I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

Save your money for something good and enjoyable

I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

"Clockstoppers" is one of those simple PG plots which involves a boy, a watch, and no need to corrupt the system. A kid, unlike you or I, finds a watch from his super-genius father that can literally slow down time (actually, speed up his molecules so that time seems to be going slower). Instead of stay in that time forever, growing old and experiencing the powers of "invisibility", he uses it to win over the heart of an unknown girl and stop the world from catapulting into utter annihilation. Yep, something I would do if I could stop time. Like any other film of this nature, I am sure you know what ultimately happens in the end. Helmed by "Star Trek's" very own Jonathan Frakes, "Clockstoppers" boasts the talents of Jesse Bradford, Michael Biehn, and French Stewart – with a cast like this, who needs enemies. Using amazing CGI to bring this story from the page, where Frakes falls short are the characters and his inability to grapple with the technology he is filming. I am not going to cover my issues with the molecular speed-up, because I am sure they have been nauseatingly been said before, but they did force you to consider the unmentioned possibilities. Why wasn't this whole film done with slowed time? How could some inanimate objects fly through the air in slow time, while others fit into the pattern of going slow? Why didn't Bradford fall through the floor? Age issues – don't make me go there! Again, this could be a whole topic of conversation, but instead, lets talk about the other pivotal downfalls of this film, and how they related to me feeling decent after watching this.I must admit, Frakes does a decent job behind the camera. He has learned from his acting lessons and can tell a complete story. Without the science fiction plot holes, the story itself for "Clockstoppers" was pretty cliché, yet straight forward. He didn't try to overdo it, while his actors might have attempted to gobble every line they could, Frakes kept the story simple and the CGI impressive. I have to applaud him for his work here, he could have made this a very dark story, but instead kept it suitable for a teen audience. This wasn't the original "Agent Cody Banks" in any way, but it did attempt to stand on its own, and I must applaud Frakes for his attempt. The acting, as mentioned before, was horrid. French Stewart was possibly at the lowest point of his career with this film. His attempt to be a honest scientist was goofy at best. He was never mad, just loony with his approach to this character. Jesse Bradford was middle of the road. Consistent with the standards of this film, he never went above where we wanted him to be. Oddly, his Ebay selling reminded me of another character from "Transformers", but I don't want to think the two films plagiarized. Julia Sweeny, well, just don't make me go down that tunnel. Paula Garces was middle of the road as well, she played off Bradford with ease because there was nothing they needed to attach themselves to. Could I be any more vague? When I finished watching this movie, I wasn't feeling upset or happy about the results – this was a mediocre film, and I can applaud it for staying within that genre.Sometimes I listen to music half my age – this film is a prime example of music that is half my age. There was an attempt to take it even further up the tween channel by employing the music of Blink 182 to heavily dominate the scenes of joy, empowerment, or victory. There was the overuse of Smash Mouth, which seems to plague every tween movie today – but oddly, that was allowed this time. Typically, I find myself yelling about how one-sided these releases tend to be. Focusing their marking towards a singular audience instead of just pushing the boundaries, but with "Clockstoppers" I felt their average outing calmed me. It worked I shouldn't have worked, but it did. Frakes subdued me, and I cannot argue with him. The special features surrounding this film were pathetic as well, staged "behind the scenes" which only showed how "fun" a film like this could be – it was disgusting. The music videos didn't fit, and the Saturday Morning interruptions also included were vile as well. See this language, yet I am going to give this film at least three stars. See, Frakes did dupe me.Overall, I gotta stop this review before I stick myself in a deeper hole. Agents with no names, bad villains bent on total domination using everything in their arsenal outside of the weapon of choice, a cool watch that may have sold well over the holidays, and plot holes the size of Miami. I hate these features on a film, but again, "Clockstoppers" filled a hour and a half of couch time well for me. I never laughed, but I never got bored with this story. Call me a quitter or a lackey to the cause, but "Clockstoppers" never came out of its shell, and I am happy for that. It was pathetic, but delightful in the same sense. I cannot suggest this movie to friends, but if it rained one afternoon and we needed something to kill the time – I think "Clockstoppers" would find its way back to the DVD player! Thank you Frakes – you duped me again! Grade: *** out of *****

This is aimed at kids but having watched Bernard's watch as a youngster and once i heard a similar idea had been implemented into a movie, i thought it wouldn't do much harm to go and see it. I wasn't overly impressed but still, a good bit of fun for 90 mins. Basically its about a kid who gets hold of a watch his Dad has invented that has the ability to stop time. He starts to have fun using it but then gets in to trouble along the way. The movie stars Jesse Bradford and the good looking Paula Garces. A fairly enjoyable movie that doesn't have you wanting to pull the plug at any stage.

---SPOILERS--- I remember only part of this movie, and here's what it was: Zak is some kid whose dad works as a professor, teaching science to high-schoolers. (Or was it college?) He claims that if something was moving very fast, that everything else would seem slower. So, he invents a watch to test it. His son, Zak, steals the watch (I think that's what happened.) and makes him and his lady friend speed through time- which makes everything else seem slower.So, what I remembered about this movie was how unrealistic it was. There were two scenes that were this way.The first one was when their in the garden. The people supposedly go so fast that everything seems slower. How is that possible when the to characters experiencing "super-speed" hardly move at all? The second part was near the ending. Zak somehow speeds up the watch or something, to go even faster. Hyper-speed? Super-time?Well, this part just about messed up the whole movie. If he's going so fast, how does he get caught in a net? When they were slower, everything else showed no sign of motion. Now, when he's in "hyper-time" he gets caught in a net gun. Why? How? To make a story? I think the kids might enjoy it, but the adults should stay far away. That's all I really have to say.Feel free to send me a Private Message regarding this comment.

I really enjoyed watching this film. Unique Storyline, great special effects, good actors. Michael Biehn made a brilliant villain, I wish he had been in more scenes in the film as he was the best actor in the film. I loved the special effects when time was slowed down, they were very convincing. Jonathon Frakes has done a great job of this film.