Tag Archives: Science Fiction

Robot & Frank-2012

Robot & Frank-2012

Director Jake Schreier

Starring Frank Langella, Susan Sarandon

Scott’s Review #414

70227654

Reviewed June 18, 2016

Grade: C

Robot & Frank (2012) is one of those films where I am left with a “meh” reaction after having viewed it.

It’s not that it’s a bad movie, but there’s nothing particularly special either- it is quite ordinary and rather forgettable after the credits have rolled.

The premise, on paper,  seems novel: a future with robots that grow attached to humans. Unfortunately, the movie did not live up to the idea.

I was hoping for an interesting 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) type robot idea (HAL) but received nothing of the kind.

I’m a big fan of Frank Langella and I felt he was the main attraction in this movie.

On a side note, why is Susan Sarandon suddenly playing every meaningless supporting role these days? Another wasted role. She deserves better.

Several plot points had no follow-through and the ending, while not exactly predictable, was nothing spectacular.

Meh.

Independent Spirit Award Nominations: Best First Screenplay

Ex Machina-2015

Ex Machina-2015

Director Alex Garland

Starring Domhnall Gleeson, Alicia Vikander, Oscar Isaac

Scott’s Review #410

80023689

Reviewed June 17, 2016

Grade: B+

Ex Machina (2015) reminds me of another recent science-fiction film, Her (2013), with more of a female empowerment edge. The latter is more of a romantic drama with undercurrents of love.

In contrast, Ex Machina has a cynical tone and elements of imprisonment and psychosis, even narcissism.

The film features excellent visual effects and a futuristic mystique, making it a successful treatment.

Directed by first-timer Alex Garland, who could very well be a director to watch rise the ranks with subsequent projects.

Young, fresh-faced computer programmer, Caleb Smith (Domhnall Gleeson), wins a week-long trip to remote Alaska, to spend it with his mysterious boss, Nathan Bateman (Oscar Isaac), the CEO of a software company.

Caleb must arrive at the luxurious, sprawling estate via helicopter as it is in a deserted area of the world and exists on mile after mile of the gorgeous landscape.

Nathan, played by Oscar Isaac, is both charismatic and creepy. He lives alone save for a beautiful Asian servant named Kyoko, who speaks no English, and a female robot named Ava (played by rising star Alicia Vikander).

Caleb’s assigned task is to study Ava and determine whether he can relate to her as a human while knowing she is a robot. It is soon revealed that Nathan plans to reprogram Ava, thereby killing her. Caleb schemes to rescue Ava, but is all that it seems?

With a cast of only four principals, it is not difficult to assess each character and their relations with each other. Caleb is the least complex of the four or rather, the one with motivations readily apparent.

The others are shrouded in mystery. Caleb expects a fun getaway but instead finds himself amid experimentation. Is Nathan’s desire to perform psychological tests on Ava, by way of Caleb, genuine?

The audience can sense immediately that there is something off about Nathan. Merely in his thirties, how could he amass such financial success so soon?

Why is he, a servant, and a robot the only inhabitants? Why does the helicopter pilot refuse to venture further than the drop-off point?

Some of these questions are answered, some remain unanswered. It is part of what makes the film mysterious and complex. Could Ava be the one doing her share of experimentation or manipulation?

Alicia Vikander deserves much praise for her role as Ava and some would argue that the talented young actress should have won the Best Supporting Actress trophy for this role instead of for The Danish Girl (2015).

I’m not sure I would leap to the same conclusion, but she does amass a ton of subdued emotion as Ava. She is complex and profound. She longs for exposure to the outside world and would love to cross a crowded street to see all the faces and different types of people.

Like Nathan, there is also something not right about Ava.

Is she calculating or simply soulful? But how can she be, she is a robot.

I compared her to another famous film robot/computer- HAL from 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968).

Along with Vikander, Isaac steals the film in a role that mixes creep with genius. He sits around his estate in comfy clothes a blue-collar man might wear drinking beer and studying Ava. He has sexual relations with his servant and she is expressionless.

