User reviews

During this period, Full Moon took to making films back-to-back: Subspecies II & III, Trancers IV & V, etc. Some reviewers think that these paired-off entries are ultimately too similar to one another to count as separate movies. And they complain. Bitterly. But hey, major studios have started using the same technique - "Kill Bill" has been bisected, and "Lord of the Rings," which was filmed all in one go, was subsequently turned into three very similar movies (Here come the Orcs - run! Wait...here come our guys! ATTACK!).

So, I don't mind that this film is, in some ways, a retread of its predecessor. In fact, the effects and acting are significantly better than they were in Trancers IV - maybe it took a while for all concerned to find their stride - and so it has a different feel to it. There's also a more focused, quest-style plot, as Jack Deth toddles off to the Castle of Unrelenting Terror to obtain a jewel called the Tiamond ("sounds like Diamond" - oh Peter David, your dialogue is just too much!).

Bizarrely, several plot elements are plundered from "The Twelve Tasks of Asterix," including a siren-like seduction scene (in both cases, the spell is broken because the hero becomes hungry) and a scene in which ghosts are dispelled simply by being yelled at. Ah Peter David, I know where you get your ideas! I don't mind, though - a good sequence is worth repeating.

All this praise aside, Trancers V does not stand up terribly well on its own, and the ending feels rushed and cliffhanger-like. Jack Deth impregnated someone? He's dying? He's going back to his own time? Wha??? Since the series never continued...not with this actor, or in this vein anyway...the final feeling is one of acute disappointment.

So ends Jack Deth's final, oddball adventure in sword-and-sorcery land. Shame that he didn't get to appear in one more detective-style movie, but I still like the fish-out-of-water quality of his final battle against the nefarious Trancers.

Unfortunately, a step down from the fourth part here as we see the vampire trancers are now on the run since Jack Deth (Tim Thomerson) and the Tunnel Rats have run them out in this direct sequel to TRANCERS 4. Deth is now looking for a rock within the Castle of Unrelenting Terror that can take him back home to his own universe.

If you really enjoyed part 4 this might be for you, just so you can see how it turns out, but subtracting the credits and the recap I think they totally could have combined the two scripts into one movie that may have ran an hour and 45 minutes or so. They really kind of dragged this one out so they could make another movie. This one is missing that good old Trancers feel that did exist in the first 3 movies I would say. Both Alan Oppenheimer and Stephen Macht return as well. Same writer (Peter David) and director (David Nutter, who went on to direct some popular TV shows like X-FILES, ER and GAME OF THRONES to name a few) as Part 4.

Trancers 5 (1994) is another in the series I recently watched on Tubi for free. The storyline focuses on our good buddy Jack still hunting down Trancers on a planet that is during Medieval Times . His powers remain weak and his inability to capture the prince last picture will open the door for him to regroup and come harder after Jack and his companions. This movie is directed by David Nutter (The Pacific) and stars Tim Thomerson (Dollman), Stacie Randall (Together and Alone), Terri Ivens (Marked for Death) and Mark Arnold (Teen Wolf). The storyline, villain and premise for this movie is probably the worst in the series. The interactions between Jack and his local companion is hilarious the entire movie; however, it doesn't makeup for how bad the villain is written and executed. Overall this is a below average addition to the genre that is only worth viewing for fans of the Trancers series. I'd score this a 4/10.

Filmed back-to-back with the equally bad "Trancers 4: Jack of Sword" on cheap Romanic filming locations, this final entry in the Trancers series (unless you count a cameo by Thomerson in Evil Bong) is more than a disappointment. Tim Thomerson once again plays Jack Deth and this time has to find some mythical MacGuffin to stop an evil Trancer king. Chases through castles and forests ensue. The original film was a lot of fun because it was as if someone from the Blade Runner universe stepped into modern day Los Angeles. I'm not sure seeing Rick Deckard in a Romanian castle nearly as interesting. Stick with the first film to leave on a high note and maybe part 2 and 3 if you're in a forgiving mood, but skip part 4 and 5. Dullsville.

David Nutter directs this TV style fifth movie directly after his own fourth instalment. Seems Charles Band and Full Moon handed over the responsibility to a load of people unfamiliar with the series and told them to make a movie (well, two actually). Cast try their best, script is lifeless and the wooden, dull and additive Deth is here simply too drained to really work. Like the fourth movie this is a strange hybrid of Robin Hood (seems to be set in Sherwood Forest at times), Shakespeare plays and The Three Musketeers (though of course this is The One Musketeer!). This (and Trancers 4) were filmed at Charles Band's family castle in Romania and though an exceptionally striking place and one used to fabulous results in other films, here is is merely an option for cheapness. Unbelievably Trancers 6 (made several years later and virtually unrelated - something about a daughter) is even more obscure than the fourth and fifth instalments combined - and, Yes, they probably should be.

Please no more, the fist 3 were good but now there just plane bad, don't bother with anymore. I watched this movie one night when I had nothing to do, And you know what? I wasted my time. The acting in this film was very good but the film itself sux. I hope that PART 6 is better.

