Movie discovery

Explore stories across every screen

AksyonTaon2015Tagal1h 27mIMDb4.8

The Mind's Eye

AksyonKatatakutanSci-Fi

Zack Connors and Rachel Meadows were born with incredible psychokinetic capabilities. When word of their supernatural talents gets out, they find themselves the prisoners of Michael Slovak, a deranged doctor intent on harvesting their powers. After a daring escape, they are free from his sinister institution, but the corrupt doctor will stop at nothing to track them down so that he may continue to siphon their gifts for his own use.

Panoorin Ngayon

Trailer

Cast

Joe Begos

Director

Graham Skipper

Zack Connors

Lauren Ashley Carter

Rachel Meadows

John Speredakos

Dr. Michael Slovak

Larry Fessenden

Mike Connors

Noah Segan

Travis Levine

Matt Mercer

David Armstrong

Michael A. LoCicero

Kurt Thompson

Jeremy Gardner

Vince

Patrick M. Walsh

Officer Rayne

Brian Morvant

Tommy

Josh Ethier

Jim Robbins

Susan T. Travers

Nurse Potter

CD

Chuck Doherty

Gary

MM

Mark M. Greene

Barry Norman

JD

Jesse Dufault

Roger

Angella Lynsey Ford

Nurse Maddigan

Graham Reznick

Local Operator

Joe Begos

Writer

Mga Komento

10 Mga Komento

Ndeye ndiayeMay 29, 2023

source: The Mind's Eye

Minan DésiréNov 22, 2022

Zack Connors (a solid and likeable performance by Graham Skipper) and Rachael Meadows (a sympathetic portrayal by Lauren Ashley Carter) are two psychics who possess incredible telekinetic abilities. They both become the wanted targets of the evil Dr. Michael Slozak (deliciously overplayed with lip-smacking brio by John Speredakos), who wants to use the pair for his own nefarious ends. Writer/director Joe Begos keeps the enjoyable story moving along at a brisk pace, maintains a harsh take-no-prisoners tone throughout, stages the exciting psychic fight set pieces with skill and flair, generates a good deal of tension, and delivers a handy helping of nasty gore. The sound acting by the capable cast helps a lot: Larry Fessenden as Zack's helpful dad Mike, Noah Segan as the lethal and vicious Travis Levine, Matt Mercer as the wimpy David Armstrong, Jeremy Gardner as the bumbling Vince, and Michael A. LoCicero as brutish thug Kurt Thompson. The practical make-up f/x are quite gruesome and convincing. Steve Moore's pulsating synthesizer score hits the rousing spot. The sharp widescreen cinematography by Begos provides an impressive polished look. An on the money flick.

samzanarimalNov 22, 2022

Imagine if David Cronenberg had just a 100 IQ. This then is what Scanners would've looked like. It doesn't suck, but it's not all that impressive either. Unlike Scanners, there is no cerebral subtext. What you see is what you get and nothing more. One thing that drove me sorta nuts watching it is that the characters will announce that some course of action is not a good idea and then proceed to do just that. They also engage in fights to the death, where they get the upper hand, but then do not finish off their opponents. Guess what happens. The lead actress and the score are pretty good. Plus, the general storyline is interesting, the foreboding atmosphere is well maintained, and the practical gore effects are impactful. All in all, I'd probably rather just rewatch Scanners, but that said, you could do a lot worse than watching this homage/ knockoff/ what-have-you.

EL'CHAPO CAÏPHL 🇨🇮Nov 22, 2022

Dr. Michael Slovak (John Speredakos) runs an institute in Rhode Island to study telekinesis. He recruits people who have this power and experiments on them. Zach Connors (Graham Skipper) and his girl friend Rachel Meadows (Lauren Ashley Carter) are the strongest of the two. They are kept drugged up, have spinal fluid extracted and injected into Dr. Slovak. Not to hard to figure out where this goes. This is a low budget, "Scanners" type of film. The film had a lot of decent gore effects such a head explosions and head splitting, kudos Melissa Asci and whoever else was involved. For some reason they opted to make the film stupid. First they used a demonic voice distorter for Dr. Slovak which didn't come across too well. If you are going to shoot people a few times, either have them die, or hobble around. Don't bring them back like nothing happened. And was was with the grimace contests that were gong on all the time. It looked like the stars could have used a decent stool softener. I was confused why Zach allowed guys to live who were trying to kill him and I didn't understand the vein distortion side effect. Now it did win "Best Director" at the Austin Fantastic Fest 2015 against some good competition so maybe its just me. Minus 1 star for the voice distorter. Sometimes less is more. Guide: F-word. Brief sex and male butt nudity.

Mona LisaNov 22, 2022

From the start this is a film that wears its influences on its sleeve. It wants to Scanners and It wants to be an 80s film. Not a bad thing to strive for. The feel of the film achieves that as does the subject matter yet the details are what lets the film down from being what it set out to be. the acting is good (even though a little over dramatic at times) the effects are good and so is the music - if there is one thing that holds the film back it is the writing. For example when the lead goes on the run, he goes to hide from his pursuers at his father's house. They would never look for him there? It's points like these that hold the film back from really being something great. Obviously this is a low budget film and the film makers did a good job on working with what they had. Maybe on their next film (since I see that the actor and director have worked together before) they can take a little more time and fix the script problems and really make a sci-fi / horror classic.