He does not treat her well so we do not root for his character. At the same time, his character is tough to read. Is he experimenting on Ava or Caleb?

Visually, Ex Machina has a sleek blend of modern, crisp CGI, not at all usurping the story. There is also a scene of bloodletting that chills as much as any good horror film would.

Garland was heavily influenced by 2001: A Space Odyssey and Altered States (1980) and made the film with as little budget as possible and without outside influences that might change his vision.

I commend this and wish more filmmakers would follow suit.

Ex Machina (2015), while perhaps not perfect, could be a blueprint for what is to come from this young director.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Original Screenplay, Best Visual Effects (won)

The Martian-2015

The Martian-2015

Director Ridley Scott

Starring Matt Damon, Jessica Chastain

Scott’s Review #379

80058399

Reviewed February 19, 2016

Grade: C-

The latest film from heralded director Ridley Scott (notable for classics Blade Runner-1981, and Alien, 1979), The Martian (2015), is a science-fiction/space adventure about a believed-dead astronaut (Matt Damon) trapped on Mars after his fellow team members thought he was dead.

NASA and a crew of rescuers fervently attempt to save him as supplies run out.

Extremely resourceful, Mark Watney (Matt Damon) cleverly avoids death by using his wits to survive and prosper on the challenging planet.

Hot on the heels of several other high-profile modern science fiction offerings, such as Interstellar (2014) and Gravity (2013), The Martian features a big Hollywood star in the lead role.

Much of the action is Watney on his own, attempting to grow to produce, ration food, and keep his sanity- think Tom Hanks in Castaway (1996) except on another planet, and with a “Hab”, an indoor operations station left by his abandoned crew.

The Martian has received accolades, even winning the Golden Globe for Best Musical or Comedy Film, though that is poor categorization.

The film has snippets of humor and a few songs in the background, but that is it. Maybe some late 1970s disco songs constitute a musical?

I found The Martian to be a Hollywood mainstream film in every sense. That may be a high compliment to some, but I expect more.

It is not that The Martian is a bad film, it is not, but it is mediocre, and has all the elements of an average offering. The film was going for an emotional experience that I did not experience.

I had little doubt that the ending would be sweet and wrapped in a bow.

Mark Watney is the typical all-American character in a “guy film”. He hates disco and loves ketchup. The film makes him a guys guy, so therefore the average film-goer will relate to him.

He is in good shape, cracks jokes, and is likable.

But that is also a problem with the character and The Martian. He lacks substance. We know little about him except he has parents who never appear on-screen.

The way that the film touts him as the hero and is cheered and praised, while in real life would be warranted, it just feels forced and contrived.

This is not a knock against Matt Damon, who does a decent job.

My beef is that the character is not fleshed out.  The well-built Damon at the beginning of the film versus the scrawny Damon at the conclusion is a facade as a body double was used in the later scenes.

This lack of authenticity disappointed me.

I expected more from the supporting cast. Jessica Chastain, Jeff Daniels, Chiwetel Ejiofor, and Kristen Wiig play one-note types that any actor could have played.

Why were big stars cast at all?

Chastain as a mission commander, Daniels as Director of NASA, Ejiofor as NASA mission commander, and Wiig as a Public Relations specialist. The casting, in particular, of Wiig in the straight-laced, stale was mysterious to me, and it was not a particularly good portrayal….and I am a Wiig fan.

The humorous parts in The Martian are contrived and not dissimilar to countless other films with the smart-ass remarks all containing a bland quality. Lines like “Eat your heart out Neil Armstrong” seem silly and unnecessary.

I expected more wit.

Let me be fair- the visual effects (it is space after all) are impressive, and it was fairly interesting to see what is supposed to be the planet of Mars, but really in this day and age of CGI effects the film is not that spectacular.

 I would much rather be given a compelling story than visual treats any day of the week.

My review of The Martian may seem harsh, but only because I expected more from it than I was given.

With several Oscar nominations including Best Picture, I anticipated a top-notch film, and The Martian did not come close.

