Supernova

I guess I'm one of the few people that actually enjoyed this film. I know it went through developmental hell and Coppola was called in for reshoots to save the film but I found Spader to be fantastic as the cold and cool bad ass captain. Is it great art? No. Is it a fun and entertaining low-budget sci-fi flick? Absolutely. Note: The R-rated DVD release is far better than the theatrical one.

I don't think this is anywhere near as bad as people make it out to be. The story is very interesting, and it makes good use of the setting. Bassett and Spader make an awesome team, too.

Cool effects & solid pacing propel dialogue slim crashing, smashing, & fighting scenes with likable characters (who die). While i would have preferred a pounding hard rock soundtrack & a less derivative feel, there's not much to dislike in this sci-fi action flick & lots to entertain.

Some good tits.

How can a film with such a troubled production history be this dull? We'll never know who is to blame for the resultant mess, and it doesn't really matter because no cut is capable of shaping these shaggy scenes into a truly cohesive form. It also led to Hollywood refusing to return Hill's calls, who was arguably the biggest casualty of this creative/financial fiasco.

It works as a sci-fi piece. This is like a lost episode of (old) Star Trek, but with a sexy crew, and campy. The production design is cheap but the CGI holds up even today. The dialogue is bad but the story itself is quite good. I think this movie would have benefited from even more porniness.

The effects are mostly cool, the cast is mostly great, but the script completely sucks, with such classic lines as "He's the worst nightmare I've ever met." Even a grade school student would cringe at having written something so lame. The writing is so heavy-handed, so ham-fisted, it leaves absolutely nothing to the imagination. The film clumsily and directly tells you everything it means to say, no reading between the lines here, which makes it boring and disengaging.

Very underrated. Not a great film but actually quite good.

...more like a black hole clusterfuck.

James Spader once said he took the part in Stargate because it was 'the worst script he'd ever read'. He must've been trying to top it here...

higher than it should be score only because it gave me a few days of nightmares when I saw it, and isn't that what horror movies should do

If we're trying to be glass-half-full about it. You can at least say it solves the age-old question of what happens if talented directors are puppeteered by talentless hacks.

It could have been better if the bad guy they picked wasn't such a useless bore

Terrible. Almost everything is bad, but Peter Facinelli’s performance is the worst part.

The action is taking place in space ship, so the area is very restricted and makes some scenes claustrophobic. Other words what will describe this movie is: boring and annoying.

A fairly poor film on most metrics, and by no means a horror film, mostly just a D-movie curio. Just about watchable thanks to how silly and trivial it all is, rather than actively offensive like most sci-fi misfires. Despite a "sexy" subtext and frequent, inexplicable nudity it just seems cluelessly earnest rather than exploitative. There is some idle fascination in scrutinising Spader's every glancing look and wondering whether he is thinking about raiding the food cart or firing his agent.

Almost 2/3rds of a good movie here, trapped behind a shallow dive into its own universe. Some lines are bad and some deaths are weak. The crew has some allure, but not enough.

Most ridiculously attractive space ship crew ever.

not so good

From what I remember this was a decent futuristic sci-fi space flick which was pretty decent looking and good enough acting, just nothing special to put to the next level.

Far from Jack Sholder's best work.

Sheer butchery of the medium of film. What a disgrace. I liked the design of the ship and its dimension drive effect...and the rest is best forgotten as quickly as possible.

Actually, not the worst sci-fi ever, but just a silly softcore porn space opera.

Just fucking awful, only positives are some decent Sci-fi visuals. You might as well just skip to them.

A disastrous, unsalvageable wreck, but there are elements of a submerged theme here, to do with the power of addiction and its ambiguous relation to perversion and fetishism (including technological fetishism), and the ways these may be civilizational afflictions, and the solutions to which, being themselves technological, are also pharmacological (in Stiegler's sense), and thus both potentially miraculously negentropic or catastrophically entropic. As is, however, the film is exceedingly poor.

Spaderlicious

You know when a movie has three directors that its gonna be something special. Anything that relies on James Spader is in trouble.

Kinda wish that this script would have exploded into supernova to utterly destruct and create new life. Peter Facinelli makes a completely unbelievable bad guy and the rest of the cast is utterly wasted on this script.

Not as bad as I expected. Several good bits and twists.

Visually good, but craptacular plot drags this film right down, particularly the ending which is plain stupid

null

WTF?

not good...but it looks good

The final version on the DVD was horrible. However, when you watch the alternate ending and all the deleted scenes, it becomes a much better story and a better movie. Really makes you wonder why they cut it all. (Example: no pointless sex at the end. WTF was that all about?)

Not great but Robin Tunney is naked and has great boobs.

Boring, generic film.