Dead Fire

1997 "The Future Of Mankind Is History"
4| 1h32m| NA| en| More Info
Released: 19 July 1997 Released
Producted By: North American Pictures
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Info

A convict and his gang seize a space station in 2064, with plans to annihilate Earth's population in order to start anew with an entirely new society.

Watch Online

Dead Fire (1997) is now streaming with subscription on Prime Video

Director

Robert Lee

Production Companies

North American Pictures

AD
AD

Watch Free for 30 Days

Stream on any device, 30-day free trial
Watch Now
Dead Fire Videos and Images
  • Top Credited Cast
  • |
  • Crew

Dead Fire Audience Reviews

Vashirdfel Simply A Masterpiece
FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.
BoardChiri Bad Acting and worse Bad Screenplay
RipDelight This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.
gilimonster What makes a bad movie. Well a bad movie is unoriginal and clichéd, with a cheesy score, bad script, bad acting, garbage special effects and, possibly the worst crime of all, it's boring. Dead Fire is all of those things. This is possibly the worst movie I have ever seen. It's not a movie most people have heard of which is pretty sad seeing as they play it quite a bit on the SPACE channel in Canada, i don't know about the states (well I think this is because in Canada broadcasters are required to have a certain percentage of Canadian content but there is better Canadian stuff than this, so don't watch this and judge Canadian movies). So full of clichés and overacting and very bad action sequences. Whats with all the screaming burring the shooting, don't they not want them to know where they are? And half the time the people look like they have no idea how to handle a gun. I HATE IT WHEN THEY DON'T TRAIN THE ACTORS TO DO WHAT THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO. BLARG!!!! Just don't watch this, it is just that bad.
A_Roode Ironically, the best line in this film doesn't even belong to it -- more on that later. An immensely enjoyable Matt Frewer chews up scenery and dominates the screen every time you see him. One almost feels bad for the other actors who are there with him because his gleefully over-the-top performance blows them out of the water. Then of course you remember that you're the one watching the film and you start feeling bad for -- or about -- yourself instead.I'm pretty sure I know why Matt Frewer would have signed on to do this: gangsters have kidnapped his family and are forcing him to perform in movies that... actually I don't know. Maybe it's more a question of finding a fun part to play in a forgettable movie. In all seriousness there's not much to watch here unless you're a Matt Frewer fan (you might be after you see it) or a C.Thomas Howell fan. I always wonder when I watch films like this why someone would ever agree to be one the villain's henchmen. Excuse me, hench-PERSONS. Didn't do the job properly? No problem! Frewer will just shoot you and find a replacement lackey from a rapidly thinning herd of goons. Still, he's so funny about it that it drags this film kicking and screaming to four out of ten (bad, but funny enough to have a certain charm).The only other acting chops that showed up for this dog belong to Howell. He's not given much to work with. On screen but not used, Howell isn't bad -- you just want him to hurry up and spit out his lines so that you can go back to watching Frewer.As forgettable as this one is, it is superior to 'Sleeping Dogs' which was filmed the same year and used the same sets. Howell is in that one too so there must have been a two for the price of one deal. Or he lost a bet. To Matt Frewer.I mentioned that there was a great line. It's Frewer's last of the film and comes from 'White Heat.' Typing this up has been difficult since hearing Matt Frewer yell 'Top of the World ,Ma! TOP OF THE WORLD!' sent my eyes rolling into the back of my head. And yes, he yells it as everything explodes around him. Skip this and watch 'White Heat' instead.
ralexander-2 If you enjoy B-movie action and sci-fi flicks, this one is not bad. It's got some decent villains, and it certainly doesn't take itself too seriously. Importantly, I was not distracted by any overtly ridiculous plot-lines (other than our hero spending two or three screen minutes under supposedly deathly cold water).This review is principally provided to spotlight a tidy performance by the heretofore unknown Rachel Hayward, as Col. Alexa M. Stant. She plays the role of a colonel with an agenda with suitable campiness, and just the right edge. She was by far the most watchable character on-screen. She managed with aplomb the caraciture role of the sexy villain who simmered and barked most of the film, with occasional emotional swings. Without question, she was the most charismatic female in the film.With Hayward's entertaining performance, and other over-the-top campiness by C. Thomas Howell, it's an enjoyable romp--presupposing, of course, an appreciation for B-movies and not over-thinking the movie.
Burton C At least that's how I answered my sister when she walked into the room.I watched this movie because my brother-in-law is a sci-fi buff and that's what he was playing the night I was over. I enjoy good sci-fi. This is not good sci-fi.Movies like this would explain why we should go to war against Canada; ala "South Park". Predictable plot and dialog, acting that alternates between sad and laughable. Don't waste your time.