Innerspace - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Innerspace Reviews

Page 1 of 48
September 22, 2018
Visually impressive and pretty dang funny thanks to Martin Short, this sci-fi adventure is nonetheless reduced to B-level due to its campy serial-style plot.
½ August 23, 2018
With all of the parties involved in the making of this film, it was clear that there was a desire for it to achieve blockbuster status. Whereas it's a good film, it doesn't quite get to where it could be, in part due to an overabundance of 1980s slapstick and hokey comedy. The special effects are genuinely interesting when you consider the year in which it was all done. An interesting concept that could have been so much more.
February 13, 2018
An awesome adventure the whole family can see.
½ December 26, 2017
original and fun to watch. The props are well done making it still enjoyable today. A must see film.
November 29, 2017
I've always liked the idea of an extremely literal subjective movie, that the film is literally traveling through the body of something, that you experience a kind of greater reality as far as physical functions, grasping the processes which we are all bound to. After seeing Innerspace, I realize that you can accomplish much more with the figurative form of this, a world painted in metaphors. Once you're in the literal body, there's not much left to see.

But I really enjoy the circumstance this film delivers on, however campy it may become. It's a fun little challenge this set of characters have to get through, a very traditional Hollywood adventure structure, an innocent bystander thrust into some secretive government/science experiment by accident, ripping him from his mundane life into the otherworldly, having to face the circumstances as a common man. Martin Short delivers on this well, a nebbish store clerk with a frail structure, while inside of him is a maverick (literally Quaid appears as Tom Cruise in Top Gun, smile, gestures, and all) who has a penchant for alcohol and the ladies. A guy like that doesn't seem quite deserving of all he gets, and the film never really addresses that either, which, for the sake of steering around emotional cliches, is fine.

The villainous aspect of the film didn't work too well for my taste, it all felt rather cheaply thrown together - 'we need bad guys, competitors who will go to any length.' Add to that an all too happy to please henchman, in the vein of Bond's Jaws, except with a mechanical arm - who's menace comes from black hair, evil smiles, and low angle lights - and you're right on track for your typical studio fare.

The idea of being inside a body has tremendous implications that would be interesting to explore in an independent film one day, and it wouldn't include any of this camp. Inside Out did an excellent job of this, giving neural functions character life, the inside affecting the outside as much as the vice versa, exploring the real challenges of the boundaries both parties have, and how they have to work together to create harmony. Innerspace attempts that more cheaply with less emotional weight. We're not so much a voyeur through Jack as we are an observer of Tuck inside Jack, a less satisfying approach to the possibility presented.

I love the 80s sci-fi effects, Dennis Muren is on top of his game. This was a time when things were built to scale, props and sets that told a story, lit so as not to hide anything, space for the actors to develop their characters. This film look, with things you can grasp, is a lost art, replaced by digital video, CGI, and overly stylized chiaroscuros for competing cinematographers. Speaking of 'built to scale,' there may have been fun large size props created for this movie, but the scale of Tuck's miniaturization was awfully inconsistent. At times he appeared on a nanoscale, other times like the size of a ladybug or larger.

The film's convoluted finale did nothing for me, a mushy, contrived wedding for a relationship that's hardly been resolved, with a cheaply added cliffhanger showing the bad guys still on Tuck's trail, leaving the solution in Jack's court, which is taking on the role of the hero and leaving his former life behind. Was that what this was all about? Shows a screenplay that's unfocused, uncertain of what it's tying to achieve. It feels like at this point, everyone took on the attitude, 'doesn't matter, shoot it, get this thing done already.'

