Escape from Tomorrow
|Escape from Tomorrow|
Theatrical release poster
|Directed by||Randy Moore|
|Produced by||Soojin Chung
|Written by||Randy Moore|
|Music by||Abel Korzeniowski|
|Cinematography||Lucas Lee Graham|
|Edited by||Soojin Chung|
|Distributed by||Producers Distribution Agency (Theatrical)
Cinedigm Home Entertainment (Home Video)
|Running time||90 minutes
104 minutes (original)
Escape from Tomorrow is a 2013 American fantasy horror film, the debut of writer-director Randy Moore. It follows an unemployed man having increasingly disturbing experiences and visions during the rides on a last day of a family vacation at the Walt Disney World Resort. It premiered in January at the 2013 Sundance Film Festival and was later a personal selection of Roger Ebert, shown at his 15th annual film festival in Champaign, Illinois. It was a 2012 official selection of the PollyGrind Film Festival, but at the time filmmakers were still working on some legal issues and asked that it not be screened.
It drew attention because Moore had shot most of it on location at both Walt Disney World and Disneyland without permission from The Walt Disney Company, owner and operator of both parks. Due to Disney's reputation of being protective of its intellectual property, the cast and crew used guerrilla filmmaking techniques to avoid attracting attention, such as keeping their scripts on their iPhones and shooting on handheld video cameras similar to those used by park visitors. After principal photography was complete, Moore was so determined to keep the project a secret from Disney that he edited it in South Korea. Sundance similarly declined to discuss the film in detail before it was shown. It was called "the ultimate guerrilla film".
It has been compared to the work of Roman Polanski and David Lynch. However, many who saw it expressed strong doubts that the film would be shown to a wider audience due to the legal issues involved and the negative depiction of the parks. At the time of its premiere, Disney said only that it was "aware" of the film; since then the online supplement to Disney A to Z: The Official Encyclopedia has included an entry for the film. Rather than suppressing the film, Disney chose to generally ignore it, and the film was released simultaneously to theaters and video on-demand on October 11, 2013, through PDA, a Cinetic Media company.
The film opens with people riding the different attractions at Walt Disney World Resort as well as the many visuals and animatronics that accompany the rides. Near the end of the montage what looks like a decapitation occurs.
On the last day of a family vacation at the aforementioned theme park, Jim White (Roy Abramsohn) gets a call from his boss while he is standing on the balcony of the family's hotel room informing him that he has been laid off. He keeps the news to himself in order not to spoil the family's remaining time at the resort. During the call, he looks down and sees a white van pull up to the hotel. Behind him, his son Elliot locks the balcony door and Jim has to call his wife Emily to be let back in. As he and his family take the monorail to the park, he sees two teenage French girls and his interest in them increases as their paths cross repeatedly, either by accident or design, throughout the morning. Jim begins having disturbing visions during the rides, such as the audio-animatronic characters' faces changing from friendly smiles to sinister scowls and his wife and children looking sinister. After a fight with Emily, springing from his decision to take Elliot on Space Mountain (which gives Elliot motion sickness) in order to keep up his pursuit of the French girls, he takes his daughter Sara to the Magic Kingdom rides and continues tracking the girls while his wife and son return to their hotel room.
Later, the son of a wheelchair-bound man, whom Jim had spotted earlier from afar, shoves Sara, who scrapes her knee and requires a visit to the park nurse. The nurse, while treating his daughter, seems extremely unsettled by the "cat flu" apparently spreading through the parks' patrons, noting "You could be a host and not even know it." Jim and Sara meet a mysterious woman and Jim becomes entranced by a glimmering amulet necklace the woman is wearing. He briefly blacks out, and the film flashes forward to Jim coming back to consciousness mid-coitus with the woman. Afterward, she claims that the parks' wholesome, costumed princesses are actually part of a secret prostitution ring that services "rich Asian businessmen". Growing increasingly unnerved, he quickly makes an awkward exit with Sara and eventually joins his wife and son at the pool. There he again encounters the French girls, and his mounting obsession makes him bolder, as he attempts to talk with one of them while his wife berates him and notices his lust. His family returns to Epcot, where the seething tension between Jim and Emily comes to a head after Jim drinks heavily and eventually vomits while on the Gran Fiesta Tour. Spotting the French girls, Emily confronts Jim about his obvious interest in the girls and, in her anger, lashes out at their daughter. Embarrassed, she decides to return to the hotel with their son and leaves Jim with Sara. They ride the Soarin' attraction, where Jim imagines a beautiful naked woman superimposed over the ride's video footage of landscapes, and speaks to him saying they will be together soon. When he emerges from the ride, he spots the French girls once again. One of them approaches and invites him to come with them. He reluctantly refuses, saying something bad could happen if he did; she counters saying something bad will happen if he doesn't. When he states again that he is sure he will not accompany them, she spits in his face. He realizes that he has lost track of Sara during the encounter and searches for her frantically before being knocked unconscious by park guards.
