Yeah... this was done on the cheap, that's sort of obvious from the start. But, you know, that isn't always a bad thing. Look at what the movie is about, spies ala Nightmare on Elm Street, it doesn't really need to be a big budget film to be fun and watchable.

And it is fun and watchable. Dennis Quaid was the absolute best pick for the role, his personality (which is usually watchable) meshes well with the character, and the character he plays is written brilliantly for the role. The heroic and lovable slacker, but a slacker of near epic proportions that rises up to the situation. You couldn't cast better in 1984.

And then he's paired against Max Von Sydow who, in his lifetime, won far less awards than he was worth. He was one of the best actors to ever live and he's in a B science fiction movie. He's a guy that brings his A game to everything.

So out the door it has great casting going for it. But then, moving on from that, the plot is just fun, not at all too serious, it knows what sort of movie that it is, it knows it's budget and limitations, and it is presented with the appropriate seriousness and tongue-in-cheek to keep the audience engaged from start to finish.

It's not at all a perfect movie, but it is a fun movie, it is an entertaining movie. It doesn't have much to complain about (save for Nightmare on Elm St did it better) but it does have what it takes to keep you engaged, entertained, and at the end, satisfied.

**_Is murdering people in their dreams viable?_**

A young man with extraordinary psychic abilities (Dennis Quaid) is coerced into participating in experimental dream techniques by his former mentor (Max Von Sydow). While he flirts with the assistant (Kate Capshaw), a mysterious government official (Christopher Plummer) is interested in using the new technique as a political weapon. Eddie Albert plays the president while David Patrick Kelly is on hand as a psychic of dubious morality.

“Dreamscape” (1984) combines dream-oriented sci-fi with political thriller for an entertaining flick. Young Quaid makes for a good protagonist while Kate is alluring in her voluptuous way (and less annoying than in “Temple of Doom”). The concept of killing people in their dreams is fascinating and implemented in a realistic way compared to the contemporaneous “A Nightmare on Elm Street.”

While it borrows a little from “Scanners” from a few years prior, it’s unique enough and would influence future flicks like "Nightwish,” “The Cell” and “Inception.”

Some people today criticize it as “dated” but, come on, it was made in friggin’ 1983.

The movie runs 1 hour, 39 minutes, and was shot in several spots in California (Los Alamitos Racetrack, Union Station in Los Angeles, West Hollywood, Point Mugu, University of the Pacific in Stockton, Santa Clarita and Bronson Caves).

GRADE: B