Mediocrity, straightforward, and predictable describe The Martian (2015) film.

I have heard that the novel is fantastic and added it to my reading list.

Oscar Nominations: Best Picture, Best Actor-Matt Damon, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design, Best Visual Effects

Jurassic World-2015

Jurassic World-2015

Director Colin Trevorrow

Starring Chris Pratt, Bryce Dallas Howard

Scott’s Review #307

80029196

Reviewed December 23, 2015

Grade: C

Jurassic World (2015) is a film I expected to like much more than I did.

Sure, it is a summer, blockbuster, popcorn flick. Based on the success of the earlier franchise efforts,  and, if memory serves, finding enjoyment in the 1993 original, Jurassic Park, I expected a fun ride.

Unfortunately, I was treated to a formulaic, escapade with uninteresting characters and mediocre writing.

The premise is standard. A behemoth of an amusement park exists in Central America, on Isla Nublar, where a dinosaur theme park has been running without incident for ten years.

A genetically modified dinosaur, created because a magnificent new attraction is needed, breaks loose and runs rampant.

A silly love story exists between the two leads Owen and Claire (Chris Pratt and Dallas Bryce Howard), as well as the inclusion of two young boys (Zach and Gray) sent by their divorcing parents to be with their Aunt Claire, who works as the Operations Manager at the park.

Owen is the dinosaur trainer. Predictably, there are “bad guys” who are greedy and desire to advance science at the risk of human life.

The special effects are fine, albeit completely CGI-laden, which is to be expected because the main stars are dinosaurs after all. I did anticipate better writing or, at least, more of a creative attempt at coming up with something a bit edgy.

The story was completely redundant. Where was the character development? There was none. We know very little about any of the principal characters.

One might argue that an adventure film does not necessitate this but it’s important. We know that Claire is a workaholic and has none time for her nephews- why? What makes her tick?

Here is a slight complaint. Why kill off only extremely minor characters or villains? I could see this (and the ending) a mile away. The whole film seems forced and sloppy.

Jurassic World is also filled with clichés. Owen and Claire initially dislike each other having had one unsuccessful first date back in the day. The film tries to push the love/hate, opposites attract element and it feels contrived.

How many times have we seen this in film history?

Also, Chris Pratt is perfect as the hunky, muscular “hero saves the day” type, and Dallas Bryce Howard running through the forest in a tight tank top is not unintentional.

This is not to say that the film is bad. It is a decent adventure film and the special effects are cool. I did enjoy the homage to the original 1993 version as the boys stumble upon the original visitor station complete with the 1992 jeep from the original Jurassic Park film.

I thought this was a neat little nod to history and I love that in a franchise film, but that is it for the positives.

Yes, this film was a blockbuster smash and made oodles of money. It, however, feels forced and clichéd and quite formulaic.

I was hoping for much more and deeper, stronger, material.

Interstellar-2014

Interstellar-2014

Director Christopher Nolan

Starring Matthew McConaughey, Jessica Chastain

Scott’s Review #277

70305903

Reviewed September 25, 2015

Grade: B-

Interstellar (2014) is an interesting film to review.

Science-fiction/futuristic epic with a run time of nearly three hours and is complex and intricate. It is the latest offering by director Christopher Nolan.

I cannot say I loved the film, however, I did appreciate and marvel at the visual and technical aspects of it, which completely usurps the convoluted plot, made difficult to follow due to changing worlds and galaxies.

The film reminds me of Inception (2010) with an obvious homage to 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), the former directed by Nolan, but not quite as compelling from a story point of view as Inception was.

The complexities of different entities, worlds, and layers of worlds are featured and admittedly, mind-blowing, which is the weak part of the film.

Making the film arguably too intelligent, it loses the audience’s attention.

By too intelligent, I mean too complex. As I review the film, I see two halves-the story side and the visual side. In Interstellar, both are essential components and one fails and one marvels.

The story goes something like this. Matthew McConaughey plays Cooper, a widowed, former space expert stuck in a small town in the mid-west, where he begrudgingly runs a farm, living out an unsatisfying existence.