The word "INTERMISSION" flashes onscreen for 5 seconds and the film resumes as Jim awakens in a secret detention facility under Epcot's Spaceship Earth, that shows video screens displaying scenes from other parts of the film where the valet greets the man in a fedora at vehicle, french girls first realizing he was following them and where an interrogator discusses Jim's flights of fantasy and imagination, telling him that he has been part of an experiment since he first went to the parks as a child, his boss is in on the conspiracy, and his firing was all part of the plan, as was the closure of the Buzz Lightyear ride just as he and his son approached the boarding area, much to his son's distress. He is told he was supposed to have turned in his son to them. A helmet in the shape of the Epcot dome manifests around his head and scans him. He escapes, and in doing so discovers that the interrogator was an animatronic robot. Disoriented, he searches for Sara during the nightly fireworks celebration. He again encounters and now attacks the wheelchair-bound man, then returns to the mysterious woman's room, where he discovers that she has kidnapped Sara and is reenacting Snow White, in costume. The woman begins to ramble about her time as a character princess when she was young and beautiful and tells him how bad things happen anywhere, including a decapitation at the park. She again entrances Jim with the amulet, until Sara pulls it from her neck and it smashes on the floor, freeing Jim of her power. He returns to his hotel room and puts his daughter to bed alongside his wife and son.
Suddenly, Jim begins to have severe digestive distress, he vomits up hairballs and swallows all drug pills. He begs Elliot for help, but Elliot closes the bathroom door on him and in the morning, Jim is found dead by his wife. He is covered in blood, as is the bathroom, his eyes have transformed into cat's eyes, and he has a large grin on his face, presumably from having been infected by the "cat flu". Cleaners with the Disney logo rush in on the scene and remove all evidence that a death occurred, then take Jim's body away to the unmarked white van. While they are loading it with Jim's body, the valet seen earlier greets a man seen on the detention facility screens earlier in the film with the fantasy woman from the Soarin' ride and a young boy and girl, presumably their son and daughter, ready to check into the hotel as the unmarked van pulls away and the bellboy smiling as the van drives away. The camera pans up the side of the hotel and the two French girls as fairies fly in from each side of the screen, with "The End" title appearing behind them.
During the credits, the song "Imaginate!" has the children singing: "Imaginate, what we can do, when Tomorrow there's another YOU?" together with the events from the detention center.
- Roy Abramsohn as Jim White, a repressed middle-aged father of two
- Elena Schuber as Emily, Jim's frustrated wife
- Katelynn Rodriguez as Sara, Jim and Emily's daughter
- Jack Dalton as Elliott, Jim and Emily's son
- Alison Lees-Taylor as the Other Woman
- Stass Klassen as The Scientist
- Danielle Safady and Annet Mahendru as Sophie and Isabelle, the two French teen girls
Moore, a native of Lake Bluff, Illinois, frequently visited his father in Orlando following his parents' divorce. The two often spent time together at Walt Disney World nearby. "It was a special, physical place, and it became an emotional space," he told Filmmaker. "Obviously, I have a lot of father issues that I can't separate from that place." Later, their relationship deteriorated.
He decided to pursue a career in film. After attending two other film schools, he graduated from Full Sail University in another Central Florida town, Winter Park, as the class valedictorian. He moved to Southern California and began working as a story editor, primarily doing uncredited rewrites.
In Hollywood, he married and started a family. Much like his own father, he frequently took his own children to Disneyland. "It wasn't until our first family trip together that this very visceral emotional landscape of my past, that I had by now nearly all but forgotten, hit me again like [a] bullet." On the family's first trip to Walt Disney World, the emotions grew stronger. "[I]t was like he was there as a ghost. We were going on the same rides I used to go on with him, but now we're no longer talking anymore."
