woman, who's a mutant, wears the nurse's face(although how she hides everything else, even in the nurse's clothes, I'm never sure) on top of her own, and tries to talk the oily assistant into coming to the future to be a breeding stallion because he has 'undamaged genes'(not in my opinion, he doesn't). The two of them get electrocuted, there's a stupid long sermon about using nuclear fission and atomic bombs, and the movie trails off to its flat conclusion.
4 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
"Please! It's Horrible!"
stryker-53 March 1999
1950's science fiction films are so earnest and so crummy that it's impossible not to like them. "Terror From The Year 5000" is a prime example of the genre.

On a lonely island in Florida's Everglades, a professor is experimenting with time travel. The project is successful to the extent that Prof Erling and his assistant Victor are able to trade artefacts with people from the year 5,200AD. One of these items finds its way to the desk of Dr. Bob Hodges, a museum curator and all-round good guy, who is amazed to learn that the figurine dates from the future.

Bob Hodges heads for the Everglades, where Prof Erling and his beautiful daughter Claire make him welcome. Victor, meanwhile, has started putting in some unauthorised overtime in the lab, with alarming results...

Robert Gurney wrote, produced and directed this gauche piece of malarkey with its wooden acting, daffy plot and laughable sets. The scientific gadgetry in the lab is particularly amusing.

The howlers come thick and fast. Bob explains to his secretary Miss Blake (boy, if there were only an oscar for stodgy delivery ...) that carbon-14 dating places the statuette in the future. Just how carbon-14 can do that is baffling to ordinary mortals like me! When Bob fires his shotgun, we hear the shot but there is no muzzle flash from the dummy weapon. When a female in a nurse's uniform opens the door, somebody says, "You must be the nurse". The clock on the lab wall shows silly times which don't match the sunlight outside. The prof's gadget disrupts all machinery in the district when it's switched on. We see a TV set in a local bar pack up, but nobody seems to mind.

There are many unintentional laughs ("I'll do my exploring in the laboratory, if you don't mind", "And then the missile centre fired him" etc etc). Every plot point is laboured to death. The non-sequiturs abound. Nobody flinches when it is realised that they are all contaminated with radioactivity, and no-one warns Claire when she walks in. Later, it turns out that the lab has protective suits available. When Victor breaks a pane of glass in the time chamber, he picks up a replacement pane of exactly the right size which happens to be lying beside him. When Bob gets out of bed and follows Victor, he unaccountably has his shoes on. Why would Victor go to the trouble of getting in bed in the same room as Bob, only to sneak out and tamper with the gadget? And why at this stage would Bob want to follow him?

It goes on. The 'monster' speaks perfect Greek and English, even though it comes from five millennia in the future. The men know there's a dangerous creature out there, but they stand back and let Claire answer the door. The monster kills Angelo easily, but Claire is able to unmask it without any trouble. When they find the nurse's body, Hedges and Erling stroll back to the house as if they were picking mushrooms. Nobody calls the police when Angelo is found dead. Bob and the Professor abandon the house, with its two women and sick man, to go searching the island together. Nobody thinks of calling for help. The nurse, in her immaculate uniform, has to walk up to the house through swamp and jungle without a guide. When the alarm is sounded, nobody wonders where Victor is until after it's all over.