The Earth’s food and crops are slowly running out and the planet is dying. His two children, daughter Murphy and son Tom face a bleak world.

One day, a dust pattern with coordinates leads Cooper and Murphy to a secret NASA team intent on finding other worlds and attempting to save Earth. The team is led by Dr. Brand, a college professor, and science wizard, played by Michael Caine.

Cooper, naturally, is chosen to lead the venture, which could take him away from his family for years. He accepts much to Murphy’s chagrin. Once in outer space- assisted by Amelia Brand (Dr. Brand’s daughter), the team embarks on an endless mission leading them to different planets and one strange encounter with a rebel astronaut (played wastefully by Matt Damon).

Years later (on earth anyway) Murphy and Tom (now grown and played by Jessica Chastain and Casey Affleck) assume their father Cooper is dead.

Critically, the story is way too much to comprehend. I let go of the story instead of focusing on the visual spectacle I was treated to.

The plot eventually meanders off track as the team traverses through a space wormhole created by an alien intelligence and travels fifty years without aging. Life has gone on over planet Earth. Some characters age, others do not.

To summarize, the story is convoluted and impossible to follow.

Speaking of the story side of Interstellar, the writing contains an irritating wholesomeness, especially in the early stages- pre-outer space.

McConaughey was given this tough, machismo side to him that screams of Hollywood traditionalism- almost like “I am a man- I save the family”. Haven’t we seen this too many times in film?

I also found the relationship between Cooper and his young daughter Murphy incredibly saccharine and screamed of Hollywood schmaltz.

McConaughey was given and succeeded in delivering, one great crying scene.

The visual aspect of Interstellar is a spectacle and much, much better than the story, especially during the final third of the film. The sheer grandeur is astounding. When the crew lands on Miller’s planet, an ocean world, a great tidal wave topples their space ship killing one of the team.

The massive look of the tidal wave is monumental in size and ferocity. Later, when the crew lands on an icy planet, the immense coldness and shape of the planet work perfectly and one feels like they are in outer space.

How inventive and creative is the scene where Cooper attempts to contact a character through a bookshelf. The scene is set up like a maze with different periods, colors, and shapes, seemingly blending is very impressive and artistic.

Visually speaking, Interstellar has some similarities to the 1968 epic 2001: A Space Odyssey. Grandiose, artistic, experimental, and epic along with the obvious space theme allow the two films to be compared.

However, where 2001: A Space Odyssey was about life and contains a clear and powerful message, I did not find the same with Interstellar. Instead, I did not find a message, only a confusing story, mixed with spectacular visuals.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Original Score, Best Sound Editing, Best Sound Mixing, Best Production Design, Best Visual Effects (won)

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes-2014

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes-2014

Director Matt Reeves

Starring Andy Serkis, Jason Clarke, Gary Oldman

Scott’s Review #232

70300076

Reviewed March 29, 2015

Grade: C+

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014) is a summer blockbuster hit that knocks it out of the park from a visual perspective- it is magnificent to look at with creative sets and realistic images, but the story is mediocre and predictable.

I think the filmmaker’s true intent was to focus on the look of this film, which is a splendid feature. The film is a slightly better-than-average big-screen adventure with more style than substance.

Set in San Francisco, or what was once San Francisco, the film is set in futuristic times. Apes have forged a new civilization after a deadly virus has eliminated 90% of the human population.

The apes are highly intelligent and manage a happy, unified existence. Then, one day, a human is encountered and, scared, shoots one of the apes. This leads to a peaceful resolution between Caesar, leader of the apes, and the humans, to each stay in their respective territories.

However, humans need access to a dam in the Apes area to provide electricity for themselves. Mutual distrust leads to tension, but the civilized apes and humans reach a truce.

Naturally, there is further conflict as sinister humans and apes vow revenge on each other. This leads to a waging war while the peaceful apes and humans strive to work things out.