His wife, a native of the former Soviet Union who had no memories or expectations like his, saw things with fresh eyes. "She's a nurse and goes between floors at hospitals. At one point she turned to me at some princess fair or something and said, 'This is worse than working the psych [ward] at the hospital.'"
He read Neal Gabler's biography of Walt Disney and took the children to Disneyland more frequently. "I became obsessed with finding a connection," he recalled later. He wrote the screenplay for Escape from Tomorrow in a month along with two others. An inheritance from his grandparents provided the bulk of the film's budget, which he put at around $650,000, triple what he had originally planned.
"There was nowhere else to do it," Moore says of his decision to use Disney World as a setting and shoot at the parks. Disney, which has a reputation for aggressively protecting its intellectual property, has been tolerant of visitors uploading videos of their visits to YouTube and elsewhere since most of those user-created videos project a positive image of the parks. But Moore did not expect to get permission from Disney to shoot there given his negative, surrealistic portrayal of the park.
Instead he used guerrilla filmmaking techniques, which sometimes call for using locations without getting permission. Escape from Tomorrow is not the first film made in whole, or part, this way at the Disney parks. In 2010, the British street artist Banksy shot a scene for Exit Through the Gift Shop in one of the parks with his collaborator Mr. Brainwash. They managed to smuggle the footage out after being detained and questioned by park security. The following year, a viral found footage short, Missing in the Mansion, filmed in the Haunted Mansion, was distributed online without interference from Disney.
Extensive pre-production was necessary. The unique nature of the film shoot dictated steps not normally taken in filmmaking, such as charting the position of the sun weeks in advance since they could not use lighting equipment. Scenes were rehearsed and blocked in hotel rooms, rather than the actual locations. "We must have walked through the entire movie at least eight or nine times during multiple scouting trips before we ever rolled camera," Moore says.
Before principal photography, the cast and crew bought season passes to both the Disneyland and Walt Disney World resorts. They spent ten days in Florida, then returned to California for two weeks at Disneyland, making the parks depicted in the film a combination of both resorts. Actors and crew entered the parks in small groups to avoid attracting attention. "At one point, I even made the camera department shave off their facial hair and dress in tourist attire, which almost provoked a mutiny," says Moore. Despite the actors wearing the same clothes for days on end, Moore told The Los Angeles Times, no one at the gates seemed to suspect anything, save for one day near the end of filming when Disneyland security thought they were paparazzi harassing a celebrity family.
The film was shot using the video mode of two Canon EOS 5D Mark II and one Canon EOS 1D Mark IV digital single-lens reflex cameras, which helped the filmmakers look more like typical park visitors. To compensate for their inability to control the lighting, the film was shot in monochrome mode. "[W]e were shooting with really fast lenses wide open, so our depth of field was razor thin. Black and white helped us enormously with focus and composition, since we were doing almost everything in camera and didn't use a focus puller," Moore recalled. It was an irreversible choice. "[B]ecause the 5D doesn't shoot RAW, we customized settings in its monochromatic mode and couldn't go back to color, even if we had wanted to." Moore was comfortable with the result because of the surreal, dreamlike quality it created, forcing viewers to see the familiar sights of the Disney parks in a new way.
Actors and crew used their iPhones to communicate and store information such as the script—that way, they looked like guests casually using their phones. The phones were also used to record sound, in addition to digital recorders taped to each actor's body that were left running all day. For day scenes, Moore felt comfortable risking only three or four takes of each scene, but found he could do more at night.
Scenes involved riding on eight recognizable attractions in the parks. One required waiting on a long line for the Buzz Lightyear ride at Disneyland, and the actors rode It's a Small World at least 12 times to get the scene right. "I was surprised the ride operators weren't a little more savvy," Moore told The New York Times. For a scene where two characters pass on the People Mover, Moore had the actors ride it for hours while he worked out the timing.
After the location filming, production went back to soundstages for interiors. Some scenes were shot against a green screen background for second unit footage of other locations to be substituted, allowing the use of crane shots. With the photography done, Moore took the film to South Korea to edit to prevent Disney from finding out; he also refused to tell most of his close friends what he was doing. Visual effects were done by the same company there that had done them for the 2006 South Korean monster film, The Host.
