best movie i've ever seen.

Very interesting film. Was caught on the premise when seeing the trailer but unsure as to what the outcome would be for the showing. As it turns out, it was a very good film.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

I don't have to tell you what this movie is a ripoff of because it's so blatantly obvious you could see it a light year away. As much as I dearly love this movie, it's just very, very bad. Not least because the space shots are all recycled from Battle Beyond the Stars and the rubber monster looks about as convincing as the Shat's new rug. The plot? A Marshall in the Alliance Mike Colby (Jesse Vint) is pulled out of stasis by his long-suffering Cylon partner SAM-104 (voiced by Don Olivera) to have a space battle before whizzing off through a effects shot to the planet Xarbia, where genetic researchers are creating a new kind of life form that gets loose and starts eating everyone. The one thing I think saves this movie from being a complete flop are the characters, particularly Fox Harris' character Doctor Cal. I don't know why but his slightly nihilistic pessimism and constant smoking have a strange charm about them. He should've had his own movie, that's how good he is. Linden Chiles' Hauser is also quite fun to watch, if a little predictable. I kind of feel sorry for SAM, he's always getting switched off. The deaths are a bit over the top, the sex and nudity are a little on the large side, and the sky outside is quite obviously blue, no matter how much tint you stick on the lens. Corman's didn't learn his lesson there either; when he remade it as Dead Space in the 1990's, the only improvement was this time the monster looked better. That aside, it was worse. He even used THE SAME F*CKING STOCK FOOTAGE for the space shots. What a cheapskate.

Roger Corman produced this film and although his movies almost always made money*, they always were made with minuscule budgets. None of them are what anyone would consider high art, but a few are masterpieces of inexpensive cinema. This one, however, is pretty much like most of Corman's films--super-cheap, kind of cheesy and a bit dumb...but also almost entertaining enough to keep your interest. After all, if the story (a re-working of ALIEN) doesn't keep your interest, the film tossed in quite a bit of gratuitous nudity to keep your interest!When the film begins, there is a really crappy space battle that looked very, very dated for the early 80s. Following this, the captain of the ship arrives at a research station where some sort of accident has occurred...though the leader of the station continually downplays the seriousness of it. They've created some sort of super-organism and although folks seem amazingly complacent, it soon starts wiping out folks on the station. Can they stop it in time or are they all doomed to be entrées for this creature?ALIEN came out in 1979 and looks a billion times better than this film. Heck, several other sci-fi movies of the 70s look a lot better than this one. But it does sport two women who love to take their clothes off for no discernible reason other than to distract the audience from the overall crappiness of the movie. The overall effect is anything but artful and isn't particularly good...but folks wanting to see a lot of flesh should be satisfied. Otherwise, not a film most folks would want to watch and would do a lot better just watching ALIEN.By the way, 're-working' is also occasionally a nice way to say 'blatant ripoff'.*Corman's only money-losing film (out of over 400 credits) was reportedly "The Intruder" (starring William Shatner). Sadly, this was among the best films Corman ever made and yet it lost money and some god-awful ones made money. A great example of the phrase "life ain't fair".

I've seen it many times and every time I see it I'm surprised at how good it is. Countless cheap (and expensive) films have copied Alien, and this may well be the best.Although a sequel to Roger Corman's earlier Galaxy of Terror, which was more of a Star Trek rip-off than Alien, Forbidden World has nothing to do with Galaxy of Terror except they share sets and are clearly set in the same universe as one another.It is full of gore, clever special effects, good performances, fitting mood-setting music, sex and screaming. The monster is a proper low-budget creation and one that you see a lot of. It's a sort of cardboard version of Giger's Alien.If you're a fan of horror science fiction you MUST watch this. My money and time has not been wasted, it is constantly entertaining, and the finale is worth the exciting wait.

In the distant future, a federation marshal arrives at a research lab on a remote planet where a genetic experiment has gotten lose and begins feeding on the dwindling scientific group.So, what do you get when you have an "Alien" ripoff written by Jim Wynorski, produced by Roger Corman, and with effects from John Carl Buechler? If you expected excessive boobs from Wynorski, you would be right. And if you expected a low budget from Corman, you would be right. A great monster from Buechler? Sure thing! Seriously, this is not a bad movie. Is an A-level science fiction film? Maybe not. It should not be thought on on the same level as "Alien". But that is not the point, if you know what you are getting yourself into when you sit down for a Corman flick. It is is gonna be fun, cheesy and entertaining -- just like movies should be.