A further angle of the story is the hunger for power within the ranks of the Apes, reminiscent of Lord of the Flies. The human protagonists, Malcolm and Ellie, played by Jason Clarke and Keri Russell- are a wholesome, decent couple.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes pales to the original 1968 masterpiece, Planet of the Apes, starring Charlton Heston. To compare the two is unfair since, sadly, this one has nothing to do with the original.

It is simply the same franchise tag.

However, Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is weaker than its predecessor, 2010’s Rise of the Planet of the Apes. We had a charismatic star, James Franco, and an interesting story. The apes are experimented on and their intelligence is a strong angle.

With the sequel, the story is rather one-note and has a machismo, us against them angle, that is not unique.

The main drawback to this film is its limitations. The characters are portrayed as a) the good and sympathetic humans, b) the evil and destructive humans, c) the good and heroic apes, or, d) the evil, bad apes.

Everyone is defined for the audience and there is no ambiguity or complexities within the characters. This is a bit limiting. The evil ape Koba is purely bad and the drunken, gun-happy, humans are bad.

This is not to say that Dawn of the Planet of the Apes is not enjoyable, it is. It’s a fun, entertaining flick. For what it is, there is a somewhat message in the film, that there is a way to find peace and love between different species and types of people.

Hopefully, the audience gets that message.

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014) is a summer blockbuster action/sci-fi flick that many will enjoy, however, it is a plot-driven extravaganza that could have been superior had it contained more layers to the story and more shape to some of the characters.

It is worth seeing as a visual cinema treat, but scarcely more than that.

Oscar Nominations: Best Visual Effects

The Day the Earth Stood Still-1951

The Day the Earth Stood Still-1951

Director Robert Wise

Starring Michael Rennie

Scott’s Review #155

60026578

Reviewed August 18, 2014

Grade: B+

The Day the Earth Stood Still (1951) is one of the best, most credible, original science fiction thrillers. It has stood the test of time, considering it is over sixty years old.

Made in 1951, the film is a message movie about a spaceship that suddenly arrives on planet Earth in the United States capitol of Washington, D.C.

Michael Rennie is fantastic as Klaatu, the calm, poised leader of the spaceship. Along with Gort, a 7-foot-tall robot, Klaatu intends to deliver a message of peace and humanity to the leaders of Earth.

The arrival sets off a panic, and Klaatu is captured, only to escape and meet local townspeople as he tries to pass himself off as human and deliver his message.

The Day the Earth Stood Still is a liberal-slanted, anti-war, pro-tolerance, and acceptance movie, but also a good, old-fashioned black-and-white science fiction thriller rolled into one.

It’s an important film.

It is an edgy, questioning film that can easily still be viewed and appreciated today (sad that not much seems to have changed in the world after all these years).

It is political, and the setting of Washington, D.C., is wise and symbolic.

While a handful of humans are portrayed as intelligent and accepting, most of Earth’s human beings, especially politicians, are portrayed as war-happy, foolish individuals.

The viewer will question the world around him or herself and, hopefully, begin to question political decisions and the horrors of war that continue unabated.

Her-2013

Her-2013

Director Spike Jonze

Starring Joaquin Phoenix, Scarlett Johannson

Scott’s Review #147

70278933

Reviewed August 5, 2014

Grade: A-

Her (2013) is a very unique film directed by Spike Jonze.

The film tells the tale of a lonely, depressed man named Theodore, played by Joaquin Phoenix, who lives in a beautiful high-rise in futuristic Los Angeles.

He works as a writer for a company that creates intimate cards for people in relationships. Having suffered a recent divorce, he falls in love with his computerized operation system named Samantha, played by Scarlett Johansson- voice only.

Conflicts emerge as the relationship deepens and intensifies. Her is a love story uniquely crafted, but also a story of loneliness and the world of technology we now live in.

It portrays human relationships as troubled and unsuccessful yet several characters have wonderful relationships with computers.

Is this what the future may bring with human beings? How many people have fallen in love with a fantasy or a voice on the phone?

The film ponders why relationships have been changed due to technological advances and wonders what will happen further into the future. Technology, while wonderful, has changed our interpersonal relationships and this film successfully delves deeply into that aspect.