The post-production tasks were as challenging as the production itself. Sound editors had to listen to the entire uncut tracks from the recorders taped to the actors' bodies in order to find the dialogue. Content proprietary to Disney, such as the lyrics to "It's a Small World" and footage from Soarin', was removed from the film to avoid copyright infringement. Composer Abel Korzeniowski contributed a light, airy score similar to those used in Hollywood's Golden Age.
Moore submitted the completed film to the Sundance Film Festival, where many independent films seek distributors. He had little hope that it would be accepted due to the festival's corporate sponsors. But Trevor Groth, the festival's new director of programming, was "blown away" by Escape from Tomorrow, and accepted it for the festival's non-competitive "Next" category, for films that transcend the limitations of the low budgets common to most independent films.
When the 2013 festival began in Park City, Utah, the secrecy about the movie continued. The festival's website only identified the setting as a theme park. Nan Chalat-Noaker, critic for the Park Record, recalls that the festival and even the film's publicist were unwilling to share further details about the film, but strongly urged critics to see it. In her review, she declined to identify the setting of the film by name, although she dropped broad hints, out of fear it would alert Disney's lawyers. The premiere, on the festival's first night, was not fully attended; when word got out to the attendees, all the other shows were effectively sold out.
Escape from Tomorrow received mixed reviews from critics. Review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes gave the film a score of 56% based on 78 reviews, with an average rating of 6.1/10. The site's consensus is "Conceptually audacious but only intermittently successful in execution, Escape From Tomorrow is nonetheless visually inventive and darkly surreal."
Before the Martin Luther King Day weekend was over, Escape from Tomorrow was being widely discussed by festival attendees. The New York Times and The Los Angeles Times both ran articles about the film and Moore. Much of the attention focused on the audacity of the filmmaking. Movies.com reported that people were already calling it "the ultimate guerrilla film." On the night of the premiere, Drew McWeeny wrote:
It is not possible that this film exists. It is not possible that they shot long scripted sequences on the actual rides. It is not possible that I just saw a film in which it is suggested and then shown that the various Disney princesses all work as high-priced hookers who sell their wares to wealthy Asian businessmen. It simply cannot be true.
I grew up in Florida, and I have been going to Walt Disney World my entire life. I worked at that park. I've been there as a child, as a teenager, as an employee, and as a parent. I've done Disney sitting on my father's shoulders, and I've done the Disney parks with my kids sitting on my shoulders. It is a huge part of my DNA, and I can tell you that there is no way Randy Moore pulled off what I saw tonight. It is a film that should not exist by any rational definition.
And yet ... not only does it exist, but it's fascinating.
He allowed that it was "undisciplined at times, rough around the edges in places, technically uneven, and there's no sense of pacing to it at all. Even so," he concluded, "there is a sort of naive charm that makes it impossible to look away."
Other critics concurred that the film had artistic merit. "[W]atching Moore's noir tale is like being super-glued to your seat while getting poked in the eye," Chalat-Noaker wrote. "It's both fascinating and repelling." Stephen Zeitchik of the LA Times called it "one of the strangest and most provocative movies this reporter has seen in eight years attending the Sundance Film Festival." At IndieWire, Eric Kohn wrote that "Moore portrays Disney World as the ultimate horror show—and gets the point across in nearly every scene." While they conceded the film's audacious production made it worth their time to watch, other critics found flaws. "[It']s not a great film. The story has some good ideas, but the execution is uneven," wrote Peter Sciretta at /Film, while still recommending it as "unlike anything you've seen before [or will] see again." Similarly, CraveOnline's William Bibbiani "wouldn't have missed it for the world" but qualified it by noting that that film often lacked "cohesion and clarity."
Kyle Smith of the New York Post had the most negative assessment. He called it "more fun to discuss than to sit through." While he found the guerilla-filmmaking aspect of it "intriguing," all it amounted to for him was "a couple of amusingly surreal moments" that could have taken place at any sufficiently large amusement park. "Even Disney-hating hipsters are going to be disappointed; the film is a pure festival play that is more or less unreleasable unless theater owners start selling weed along with popcorn."
Every reviewer at Sundance who saw the film speculated that it was likely that Disney would take legal action to prevent the film from being shown outside the festival, or perhaps even during it. "Disney's lawyers are probably climbing onto helicopters and planning a raid on Park City right now," wrote McWeeny. Reviewers urged others present to see it before it was too late, and expressed regret that their readers elsewhere would likely be denied a chance to see the film for themselves.
