MacGyver: Trail to Doomsday (TV Movie 1994) Poster

(1994 TV Movie)

User Reviews

Review this title
7 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Modestly enjoyable, if generic, though dogged by uncareful writing
I_Ailurophile24 January 2024
The original 'MacGyver' series, running for seven seasons starting in 1985, is terrific and classic. The action, adventure, and intrigue was a blast with just the right measure of humor and heart peppered in, and the resourcefulness, expertise, and especially the improvised solutions for which the chief character is known are nothing less than inspired. Factor in the superb cast, anchored by dreamy Richard Dean Anderson, and even at its most ham-handed it's hard to go wrong with the original series. Regrettably, the 1994 TV movie 'Lost treasure of Atlantis' was a bit of a letdown; though it was enjoyable, it felt too much like a generic adventure romp in which any random nobody could have been substituted for Angus MacGyver. All this is to say that I had sadly mixed expectations for this second TV movie, a format that already has a checked history. In a runtime of just over ninety minutes, it doesn't take long while watching to begin forming an impression. 'Trail to doomsday,' like its immediate predecessor, is a suitably good time in and of itself, but it's not free of issues, and likewise could be about any heroic protagonist and none would be the wiser.

Ken Harrison's music is appreciable, but kind of generic, and one theme gets tiresome quickly as we hear it repeatedly. Between Lee David Zlotoff and John Considine's screenplay, and Charles Correll's direction, there are plenty of tropes on hand that are employed somewhat emptily, and plot development sometimes feels rather brusque, false, and/or forced. Alternatively, there are instances when the plot gets limp, wishy-washy, unconvincing, or vague, all seemingly less as a matter of judicious storytelling and more to fit the needs of conforming to the style and/or time slot of the format. Meanwhile, and worse yet, is that when it comes to details of the script it really seems as if Zlotoff and Considine just threw up their hands in futility, assuming that the audience would just thoughtlessly go along with whatever they threw in. Far worse than any fault of 'Lost treasure of Atlantis,' the writing mindlessly tosses out the term "anarchists" as if anarchists were to the 90s what Communists were to the 1920s and 50s; is cavalier about the use and meaning of the term "terrorist," and the geopolitics of states that don't fall within strict bounds of Western ideals; makes bizarre insinuations about KGB training that feel less like a small touch of comedy and more like sheer senselessness at best, or maybe even backhanded jingoism. Even the steady stream of twists just seems a bit much after a point. There are some bigger themes and notions that the script tries to touch upon, especially in the last act, but the doing is too often astonishingly gawky and heavy-handed, becoming gauche and untenable.

In fairness, broadly speaking the picture is well made. Correll's direction is technically sound, and there are some good ideas in the story adjoining those that are common and unremarkable, and those that raise a skeptical eyebrow. I've no notes for the cast, constrained as they sometimes are by the writing and direction; Anderson is reliable, it's always a pleasure to see Alun Armstrong, and Beatie Edney is excellent in her supporting part. While she has a small role, it's also noteworthy that Lena Headey makes an appearance here decidedly early in her career. The stunts and effects are well done; the filming locations are swell, and the production design and art direction. Even small matters like props, hair, makeup, and costume design are adequate and commendable; though I disagree with some of the decisions made here, the cinematography and editing are quite fine. Once again, overall the feature is entertaining, and it had no loftier goal. Still, 'Trail to doomsday' struggles with a lot of its details - arguably, most of its details - including a fair bit of questionable dialogue and scene writing. Moreover, the fact remains that our protagonist could have been Joe Anybody and it would have been much the same film. All told I don't think it's bad, yet saying it's "good" is true mostly just in contrast with the antonym, and at that maybe I'm being too generous in my assessment.