The conversation is a lost art and Her features the joys and the tragedies of technology.

Visually, the film is successful because it portrays Los Angeles in a sophisticated, ultra-sleek, modern way that is fascinating.

Several technological games are featured (the Alien child is brilliantly comical) and the “Mom points” is fascinating in its irony.

Her is a deep film that raises questions and I applaud this in modern cinema.

Her is a slow-moving film, but a questioning one.

It won the 2013 Best Original Screenplay Oscar and I am so glad the academy recognized the originality of this film.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Picture, Best Original Screenplay (won), Best Original Score, Best Original Song-“The Moon Song”, Best Production Design

World War Z-2013

World War Z-2013

Director Marc Forster

Starring Brad Pitt

Scott’s Review #121

70262639

Reviewed July 20, 2014

Grade: B

World War Z (2013) is the type of film that is a summer hit but will most likely be forgotten over the years. It is a slightly above-average, enjoyable action/ zombie thriller, but not much more.

It stars Brad Pitt as a former United Nations investigator called in to save the world from a zombie pandemic. The crisis is spreading throughout major cities of the world simultaneously.

The film sees Pitt traversing the globe in an attempt to find a cure for the epidemic before it is too late and the zombies make the world extinct from humans.

The zombies are super zombies in that they can fly and move at lightning speed making them ultra-dangerous.

The story is implausible and plot-driven, but it doesn’t matter and works on some level. My theory for this success is that the film is fast-paced, the action starts almost immediately, and Brad Pitt is charismatic.

He is the star and all the action centers around him.

The film contains exciting, tense scenes including a plane crash sequence and a chase around a medical lab.

World War Z (2013) is a popcorn film, meant to be sat back and enjoyed and not overanalyzed or taken too seriously.

It is a perfect summer hit.

Alien-1979

Alien-1979

Director Ridley Scott

Starring Sigourney Weaver

Scott’s Review #94

60029356

Reviewed July 5, 2014

Grade: A-

Alien is a science-fiction success from 1979 that began a long-running franchise and made Sigourney Weaver a household name.

It has the brilliant direction of Ridley Scott, who sets up the atmosphere and camera angles perfectly.

Arguably in the horror genre as well as science-fiction, the film is riveting from start to finish.

Weaver stars as Warrant Officer Ellen Ripley, a member of a spaceship returning to Earth. The ship picks up a distress signal and is ordered to investigate. They discover an alien existence.

From this point, the film certainly has a horror element to it as the members of the doomed spacecraft are knocked off one by one in pure horror fashion, but the brilliant part is you do not know when or how and many of the deaths come out of nowhere.

The captivating visual effects in this film take it to another level and the narrow spacecraft tunnels and hallways are stunning.

The villain of the film, the alien, is masterful as it is mysterious to the audience. The fact that it is only sporadically seen only adds to the tension.

Alien (1979) is a memorable classic that is high up there on the sci-fi genre list of excellent films.

Oscar Nominations: 1 win-Best Art Direction, Best Visual Effects (won)

Slaughterhouse Five-1972

Slaughterhouse Five-1972

Director George Roy Hill

Starring Michael Sacks, Ron Leibman

Scott’s Review #84

972612

Reviewed July 1, 2014

Grade: A-

Slaughterhouse-Five, adapted from the novel of the same name and made in 1972, is a dream-like visual experience through cinematic time.

The main character (Billie Pilgrim) is a World War II soldier who survives a horrific explosion during the war in one period of his life, and he, along with the viewer floats through time to relive, but not change, three other times in his life.

It is a first-person narrative.

As a senior, in the most engaging period, he is transported to a lavish outer space planet where he falls in love with a Goddess.

There is a certain anti-war sentiment to the film and is certainly cerebral, unique mesmerizing, and tough to explain, but it is dreamy and clever and, after 30-plus years, is surprisingly fresh, therefore it should be experienced.

It is a science-fiction type of film.

My favorite scene is the humorous, yet tragic runaway Cadillac scene.