Columbia Law School professor Tim Wu does not think Disney would have any defensible intellectual property claim. "Though the filmmakers may have committed trespass when they broke Disney World's rules and if it violated the terms of entry on their tickets, the film itself is a different matter," he wrote on The New Yorker's blog. "As commentary on the social ideals of Disney World, it seems to clearly fall within a well-recognized category of fair use, and therefore probably will not be stopped by a court using copyright or trademark laws."
Despite the film's repeated use of Disney's characters and iconography, Wu explained, trademark law was not sufficient. "Disney does not have some kind of general intellectual-property right in Disney World itself." To make a trademark-infringement case against Moore, he continued, Disney would have to convince a court that the use of its protected imagery in the movie could reasonably lead viewers to believe that it had a role in the film's production, and he did not think that was a plausible argument. "The scene where a Disney Princess attempts to crush a child seems to eliminate that possibility."
As for copyright, Wu sees Moore's use of the Disney parks as transformative:
... [H]is use of Disney World is not as simple window dressing; he transforms it into something gruesome and disturbing—a place where, for example, guests are sometimes tasered and have their imaginations purged ... It might be a violation if Moore had made a film designed for viewers who wanted to see Disney World but were too lazy to go to Florida. Escape from Tomorrow, however, is clearly no substitute for buying a ticket.
As such, he sees the film as offering artistic commentary on the cultural impact of Disney, and thus clearly falling under fair use. Wu likens it to a 1990s case brought by Mattel against artist Thomas Forsythe, after he sold some of his photographs depicting another American icon, Barbie, being eaten by vintage appliances as a way of calling attention to the toy doll's role in promoting the objectification of women in American culture. Not only did the court dismiss Mattel's complaint, "[t]he judges were so annoyed by the lawsuits that they awarded attorney's fees of nearly two million dollars to the artist ... A judge has to think of the First Amendment when asked to ban art work."
In his /Film review, Sciretta raised another issue:
Intellectual property and copyrights aside, many people appear in this film who have never signed a release. Real families and children are seen in the background of almost every shot. None of them gave permission or knew they were being filmed for a feature film.
Possible response by Disney
Disney did not return reporters' calls or emails for comment, nor take any legal action during the festival, although it confirmed to CNN that it was "aware" of the movie. Despite critical apprehension that the film would never be shown outside the festival, some observers saw the situation as more complex. Were Disney to attempt to forcefully suppress the film, that effort could serve to draw even more attention to it, a phenomenon known as the Streisand effect. Even if Disney were to successfully prevent official distribution, the film could easily be pirated and distributed over the Internet. In his Post review, Smith suggested that Disney prevent this by taking the opposite course, simply ignoring Escape from Tomorrow and letting the attention dissipate by itself.
Michael Ryan, director of The YoungCuts Film Festival, noted that there was a precedent for Escape from Tomorrow in the Air Pirates lawsuit, in which Disney spent eight years in court with some underground cartoonists who had published an underground comix parody in which Mickey Mouse and the other Disney characters engaged in explicit sex and used illegal drugs, among other behavior they avoided in Disney's own narratives. He suggested that Disney buy the rights and release the film itself, which it could easily do as its announced interest would guarantee it a monopsony on the film since no other distributor would want to match Disney's deep pockets or its feared legal response. As a Disney release, Escape from Tomorrow would have a large potential audience of both Disney enthusiasts and antagonists, Disney would be making money from property it already owns instead of someone else, and the company's apparent willingness to go in the joke would take some of the satiric edge off.
Moore expressed hope that the film could be shown and released, even if it meant a legal battle.
It depends on how good a case lawyers can make for it. If they say I have a chance, I'll definitely fight for it. I worked on it really hard for three years and it took a lot out of me. Just to let it disappear would be a waste of time.
Since the film's release Disney has discreetly acknowledged it in another way. The online supplement to Disney A to Z: The Official Encyclopedia now includes an entry for Escape from Tomorrow, describing it as "An independent surrealistic cult film surreptitiously filmed at Walt Disney World and Disneyland."
- Zeitchik, Steven (January 19, 2013). "Sundance 2013: How did a newbie make an unapproved film in Disney parks?". The Los Angeles Times. Retrieved January 21, 2013.