The editing is atrocious. We see the Professor waiting for his cue before speaking, and the lumpy back-and-forth dialogue cuts are dreadful. The close-ups of Bob and Claire swimming in the pond are oh-so-obviously filmed in a studio tank. At one point, Victor says "Professor, we're wasting our time." One can't help thinking he's right.
17 out of 28 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Amateurish and boring
jamesrupert20147 November 2019
Experiments in time travel bring a predatory female mutant from a distant, post-apocalyptic future to an isolated island. Sadly, the film is nothing like its excellent poster: the 'terror' is a woman in crude 'mutant' makeup wearing a sparkly suit that emerges from a bargain-basement 'time machine' that looks more like a converted boiler than the 'window into the future' depicted in the poster. The acting ranges from adequate to amateur, with cardboard characters delivering an insipid and derivative script. The only highlights are the terror's face stealing machine and the briefly glimpsed four-eyed (dead) cat from the future. The story doesn't make much sense, even from a time-travel perspective, and is yet another example of the 'our dying civilisation needs your men/women to survive' shtick (a storyline flogged-to-death by 1958). For extreme fans and life-listers only. The film was edited by Dede Allen - another example of a future A-lister getting started in the business (her next editing job was Robert Wise's 'Odds Against Tomorrow', 1959).
2 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
Save Us!
kapelusznik182 December 2013
Warning: Spoilers
****SPOILERS**** It's not just the mutant human beings of the year 5200 AD that need to be saved but those of us watching this turkey that takes the cake in being one of the worst horror or anything else movie ever released. I have to say that Salome Jens in her motion film debut is as hot as Kryptonite as the woman from the future when she takes on the appearance of the nurse that's sent to the off shore Florida island to care for the stricken from radiation Victor, John Stratton, whom she in fact infected with that deadly illness. It's Victor who played fast and loose with his girlfriend Claire, Joyce Holden, father Prof. Howard Lering's, Frederic Down's, time machine that brought this deadly calamity upon himself.

As for Salome or the woman from the future her task was to bring the at first young and viral Victor back to the future to do, in finding no other word to call it, stud duty to replenish the by then dying off human race.You see after thousands of years of nuclear testing the radiation of those atomic teats has mutated the human DNA causing mutations that got to the point where one out of five babies being born were seriously defected and mutated. Now Solome or future women in her being brought back to the year 1958, the year that the film was released, was or is going to change all that.

****SPOILERS*** Miss. Jens, a gem of a woman, was seen throughout the entire movie, not counting her impersonation of a nurse, in a tight fitting and sexy looking jumpsuit covered with what looked like dozens of shiny rhinestones who's reflection of whatever light was available made it difficult to see her. In fact Solome was so obviously strange and sinister looking that it was unusual that no one in the cast realized what she was really up to until, for Victor, it was too late. One of Salome's victims was the island handy man Angelo, Fred Harrick, who in what seemed like him trying to pick her up and make conversation with her ended up being radiated to death instead. The final scenes had Victor finally realized that he's being used by Solome, who hypnotized him, to do her not his bidding and caused him to revolt against her and finally put an end to all this back and forth to the future hysterics.
1 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Ridiculous
Gafke23 January 2005
On an isolated island deep in the swamps of...Florida, I think?... Professor Erling and his assistant Victor are tampering with Gods domain, namely the Time Barrier. Behind the closed doors of their basement lab, the two men believe they have been contacted by people from the future, who send them silly looking statues and bowling trophies. Professor Erling's strong-willed daughter Claire decides to send one of the sillier statues to museum curator Bob. Bob somehow manages to carbon date the statue to the year 5000 AD, and discovers in the process that it is highly radioactive. Intrigued, Bob heads down to the swamps for answers. Victor, the uptight lab assistant, has been running his own secret experiments with the time transport thingie in secret and, unbeknownst to the others, has unleashed the Terror From the Year 5000!!! Really, it's just a really ugly chick in a sequined spandex disco suit, but she is very deadly and she wants Victor to accompany her to the future and save her nuclear decimated race of freaks. Fortunately, the astute Claire notices the Terror's hideous silver spike heels and realizes that such shoes can only be FROM THE FUTURE!!! Will they be able to save Victor? More importantly, can they prevent the post- apocalyptic fate that awaits them all? Who cares?

This is a silly, senseless film with a threadbare plot and some very laughable moments...like the hilarious plot point of the futuristic pumps. No one is very likable: Claire is stridently annoying, Victor is a wuss, Bob is a dork. Who cares if they live or die? I can't believe that Salome Jens went from this to "Seconds" with Rock Hudson. The script is atrocious and the love triangle is just icky. Stick with the MST3K version. This film is dreadful, embarrassing, boring and just really painfully stupid.
3 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Very dull b-movie.
loserfilmnerd7 August 2011
This is the first time reviewing a movie featured on MST3K, but I do not let Mike and the bots influence my opinion on the movie. I have seen some pretty good movies on that show, and the hilarious riffing just enhanced it. This movie, however, was really bad, like most movies featured on the show.