But hey, it's also possible I'm being too harsh. I'm glad for those who get more out of this flick than I do, and again, it's a good time just as it is. The sum total is flawed, relying on Movie Magic and facets that we viewers have to take at face value, but I also don't think this ever pretends to be anything it's not. Would that the writing in particular were smarter and more careful, but I suppose that's hardly a flaw exclusive here. If you're looking for another healthy dose of 'MacGyver' then it's debatable if this will sate your craving, but while 'Trail to doomsday' is nothing one needs to go out of their way to see, it's passably worthwhile for a lazy day if you happen to come across it.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Another Great MacGyver movie!
Indyfan8216 November 2000
This movie was yet another great MacGyver adventure. It had all the feel of the tv series and had many "MacGyverisms". Really incredible movie. A must for all MacGyver fans. This movie had drama, action, and adventure. Hey, it's MacGyver. What more do you need? A great movie!
23 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Runs from one unlikely event to one even more unlikely
meif14 June 1999
This movie is really something else. It's all so unbelievably unlikely. How stupid do they think the viewers are, anyway. Probably as stupid as the detective himself: when you are trapped, only two people knowing where you were going, and you rule out one of them as suspect, do you arrive to the conclusion that the other must be the villain? Not MacGyver! He keeps guessing. Another example: MacGyver is wounded and exhausted; he collapses. However, only a few seconds later he has managed to haul himself up to a ledge behind a mirror, which even a healthy man would have trouble reaching. And so on, and so on...
14 out of 32 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
Goodbye MacGyver!!!!
michaelrustage3 October 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Sadly, this was the last time that Richard Dean Anderson played MacGyver. After a seven season TV series and one movie, MacGyver made his last appearance in " Trail to Doomsday ", the second and final movie. This movie was great but had a slightly darker atmosphere to the series. The whole thing seemed more serious and focused more on the story rather than action and MacGyver making things. Maybe it's because it was filmed in London. I've always found London a bit of a depressing place. This movie has a good story about MacGyver trying to find out who killed one of his best friends. But when he starts getting a little too close, they want him out of the way too. They try and kill him, but when that doesn't work, they frame him for murder so now he's wanted by the police. As usual, he solves it all in a typical MacGyver manner.
10 out of 14 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
One of the best movies I have seen
Annie-3727 November 1998
I have seen this movie many times, and I love it. The storyline is terrific. Anderson is as usual wonderful. I just love the plot, it is so well done. I give it 10 out of 10 points. I highly recommend it.
25 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Don't forget it's a movie
jessehn1 October 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Don't forget to MacGyver is a fictional character and this is a movie. We are expected to suspend our disbeliefs momentarily to enjoy this art form. If you can't do that maybe you should stick to documentaries. Yeah Mac gets hurt, then he gets up, to save the day. How is that any different than any episode ever? If I was to compare this movie to the episodes. It wouldn't be one of my favorites but still worth the watch. The part I didn't like is MacGyver says your logic sucks and (spoiler) he punches the woman at the end. Pretty uncharacteristic for our hero. Plenty of ladies have been knocked out throughout the course of the show. But it was always somebody else giving the lady the one punch KO.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Why don't you let MacGyver be MacGyver ?!
elshikh425 September 2022
Warning: Spoilers
Waiting for a nice MacGyver movie, or a nice movie anyway, both ways this one will not satisfy you!

First of all, this is not MacGyver; this is poor man's James Bond. For instance, I watch MacGyver for some reasons, on their top is his improvised-from-everyday-items gadgets. Though, this movie doesn't have any of them until the last 5 minutes!

Richard Dean Anderson, as the movie's executive producer, canceled his character's narration, which was familiar in the TV show, because - as he said - it used to insult the viewer's intelligence. Not only this, the character's theme music was canceled as well, which increased the feel of alienation towards our good old hero. So, in the end, what were left from him were just his name, and his looks. And sure that wasn't enough.

Moreover, you won't find logic in many parts. Just think, if the Russian girl is associated with the evil guys, then why they exploded her house?!

In the climactic sequence, the movie got utterly crazy: there is a nuclear reactor underground! To do what exactly?! MacGyver survived just because he reminded the Russian girl that her associate is a capitalist, so she killed the guy instantly.. What kind of nonsense is that?! Then, after MacGyver escaped from her, in such a childish way, he saved the whole world by a tennis racket! Aside from how terribly poor that gadget was, can anybody tell me what is a tennis racket doing in an underground nuclear reactor?!

And while it isn't MacGyver, it couldn't be Bond either, because there weren't Bond's dazzling backgrounds, impressive action, and big budget to make up for that script!

In one scene, when the lead was being informed that he couldn't leave the city after his friend's murder, a previous shot of him was reversed, in slow-motion?? Clearly, this movie didn't need more idiocy!

As for the virtues, the pace is fast, Beatie Edney was clever, Anderson is a reliable man in any case, director Charles Correll, who directed 19 episodes from MacGyver TV show, tried to infuse seriousness, but that script was a killer, giving us a hero that we don't know, in a muddled conflict!

My theory goes like this: this is a rejected 2 parts episode from the TV show, which - one way or another - made its way as a TV movie for the title character, after 2 years of the show's end. They wanted him to be Indiana Jones in his first movie MacGyver: Lost Treasure of Atlantis (1994), then James Bond in his second and last movie MacGyver: Trail to Doomsday, which was aired 6 months after the first. And while it - somehow - worked in the first one, it didn't in the second. Well, why don't you let MacGyver be MacGyver?! He earned his big success by that!

As you see, MacGyver is in the title, but not in the movie. So how about being not that good movie in the first place. It's really disappointing to have this as the swan song of our childhood's hero. He, and us, deserved better.
0 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed