Run for Cover (1995) Poster

(1995)

User Reviews

Review this title
4 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
2/10
Run for Cover... From This Movie
Scars_Remain14 February 2008
A good friend and mentor of mine is in this movie as Kyle Flynn, so naturally, I wanted to see him in a movie. Unfortunately, that was the only good reason whatsoever to see this catastrophe. Not once was I entertained except for the paintball scene which was pretty darn hilarious. Try not to see this one.

Bad acting, bad characters, bad writing, bad direction, bad editing and bad everything else have a big role to play in this one. I like Mark's acting and Adam West but that was about it. I even had to fast forward after about 40 minutes just to get it over with. If you don't have a good reason to watch this like I did, then don't.
4 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Overly ambitious low budget failure.
maeander5 June 2004
The film makers claim to be making a picture about terrorists attacking New York City. With the opening shot of the Twin Towers and the initial blowing up of a tourist sightseeing ferry, you might think you are in for a disturbing journey in this 1995 film. Instead you are given the equivalent of a group of third graders doing a production of Hamlet.

Viveca Lindfors appears for no more than a minute. Adam West for less then ten. As for the rest of the cast, they aren't even talented amateurs. (IMDb list Heather Graham in the cast, but she is not in the film's credits and does not appear.) Maybe their acting wouldn't be so bad, if there weren't so many of them or if the dialog was half way decent. There are at least fifty speaking parts. The dialog is simply lame. In fact the entire production is lame. The terrorists are not terrorist. The Germans demand money from the city to stop their bombings. That makes them extortionists.

Originally shot in 3D, you wonder what was in the film makers mind. Instead of spending their limited resources on a 100 different locations with an incredibly tortured script in 3D, they would have done better for themselves to hire a writer who knew dialog and actors who could act.
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
low low budget film Waste of 3d technology
ozzyoz3 July 2004
The only thing great about this film is the 3d aerial image of our beloved twin towers and the rest of New York that was destroyed on 911.The film suffers from a lackluster plot and short cameos by New Yorks elite that are used to bait the filmgoers to believe the film may have a viable plot.The terrorists and hero are at best weak and nonthreatening by today standards.The technology used in this 3d film would have been better suited filming space or animal documentaries.It didn't have much of an impact being such a really low budget film. Also Heather Graham who does not appear as listed in this films credits would have been a major plus in talent.Complete waste of time, but then again its your money.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Z-grade thriller
Leofwine_draca12 October 2017
Warning: Spoilers
RUN FOR COVER is a truly terrible Z-grade action thriller of the mid 1990s with poor production values in every respect. The only minor interesting thing about it is that it seems to have been shot in 3D, although watching it in 2D this makes no difference and is in no way noticeable. A bottom-grade cast go through the motions in a story about terrorists holding New York to ransom, and there's the usual corrupt politician conspiracy angle to pad out the story. Watch out for Adam West, embarrassing himself with a dodgy toupee.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

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


Recently Viewed