مشاري راشد العفاسيNov 22, 2022

This is a low to middle budget film from most of the people that bought you 'Almost Human'. This movie has a great 'John Carpenter' type score all the way through, no CGI cheap effects , a lot gore scenes, and there is quite a bit, using the real built effects ...a real nod to the scanner films and horror's of the 1980's & 90's. Not got a big budget, but the film works well , worth a watch, i did enjoy it!!

Johnny Garçon MbonziNov 22, 2022

If this feature stood on it's own, it might have made a weak 4 on my list, but as a rip off of the 1981 classic it barely gets a 2. So let's settle then on 3. Though the story line deviates from David Cronenberg's Scanners, this feature is a clear rip off from Scanners with very obvious parallels – even a classic reference to the forced veins on the face of Michael Slovak, the deranged scientist. Someone clearly forgot to tell this movie maker though that if you are going to try and emulate the style of a legendary director like Cronenberg, one should probably at least try and come up with an original idea or study the thematic content of that particular director before putting out a half-bred attempt to cash in on a new generation that would not know the classic. But with a very weak story line, a complete lack of thematic content, an over obvious choice to emulate Cronenberg's style and an insulting lack of innovation and originality, the best thing about this film is the B-grade special effects that is slightly nostalgic of early Rob Zombie films.

waiiwaii.pNov 22, 2022

i can only agree with previous comments to the effect that this is a terrible film. it sure is, it's a total irredeemable stinker. i hate to say it , i suspect this was made in trying circumstances, on a minuscule budget but i cannot deny that this was a total waste of time. ( Sean Carruther's Primer will show you what can be done with less than a thousand dollars. the music was a fair pastiche of late 70's Howard Shore but the film it tries to ape more than any other is of course Scanners. I can imagine the makers discussing how they can blow up somebody's head and then building the rest of the film around it. yes it is a film of 1 or two lackluster set-pieces displaying the wonderfully clever mechanical effects they constructed, the rest is beyond un-engaging and utterly risible. the lead is to ineffectual and the villain of the piece is hilariously over the top bad, not affectionately bad, absolutely execrable bad. by the time they face off i was ready to sleep. the end of scanners works because of the protagonists, you can totally believe that Michael Ironside will " suck your brains dry" bad line but, as i say, it's michael ironside) the two characters at the end of this just look as if they are constipated - it's one of the most unintentionally funny moments i have ever seen in a movie. And there is a sex scene which seems so ill-judged that it makes the love scene in "Watchmen" seem like something out of DH Lawrence Yes, it is an homage to 70's Cronenberg, but it is a very bad one. giving this 4 is generous and allowing that this is a feature debut ( and the soundtrack was the best thing about it). Definitely one of the worst sci-fi films i have ever seen. and i am all about the sci-fi : )

ans_3onNov 22, 2022

This is a blatant rip off of the 70's cult classic "Scanners".Now,some 40 years later with all the new technology they still can't beat or come close to what Cronenberg did. Also (to me personally) it's not even one of his best works but he does a lot with it on a small budget. The first scene of the movie introduces the telekinetic as he confronts the police and the acting immediately pulled me out of this movie.Just,so wooden and lines in a monotone voice that made it instantly boring. The effects were poor and not nearly so imaginative as from the original"Scanners". The sound(which the movie says you should play loud) was annoying and reminded me of a south park episode where Eric Cartman is fighting these mediums that think they have telekinetic powers. In the cartoon it was funny but taking seriously in this movie was just sad. If any element of "Scanners" would have been topped this would have been a not 1 movie and could have been a mildly entertaining popcorn movie. But as it has non of that,I don't recommend it. If your into low indie flicks...enjoy.

Messie BombeteNov 22, 2022

I did like Joe Begos earlier throwback to the horrors of the eighties Almost Human (2013) but this one wasn't really my cup of cake. For me the story was a bit weak but again, the director Begos made an ode to those heydays in the eighties of psychokinetic flicks like Scanners (1981) and the underestimated Bells (1982) still unavailable on any format, only VHS. What I did like was the effects used towards the end. But you really have to wait until then because when the mind is being tricked by a kinetic one there aren't any effects, it's just the use of the eyes that makes contact of the enemy's mind. But at the end of course they all are against each other and it's there that the gore comes in. Oh yes, I can even say that it's ultra gory at some points but overall it was just above mediocre for me. Maybe some scene's took too long. Nevertheless, if you grew up in the eighties be sure to pick this up but if you're used at the horrors of nowadays you wont like it at all. Gore 2/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 3/5 Story 2/5 Comedy 0/5

Featured Picks

Naghahanap pa ng mas maraming entertainment? Tuklasin ang aming recommended gaming hub at short-drama destination.

Instant Games

Gamixo

Maglaro ng casual browser games gaya ng puzzles, cards, sports, at quick challenges sa loob lang ng ilang segundo.

Short Drama

VSKIT Drama

Manood ng trending mini-series, romance stories, at mga bagong short drama na may mabilis na daily updates.