I think the worst thing about this movie is the pacing. Basically a guy finds some statue thingy, which he uses some kind of weird science to determine it's from the future, and then nothing really happens for half the movie. There's nothing wrong with a slow- building thriller, but there's no tension in the first half. Sure we get some pointless subplot about a love triangle or something, but this is a movie obviously marketed as a sci fi thriller. How about some thrills? Those of you patient enough to get to the titular "Terror" will at least be treated with some cool make up effects, which is basically the only reason I gave it a three instead of a one. But other than that, the second half doesn't have much thrills either.

But enough of the pacing, let's talk about some of the filmmaking. Like I said before, there's some good make-up near the end. But the person wearing the make up was in a really stupid costume, but I can't really explain much more without ruining the film. There was some on location shooting that appears to be shot at night, without much lighting, so it was too dark to see what was happening at times. There was also lots of padding, with pointless shots of driving and walking, and a couple over long scenes with a scientist and a time machine being, uh, scientist-y. As for the acting, it was wooden, but the average amount of wood you'd find in a b-movie.

I would recommend the MST3K episode, but this movie is probably unwatchable without it.
2 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
To use or not to use
dstillman-8938312 May 2019
Most of this movie is taken up by endless debates among the scientists about how to proceed with the experiments. Also, the romantic episodes are distracting and mean nothing. When they get around to meaningful experiments a subject from the distant somehow manages to arrive on her own. There are many loose ends, unexplained events that were sacrificed to make room for all the soap opera is sequences. The acting is very uneven and the script is tedious. If this is supposed to be a peek into the future gives us more about the futur.Yhis falls far short of expectations.
1 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Totally Unwatchable Drive in Smeg. Unless It's MST3K Version
verbusen17 February 2010
Warning: Spoilers
American International at its absolute worst. Ultra-low budget film about time travel (in the worst, most boring way), where a monster woman from the future who is intelligent but at the same time stupid, is brought to the past to get new man seed. If I had watched this as part of a schlock movie package set it would have been stopped about 5 minutes in and never revisited. However, as an MST3K installment with Mike (not Joel) it's pretty good. The one liners they use are decent though probably not in the top 50% of their shows, however it made watching this dreg palatable and even at times amusing. Favorite lines? I like the Jimmy Carter references, having lived through that pitiful time they cracked me up, plus you never see this bunch ribbing the left so it was a pleasant surprise. 1 of 10 on its own, 6 of 10 as a MST3K episode. It doesn't surpass Beast of Yucca Flats as my worst movie of all time but it's pretty close. UPDATE FROM THE YEAR 2020!!!! This film was so forgettable that I watched it again 10 years later and couldn't remember that I had already seen it. Of course, I watched the MST3K version. When I came here to leave a review, I saw I already left one from the past!!!! So, do I still agree this is a 1-star film? Absolutely! If you read the other reviews, most praising it are nostalgic reviews or are praising it because its so bad its good. This film reminded me of the 1957 Everly Brothers song "Wake Up Little Susie," "The movie wasn't so hot, It didn't have much of a plot, We fell asleep, our goose is cooked Our reputation is shot. Wake up, little Susie" If I had watched this back in the day at a drive in I would have fallen asleep too! Points to ask yourself for those who really love this film and think it's so underrated, scientists from 1958 can invent a time machine but scientists from the year 5000 cannot? If you are sending a woman back to get man-seed you pick from the one out of five who is an ugly mutant? You send a person back in time with a cannister but not a weapon? If the monster is so terrifying why do they wait until the last reel to have it in the film? Also, the only known actors in this are the female lead but this is her next to last film (she's old?), the writer who also wrote the terrible (but at least funny) "Attack of the Eye Creatures" and low budget schlock master Samuel Z. Arkoff who is known for deliberately making films just to make a buck, artistic output never considered. The only revision I have watching this, 10 years into the future, is that the riffing done by the MST3K crew is higher than a 6, I now give it a 8. Only watch this "film" straight up if you love boringly bad films or watch the MST3K version if you enjoy a good riff on them.
1 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Weird
BandSAboutMovies10 May 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Originally titled The Girl from 5000 A. D., this movie had a great tagline: "From Time Unborn ... A Hideous She-Thing!"