Altered States-1980

Altered States-1980

Director Ken Russell

Starring William Hurt

Scott’s Review #82

246472

Reviewed July 1, 2014

Grade: B-

Altered States (1980) is a trippy, strange horror/sci-fi hybrid film (William Hurt’s debut film) that is visually quite impressive, but the story is too far-fetched and implausible to be taken seriously.

It feels like an earlier version of The Fly, but inferior to that particular film.

Hurt plays an abnormal psychology professor obsessed with experimental schizophrenic hallucinatory drugs, which he takes, causing him to ultimately experience episodes of being half man, half ape through the use of a sensory deprivation tank, and a strange Indian tribe comes into play.

It’s a very silly premise but somehow is believable to a point, especially in the first act.

The ending of the movie proved ridiculous and uninteresting to me and seemed extremely disjointed as an entire film.

There were lots of behind-the-scenes troubles with this film, which could explain the unbalanced feeling.

Otherwise, the sporadic weird colors and patterns during the scientist’s episodes were effective.

Drew Barrymore’s first film (she plays a toddler).

Oscar Nominations: Best Original Score, Best Sound

Aliens-1986

Aliens-1986

Director James Cameron

Starring Sigourney Weaver

Scott’s Review #80

60029358

Reviewed June 29, 2014

Grade: B+

Aliens (1986) takes away the rawness of the original Alien (1979) and infuses a glossier, slick look to the film franchise.

The film was made eight years later, but story-wise, it is set fifty-seven years into the future when Ripley, played to perfection by Sigourney Weaver, awakens.

To her horror, she discovers that the aliens have colonized and she is forced to return to prevent havoc. The militia is in tow, adding a helping of masculinity that supports the film throughout.

This scenario perfectly sets up what is to become an excellent sci-fi adventure story.

There are wonderful special effects that were quite extraordinary when the film was shot-1986. The tunnels and spacecraft are perfectly lit and designed, giving it a bright and fun setting and the audience knows that doom is lurking.

The actual aliens are visually frightening and, compared to the original, are more plentiful.

Sigourney Weaver takes center stage and leads this film successfully.

I’m not sure many other actresses could pull off her level of authentic toughness and give no sex appeal in the process and successfully get away with it.

The only detraction to the film is it seems a bit dated in a purely 1980s film way. It has an 80’s look to it and that’s not a positive.

Not on par with the excellent original Alien, but otherwise, a well-made, supernatural, thrill ride.

Oscar Nominations: 2 wins-Best Actress-Sigourney Weaver, Best Original Score, Best Sound Effects Editing (won), Best Sound, Best Art Direction, Best Film Editing, Best Visual Effects (won)

Gravity-2013

Gravity-2013

Director Alfonso Cuaron

Starring Sandra Bullock, George Clooney

Scott’s Review #69

70274337

Reviewed June 24, 2014

Grade: B

Gravity (2013) has become a film that has divided people- some have described it as “brilliant”, “groundbreaking”, and “phenomenal”.

Due to the hype, I was expecting somewhat of a masterpiece. Not being a 3-D fan (usually unnecessary), I gave in and saw it in 3-D, which did help the film.

I have discovered the theory- the techies will love it, the storytellers will not.

Yes, the film is inventive and the space scenes are magnificent, so much so that I felt like I was floating in space looking down at planet Earth.

Sandra Bullock is excellent as a lost astronaut fearful and desperate.

But, the story is quite basic and, frankly, weak. I kept waiting for the plot to thicken and was left wanting much more than the movie delivered.

The backstory for Clooney and Bullock was limited.

I must stress, though, that technically this film is astounding and deserves the praise heaped on it, but as a complete movie, it did not deliver the goods.

Oscar Nominations: 7 wins-Best Picture, Best Director-Alfonso Cuaron (won), Best Actress-Sandra Bullock, Best Original Score (won), Best Sound Editing (won), Best Sound Mixing (won), Best Production Design, Best Cinematography (won), Best Film Editing (won), Best Visual Effects (won)