4/10

Our hero Jack Deth is still stuck in the other dimension playing dungeons and dragons, but this time he is trying to find a way home. throughout the movie he is on a quest to retrieve a jewel to help him get back home. This film plays better than the previous one because they do not have to set up the story of Jack going to the Dark Ages and fighting noble Trancers with swords and magic. This one was more of an adventure film because they are on a quest whereas the one before they are just trying to fight Trancers. This movie is bad, do not get confused with that, but it is more entertaining and the story did not drag as much. This is the last Jack Deth Trancers movie and instead of going away with a roar he goes away with a whimper. Do not even bother watching the 6th Trancers movie because Jack Deth isn't even in it. Indstead his daughter is hunting Trancers. That movie is awful to the point of unwatchable, but as least you can watch Trancers 5 and not feel so bad for yourself because it is just a little waste of your life, unlike the 6th one. Avoid this movie.

for more of my review visit my Youtube page: Logan Toxic and my blog logantoxic.blogspot

Seeing that "Trancers 5: Sudden Deth" is a direct continuation of "Trancers 4: Jack of Swords" and thus carrying on in the medieval setting, I have to say that the movie wasn't off to a great start for me. I preferred the three first movies more than the fourth, so this fifth movie is most likely not going to impress me.

And that is odd, because I do enjoy medieval fantasy more than sci-fi, usually. But the medieval fantasy setting just didn't do it for me in the fourth movie.

Well, I will say that the storyline in this fifth movie was better than the previous movie. And I suppose that because Charles Band returned to the writing tasks. Writers Charles Band, Danny Bilson, Peter David and Paul De Meo put together a fair enough script. But I have to admit that the fantasy setting for the "Trancers" movie just still didn't win me over.

The acting performances in the movie were fair. And something that spoke well in favor of the movie was the fact that cast members from the previous movie returned to reprise their characters in this fifth movie, so that gave something in sense of continuity.

Visually then "Trancers 5: Sudden Deth" was okay. The effects were fair.

Watchable for what it was, but "Trancers 5: Sudden Deth" was hardly an outstanding movie in the franchise. They sort of derailed the franchise after the third movie.

My rating of director David Nutter's 1994 movie "Trancers 5: Sudden Deth" lands on a four out of ten stars.

Knowing that 'Trancers 4' and 'Trancers 5' were filmed back to back, and having found 'Jack of swords' extraordinarily lacking, I didn't have much hope for 'Sudden Deth.' Yet, amazingly, the filmmakers found a way to hobble this picture even further, as it begins with seven minutes of lazily narrated recap and exposition. This fifth entry has the same advantages as its immediate predecessor - but unfortunately, the same flaws, too. This is so direly uninteresting.

With the productions linked, everything that could be said about 'Trancers 4' applies equally to 'Trancers 5.' I like the music composed by Gary Fry, yet it can only do so much by itself. It's no small get to have Peter David onboard as screenwriter, but one gets the sense that he wrote the best story he could while still being desperately hampered by the scenario, and constrained by demands for tawdry rewrites. The filming locations, set design and decoration, costume design, props, and even makeup and hair all look swell - yet these are unquestionably the best parts of the film, and that in itself is a problem.

Worst of all, however, is the pervasive feeling that the entirety of the feature was subject to Deth's characteristic "long second" device, or that the movie is a flailing attempt at self-parody. Dialogue, action, and even the most cursory physical movement crawls along with the most listless, idle, slothful torpor. The delivery of would-be jokes falls flat, and supposed action sequences are more dull than a spoon. I once again had to check that my video settings weren't altered to reduce playback speed, but even within the same feature we're treated to rare, fleeting instances of normal, realistic movement that informs without a doubt the stagnant gait of the craft is totally deliberate. It's impossible to tell from 'Sudden Deth' alone if anyone in the cast possesses any acting skills, as everyone is forced into the most slacking, apathetic, and downright sleepy of performances. I wouldn't mind seeing these actors in other films, so I suppose there's that - but here they, like all resources of the film, just go to waste.

'Trancers 5' is ostensibly a sci-fi adventure film with elements of comedy and horror, but all these aspects are rendered almost wholly inert by the consciously plodding pace. The fourth and fifth entries in the series bear zero thrills and a single laugh between the two of them - and it's not in this one.

I'm simply flabbergasted. There were a few actual good story ideas within. Yet it's as though the filmmakers set out with the earnest intent to weaken the movie with utmost disadvantage. A job well done, I suppose - mission accomplished. But to what end?

There's no reason to watch 'Trancers 5' if you didn't already suffer through 'Trancers 4' - and there's no particularly good reason to watch that, either. I can't recommend this even to viewers who can't get enough of B-movies; only someone who has already committed to watching the whole 'Trancers' series could claim any rationale for sitting through it. This is a slog, and purposefully so, and with that design all meaningful entertainment is forfeited. 'Sudden Deth' is an emphatically bad movie.

Jack Deth (Thomerson) returns to the Medieval alternate fantasy where Trancers are vampire like and joins force with The Vampire king's son and the Tunnel Rat rebels to save the world from Vampire Trancer rule. Trancers 5 is really, really pushing it in terms of nostalgia and fandom from the earlier movies. The film is aimless and has no real zip to make the story move forward. Action is mediocre per the budget and the only thing this tired sequel has going for it is Tim Thomerson. It's hard to believe that the director of this is currently one of the best directors on TV. I guess that's one good thing to come out of this misbegotten mediocrity. Also the same problem as 4 is that the sword and sorcery era is not nearly as interesting as the Blade Runner inspired first couple and the movie develops no real momentum. This is the type of movie that is best described as "For die hard fans only" which is something part 6 doesn't even get right.

* * out of 4(-Mediocre)