Incannerax What a waste of my time!!!

Robert Joyner The plot isn't so bad, but the pace of storytelling is too slow which makes people bored. Certain moments are so obvious and unnecessary for the main plot. I would've fast-forwarded those moments if it was an online streaming. The ending looks like implying a sequel, not sure if this movie will get one

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Darin One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

Faena ... almost as long as the main characters were frozen. When this movie was released in 1991, I was fifteen. It caught my attention, but not my friends', and consequently, other movies were chosen for matinees. Late for Dinner slipped by, but never fell off my radar. I rarely rented VHS movies. Since the advent of DVD, I've become a voracious collector. I've had the DVD in my sights since 2011, but kept waiting for the price to drop to finally check out this film. When the Blu-ray was announced this year, I said screw it, it won't get any better than this, and bought it instantly. I finally watched Late for Dinner tonight after keeping it in the back of my mind for a quarter century.My story doesn't have a happy ending.I can understand why it didn't make a splash, and perhaps why it's W.D. Richter's second and (to date) final film.It just doesn't work. At all.The direction is amateurish, and it has some of the clumsiest acting I've seen in a major studio release. I attribute this criticism to the two male leads. Berg's performance is unconvincing, although I blame the script and Richter's choices first over the actor. Brian Wimmer, however, is woefully miscast. A different actor might have raised this material. The final scenes between Willie and Joy are the best example: The dude just murders it. It is utterly incompatible with his style. I actually think this scene could have saved the movie for me, if delivered with nuance and gravitas, but there is none. Clearly the man is a paid actor because he's talented, but sometimes casting the right person can make or break a production.Had I seen Late for Dinner in 1991, would I have had a more favorable reaction? To be fair, I think so. The SNL sketch deep freeze plot might have seemed more cutting edge to me as a tenth grader. Still, the cryogenic company and its personnel are completely done away with as soon as Frank and Willie drive away from the complex. The sci-fi element is required for the story, but it's totally a square peg. The movie is unbalanced, no matter what decade I saw it in.Anyway... that's my two cents. Glad I finally saw it.

Deb Bee Brian Wimmer and Peter Berg star as best friends Willie and Frank. In 1962 Willie is unemployed with a wife and daughter and is about to lose his home and Frank is his mentally challenged brother-in-law with a bad kidney. While running from a crime they didn't commit, they meet Dr. Chilblains. The Dr., eager to try out his cryonics theory, promises Frank he'll wake up and be able to get a new kidney after a restful sleep while Willie is unconscious and unaware of what he has been committed to. The story evolves as they wake up in 1991 and find they've slept for 29 years and seek to get back to the loved ones they left behind.I think this movie is lovely. It's a reminder of simple times and the power of love and family. I saw it back in 1991 at the theater when it came out and have been thinking of it now and again for years - more so recently - so I finally broke down and bought the DVD. It is reminiscent of Forever Young, but Forever Young came out a year after this one and is very big-budget, Hollywood. I like this film much more. The characters are believable and really pull you into the story. It's definitely a sleeper and very good for weekend afternoon viewing. It is now my guilty pleasure as well.

James Bass It's simple... but it's full of complex human emotion. What if? Consider a couple, caught in events beyond their control, separated by time (29 years to be exact), and reunited. Can true love withstand that kind of test? With the aid of the love of a brother and sister, and the unbreakable bond of father and daughter, and a few extra twists thrown in... well, almost anything is possible.Our family considers this one of the few, unblemished perfect stories. I just don't understand why they've never seen fit to release it on DVD, as our VHS copy is starting to wear awfully thin. However... what a joy to share this with friends that have never seen it. The reaction is always the same... "How is it I've never heard of this?"Oddly enough, this really is a science fiction. But that's just a minor plot device (fun though!) to help ask the questions about true love, family, friendship, honesty, devotion... oh it's just a goldmine of warm fuzzies.If this movie needs an evangelist to carry it's message... I'll happily volunteer. See it... and love it like we do.

rod526 I just recently saw this film and enjoyed it thoroughly. It was not what I had expected. So many of the "freeze 'em" films take a comic or campy approach. But this film tries to deal with the actual problems that could arise if a person were able to disappear and then reappear some 30 years later. A nice treatment of the question.