Alicia I love this movie so much

Ensofter Overrated and overhyped

FirstWitch A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Chase_Witherspoon Intrepid young researchers with the ability to travel ahead in time as part of a government sponsored project to survey ecology and forecast future food shortages, discover that earth may have succumbed to a nuclear disaster. As a result of the discovery, the government suspends their research and they stage a daring time travel to the future in an attempt to locate signs of life, or, aid its continuance. Isolated in the Idaho wilderness, they pair off in search of life only to encounter a series of harrowing symbols and shocking revelations concerning the fate of mankind.Director Fonda has merged the youth movement culture of the early seventies with the sci-fi genre, affecting a creatively unique and stylishly photographed film that would surely attract cult status. While the themes are heavily symbolised (you really need to find the meaning beyond the text here), the dialogue somewhat lacking narrative context, and the characters shallow, the film still packs a punch. Bruce Logan's cinematography in a barren Idaho wilderness is a highlight, while performances by the unknown cast (save for Keith Carradine in a small role) range from rank amateur to semi professional at best, although this doesn't diminish the overall impact.Quirky (the time transporter has to separate metal from mineral matter and so the researchers commute sans pants owing to the zippers) and experimental looking, there's an apparent allegorical message about mankind's custodianship of the planet, and the role of youth in arresting its decline which will either hit or miss depending on your preference for sci-fi rendered social commentary. And while forbearance is required to accept some of the events depicted in the film (e.g. there's a character who's head is seemingly beaten to a pulp with a rock in a sustained, frenzied attack, yet bares little more than a scratch), if you persevere, you may be rewarded.

hdavis-29 This is the kind of film I usually like and I went into it with reasonably high expectations. Boy, was I disappointed. I've read many of the other reviews posted here before I wrote this. The spare or minimalist quality that others mentioned is true, and I didn't mind it. But there's got to be some kind of narrative thread or tension to go with it. I didn't find one here. In fact, the running time (just under 90 mins) could easily have been 30 mins or 300 mins; it wouldn't have mattered. There was no plot, per se, and that's what's wrong with this film. It does have a vaguely hypnotic quality which is why a 5 hr running time wouldn't have changed my reaction much.One reviewer called it a cross between a brilliant masterpiece and an idiotic mess. The first is certainly far from true. I'd change the latter to "self-indulgent" or maybe "stoned" mess.I'd love to get on board with this one, folks, but I simply can't. The three stars I awarded it are for the skin. I'm serious about this. This IS a time travel movie. It will take YOU back to the '70s and I found it delightful to see those gorgeous young women parading around, almost constantly, in the panties. Gratuitous, yes, but no complaints here.

Cristi_Ciopron Despite small Fonda's blandness and one—sided flower—power core, IDAHO TRANSFER is somehow a good movie—the story is I would not say elliptical but jumped , discontinuous—and hence enigmatic (though, I repeat, Fonda does not master the ellipse, and so he uses the jump …). The movie is primitive according not to the intentions but to the nature of Fonda; and it's interesting despite Fonda and what he does. The ending is very dry.The budget for IDAHO must have been less then minimal—which is to the movie's credit! Fonda's rudimentary ideas about cinema, on the other hand, did not help or improve the movie.It's mere '70s slapdash—yet it's interesting. The actress in the leading role was artistically banal, and sexually very attractive.

web-314 I like films that don't tell you everything. Unfortunately, this film tells you nothing. Once you get passed the main premise, nothing is explained, apart from "Do humans survive in the end?" and "Is there going to be a gratuitous boob-shot?". SPOILER QUESTIONS: What's the deal with the girl's father, why are the government investigating, why doesn't the government use the machine, were there bodies in the train, what happened to the other people who transferred, why didn't they bury a huge store of food and supplies so they could use it in the future, why didn't they ever try going to another time..? It is also nice to have a film that contains elements that aren't essential to the plot, and this film has them in spades, but a little more explanation would have been nice.The film is pretty well directed, and some of the main actors are okay (others are bad). The ending is really bad. It is like they wanted something really profound, but ended up with something very cheesy and almost nonsensical.Overall, I'd say the film is pretty interesting. It is a quiet builder. I got it as part of a 50 DVD pack called Nightmare Worlds.