A surprising PG rating, with multiple sexual/masturbatory references; an alleged handjob machine that doesn't work right, a twisting cork for clitoral stimulation, "you don't talk to it, you play with it" an old man utters to Jack in the bathroom stall, Tuck clearly lascivious with women at the office, Dr. Canker excessively horny for no reason. During the scene Canker implies she'd like to warm up Jack in the meat freezer, did anyone else think studio execs got the idea to cast Martin Short as Jack Frost in Santa Clause 3 seeing him frozen while repeatedly hearing villains utter 'Jack'?
November 29, 2017
Very clever and funny movie. Great comedy. Loved it. Quality flick. Short is super in the movie. Great action scenes. Super cool and funny.
October 8, 2017
I forgot how funny this movie was
September 29, 2017
great action comedy and the premiss is cool
August 19, 2017
If you can't find something to enjoy in this movie, you are too serious! Great fun, great characters and great laughs!
Super Reviewer
½ August 12, 2017
You know, I hate to start off with this, but if I were to compile a list of the most boring actors alive, Dennis Quaid would have to be on that list. I'll never say the guy is a bad actor, he was perfectly fine and even somewhat charismatic here. He's serviceable, he gets the job done if you need him to. But, in my opinion, Mr. Quaid has spent a lot of his filmography just looking bored, barely emoting and looking like he'd rather be anywhere else than where he is at that point in time. I watched Vantage Point, in which he was one of the leads, but that film was so fast paced and intense that you never got a sense of how boring he is because the film jumped from character to character. But, I digress, I've just never been a big fan of the guy. I used to dread watching his films, but it's been such a long time since I've seen him (not counting Vantage Point) that I'm not bothered by it. I'd be bothered by it if every movie I saw had him in it. That's neither here nor there, let's move on to the flick, shall we? I like Joe Dante, I've certainly enjoyed a good percentage of his movies. Not The Hole, though, that movie is terrible. This movie has a completely silly and over-the-top concept and they, certainly make the most use of that as they possibly can. Is the movie good??? Eh, I don't know if I would go that far. There's certainly a lot of parts of this film that are very entertaining, for sure, like a lot of the early stuff in the build up to Tuck, who's been miniaturized as part of this experiment, being injected into Jack's buttocks instead of a lab rabbit. A lot of the stuff after Jack starts hearing Tuck's voice in his heads is fun as well, with Martin Short believing that he is being possessed by the devil or something. All this is fun and Martin Short gives a good performance. Martin Short has a comedic style that's as subtle as a nuclear blast, but he's still good at what he does and he gets to showcase that here. I'll be completely honest, I literally had no idea Martin Short was in this movie. I had never seen it before nor did I really know what it was about. I know, I know, this is one of my failings as a film nerd. I think that, honestly, part of the problem with the movie is that the novelty of the concept wears out fairly quickly. Don't get me wrong, the film is certainly silly and self-aware enough to make it easy entertainment, for the most part, but I also think it's a concept that uses a lot of its best concepts early on and everything else after that is just peaks and valleys. Another major problem is the fact that this film is like, seriously, 1 hour and 56 minutes long without credits. I don't think there's any way that a film with a concept as this should have gone longer than 90-95 minutes. The film does not have enough content to justify its length and, quite frankly, I have no idea why Scrimshaw and his people wanted the miniaturization chips to begin with. They do an absolutely terrible job of explaining their motivations. Maybe their motivations weren't integral to the plot, but they're trying to kill Jack and take the chip that is inside him with Tuck, so the least you could do is give us a legitimate reason that they're doing this. There's a good number of scenes that, honestly, feel like padding. Like the beginning of the whole film. I understand that you had to establish Tuck's personality, but I believe it could have been done without that whole rigmarole at the beginning. That's not the only one, but that's the first one that comes to mind. While, again, the character of the Cowboy is essential to one scene, getting from the moment where Lydia meets the Cowboy at the party to when Jack assumes the Cowboy's identity for the deal with Scrimshaw takes way too fucking long. It stops the movie dead in its tracks. And the whole dinner scene with Jack, having his face altered by Tuck to look like the Cowboy, goes nowhere to me. That's just two but, again, I feel like there's much more where that came from. I honestly do believe that you could have cut off 20 minutes off this movie and it would have been so much better, the flow would have been tighter and there, obviously, wouldn't have been as much dead time. They certainly do pick it back up again in the climax, but I feared that it was too little too late by this point. There was nothing they could have done by that point to make this a good movie. I don't know what else I can say. The stuff on the inside of Jack's body is well done and it, actually, won an Oscar for Best Visual Effects. That'll show you how far visual effects have come since this film's release 30 years ago. I don't know what else I can say about this movie. Good performances from Martin Short, Dennis Quaid and Meg Ryan aside, the film's flaws are way too obvious to keep me from truly enjoying this movie. Some of the film's scenes being longer than they should have been killed any chance this had of being good. It's not bad, it's sporadically entertaining for sure, but there's no reason I can recommend this Joe Dante movie when he's clearly done much better like both Gremlins movies, The 'Burbs, Explorers. Even The Howling, which I gave the same rating as this one (on Flixster at least), is better. Not by much, but it's better. This misses the mark, to be honest, but it's still perfectly decent.
½ August 3, 2017
Despite a frustrating ending that seems to attempt to set up a sequel that would never come, this is still a very good film (I'd go so far as to say it's kind of great). A fun, wacky 80's buddy adventure comedy that shows Dennis Quaid and Martin Short in some of their best roles. It also makes good use of some miniature/practical effects. Much better than I expected it to be. Definitely recommended.
July 9, 2017
Martin Short is hilarious and few are as gifted in physical comedy. This sci-fi comedy classic team Short up with the always wonderful Meg Ryan and Randy Quaid's brother Dennis, whom married Meg soon after this movies. 30 years later and it still thrills me and puts a smile on my face.
May 10, 2017
a little cheesy, but, still a fun family adventure
½ April 30, 2017
4/30/2017 (2): A decent movie, but I was hoping for much more comedy from this plot and cast.
½ February 15, 2017
Still great.
Everyone in the cast is at their finest. Meg Ryan is hot.
½ February 5, 2017
With an excellent cast, a fun plot and some great special effects (for the most part) - this science fiction, action, comedy has a lot to recommend it. It's not perfect but it's easily good enough for the 3 and a half stars it gets here.
Super Reviewer
January 5, 2017
Slow start but gets good starting the moment the three protagonists (Ryan, Quaid and Short) start working together.
November 11, 2016
Ah yes , the spaceship into the body of Putter ...Funny , nice adventure ! SOMVIDEO
October 19, 2016
After years it's still watchable but not that funny.
September 25, 2016
Fun, Fun, Fun and overacting is exactly what this movie needs and is. Groundbreaking technology make this great even today.
Page 1 of 48