- Davis, Erik (January 21, 2013). "'Escape from Tomorrow' Cinematographer Explains How He Shot an Entire Movie Secretly in Disney Parks". Retrieved January 24, 2013.
- Goss, William (January 20, 2013). "Sundance Review: 'Escape From Tomorrow' Takes Viewers On A Mind-Melting Vacation from Hell". IndieWire. Retrieved January 24, 2013.
- "Disney A to Z: Escape from Tomorrow (film)". D23: The Official Disney Fan Club. 2013-08-07. Retrieved 2013-08-07.(subscription required)
- Jones, J.R. (2013-10-23). "All the Disney World's a stage in Escape From Tomorrow". Chicago Reader. Retrieved 17 November 2013.
- Zeitchik, Steven (August 19, 2013). "Guerilla Disney film 'Escape From Tomorrow' headed to theaters". Retrieved August 19, 2013.
- "Escape From Tomorrow". Sundance Film Festival. 2013. Retrieved January 22, 2013.
- Macaulay, Scott (January 19, 2013). "The Outlaw Pleasures of Escape from Tomorrow". Filmmaker. Retrieved January 22, 2013.
- Kohn, Eric (January 27, 2013). "Sundance 2013: 'Escape From Tomorrow' Director Randy Moore Says "I'm a Product of Disney World"". IndieWire. Retrieved January 28, 2013.
- Schoenbrun, Dan (January 19, 2013). "Five Questions with Escape from Tomorrow Director Randy Moore". Filmmaker. Retrieved January 22, 2013.
- Barnes, Brooks (January 21, 2013). "It's a Grim World, After All". The New York Times. Retrieved January 21, 2013.
- "Missing in the Mansion". Daws Brothers Studios. 2011. Retrieved January 22, 2013.
- Sciretta, Peter (January 21, 2013). "'Escape From Tomorrow': A Feature Film Shot in Disney Theme Parks Without Disney's Permission [Sundance 2013 Review]". /Film. Retrieved January 22, 2013.
- Chalat-Noaker, Nan (January 19, 2013). ""Escape" takes audience on horror-filled roller coaster ride". Park Record (Park City, UT: MediaNews Group). Retrieved January 23, 2013.
- "Escape From Tomorrow (2013)". Rotten Tomatoes. Retrieved February 7, 2014.
- McWeeny, Drew (January 19, 2013). "'Escape From Tomorrow' is a surrealist treat that will give Disney's lawyers nightmares". HitFix. Retrieved January 23, 2013.
- Kohn, Eric (January 18, 2013). "Sundance Review: 'Escape From Tomorrow' Is a Surreal Indictment of Disneyfied Society That Disney Will Never Let You See". IndieWire. Retrieved January 23, 2013.
- Bibbiani, William (January 22, 2013). "Sundance 2013 Review: Escape from Tomorrow". CraveOnline. Retrieved January 23, 2013.
- Smith, Kyle (January 21, 2013). "Sundance review: 'Escape from Tomorrow'". New York Post. Retrieved January 23, 2013.
- Doctorow, Cory (January 21, 2013). "More on "Escape From Tomorrow," the guerrilla art-house movie shot at Walt Disney World and Disneyland". Boing Boing. Retrieved January 23, 2013.
- Wu, Tim (January 22, 2013). "It's a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad Disney World". The New Yorker. Retrieved January 23, 2013.
- Harris, Aisha (January 23, 2013). "Will Disney Let You See This Movie?". Slate. Retrieved January 23, 2013.
- Carey, Matthew (January 24, 2013). "Why Disney might want to 'Escape From Tomorrow'". CNN. Retrieved January 24, 2013.
- Ryan, Michael (January 23, 2013). "Escape From Tomorrow’ and The Air Pirates". SoundOnSight.org. Retrieved January 24, 2013.
- Abramovitch, Seth (18 September 2013). "Disney's Non-Strategy Strategy to Combat Unauthorized Disneyland Horror Movie". The Hollywood Reporter. Retrieved 18 September 2013.
- Official website
- Escape from Tomorrow at the Internet Movie Database
- Escape from Tomorrow at Rotten Tomatoes
- Escape from Tomorrow at Metacritic
- Escape from Tomorrow at AllMovie