Playing on American-International Pictures double features with The Screaming Skull or The Brain Eaters, Terror from the Year 5000 was shot in Dade County, Florida and presents a world where scientists attempt to communicate with the future by sending their fraternity keys through time and getting statues and coins in return. One of the scientists, Victor, grows insane attempting to communicate with the future and pays for it with his life. There's also a mutant cat cadaver, in case you're into that kind of thing.

The poster for this movie is, quite frankly, way more interesting than the movie its selling. Which, come to think if it, is how posters should work, right?

Dede Allen, who would one day edit The Hustler, Wonder Boys, Bonnie and Clyde, Dog Day Afternoon and Reds, started her editing career on this movie.
0 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
My Greatest Source of Nightmares as a Child was "The Chicken Lady"...
carlso639 September 2006
AKA "Terror From the Year 5000", shown on "Chiller Theater" back in the early 1970s... As kids, we called this the "Chicken Lady" movie because we thought the mutant Future Womans shrieks sounded like some kind of chicken (?)... Hey, but the name stuck...for us, anyway...

Almost 35 years later and I still recall it as the single scariest *bleeping* movie I ever saw! I Picked up a DVD copy online to watch with my kids... of course now this thing is one giant wheel of CHEESE compared with modern day CGI gorefests and bloodbath flicks. And it is no longer "scary" to me at all; my kids laughed uncontrollably every time the Future Woman jumped out and fried someone with those radioactive Lee Press-On Nails! BUT...

For my $$$ still rather see 100 movies like this than drek like "The Hills Have Eyes","The Devils Rejects" or "Saw"...

Rather odd to notice now - as an adult - that Salome Jens, aka Future Woman, was ONE HOT BABE without that mutant makeup job!

Hellllllllllooooooooooo Nurse Salome!
28 out of 37 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
She hypnotizes her victims with her shiny new press on nails...WHAT??
boss-1128 January 1999
This movie try's to frighten you and spook you and OH MY GOD..LOOK OUT FOR THOSE NAILS!! She hypnotizes her victims with her shiny new press on nails...WHAT?? It's just plain pretty bad, but I'd have to say again that it's so bad that it's...GOOD. There is one scene that brings a little chill when the psycho killer from the future is marching(?) through time and spewing this bizarre shriek that's..actually.. kind of spooky. But this is a short scene and soon you're back to some serious cheapness. It's the kind of 50's sci-fi cheapness that makes this film pass over the border from "just a bad movie" to "so bad it's good/funny/culty". If you want to know how I can say this see my review on "The Amazing Colossal Man".
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
If bad movies were capable of destroying the planet, Earth would be cosmic dust after this one.
mark.waltz12 May 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Incredible nonsense about time travel and how modern man not taking care of the planet turned babies into mutants in the future. You got a mutant cat and a mutant woman, and she looks like Catwoman with plaster covering her face. This is one of the worst science fiction movies I've ever seen, and that's saying a lot, as well as one of the worst American International films I've ever seen, and that's also saying a lot. This film made absolutely no sense, and I'm not going to spend another 66 minutes of my life trying to figure out what it was supposed to be regarding.

Time travel takes a scientist to the future to bring back items that have been created since, and the scientist returns accidentally with this creature, a deformed woman who is seeking vengeance for what people in the current day did to affect the future. It's hideously plotted and filmed and acted, and even worse, one of the most misdirected movies I've ever had the displeasure of spending 66 minutes to watch.

With a title like this, I expected so much more, especially after looking at all the lobby cards and posters out there. Shows you can't trust advertising. You can't even get a really good glimpse of what the female creature looks like, because it isn't about it being a bad reconstruction of the original print. The original just wasn't that good. This is one of those films that is strictly for science fiction diehards, and even then, there will be much regret for even giving it a chance.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed