tsode

The Rig (2023)

Well-meaning, but soggy eco thriller

A previous reviewer described this show as a mix of 'Deepwater Horizon' and 'Alien'. If I may clarify: this show has absolutely nothing in common with 'Alien'.

It does, however, borrow liberally from 'The Abyss'.

'The Rig' follows the tired workers on a North Sea oil rig who find themselves pitted against a mysterious force from below in a way that does nothing if not depict the fossil fuel industry (rightly in my view) as a zero-sum game - both for its own people, and the planet.

Unfortunately, after a fairly solid opening, the 'The Rig's contrivances and illogical character behaviour are too burdensome to build any real interest in either the story's message or it's thrills. What might have held together for 90mins, is spread thin across some 240mins or more. With far too much po-faced discussion at every turn.

There are some gripping set pieces as the crew battle to keep the rig's systems alive amid bizarre (un)natural events. But all in all I just found it too hard to suspend my disbelief. Especially whilst watching characters frequently unable to locate their crew-mates within the vast wilderness of.... a fixed rig platform in the ocean.

5/10 - An unusual setting. Diverting silliness if your expectations are low and you love the premise. But I think everyone else should skip it.

1899 (2022)

Tropes on a boat

This seen-it-all-before production about hapless turn-of-century steamship travelers sidetracked to investigate a signal from a ghostly lost vessel (hello 'Alien', as one example), looked wild in the trailer. But it's really just waterlogged on departure.

Tired tropes include: characters having "visions" of their own past trauma, a creepy kid, fog, a mystery man... As well as the period-porn setting of a late Victorian era stylised for the modern viewer. And a weird and I'll-fitting song montage at the end of each episode.

There are also some oddly tone-deaf elements, such as a predatory gay man. Really? This is so on-the-nose, it just reinforces the very stereotype that would have made life hell for anyone actually gay back in 1899.

Then there's the notion of characters finding enveloped letters that offer clues to what is going on - which the creators appeared to have just recycled from their own earlier series, 'Dark'.

Not worth your time, and so predictable in places that you'll be mouthing lines of dialogue before they're spoken on screen. 5/10.

Moonhaven (2022)

'Bella Sway'? Otherwise, a fresh take.

'Moonhaven' is a diverting sci-fi series on some levels, and I definitely admire its effort to try something new.

While it isn't an especially strong story, and there are definitely some silly devices (like a dull terrorist with a Mohawk)... I do like the eco-utopian nature of the Moon community. I also enjoyed the discussions about humanity's destructive nature, and the need to fundamentally reset this and to live differently. It feels like a story rooted in 1960s sci-fi novels, which were frequently optimistic and depicted utopian, even hippy, futures.

But one major gripe - the name of the main protagonist is 'Bella Sway', which is distracting. It's clearly far too close to 'Bella Swan' from 'Twilight'. Not that I care about 'Twilight'. But the book is famous. And it'd like creating a new sci-fi or fantasy series with a character called 'Luke Skyrunner'. Or 'Harry Porter'. Or 'Katniss Evergreen'. Why make such an egregious fumble? It's so unnecessary and seems like a deliberate nod - despite the stories being nothing alike.

The X Files: Terma (1996)

Terrible and rushed.

Put aside your nostalgia - and both Tunguska and Terma are terrible, rushed, far-fetched episodes. Too much is packed into both, particularly with Mulder/Krycek and the Russian operative. What even was all the stuff with power plant at the end? Why were all those one-armed Russians hanging out in the forest so conveniently for Krycek? Why was it so necessary to chop arms off after the black cancer? Why was scully not amazed to see a sentient, leech-like liquid? Nothing was clear. Terrible writing and rushed all around.

The Wheel of Time: The Dragon Reborn (2021)

Was great all along... glad people are finally figuring that out!

Amazing episode. The Aes Sedai are awesome. The One Power - awe-inspiring.

The mystery of the Dragon Reborn - twisty.

The visuals - captivating.

The acting - perfect.

I love when people say "the show has finally found it's groove". Or "thanks for improving". As if it were being filmed weekly and adjusted based on your stupid IMDB feedback. LOL.

The whole show was filmed at once, a year ago. Probably not even in episodic order at times.

And it's been gorgeous from the start, not just this episode. Glad people are waking up and realising.

Invasion: Hope (2021)

Tense and thrilling 8/10

The individual stories of human struggle, fear and confusion continue in this episode. Amidst an incomprehensible, and mostly hidden alien threat seeping across the planet.

They do a great job of maintaining tension by only showing glimpses of the enemy - as all the best thrillers do.

This episode included an interesting analogy with respect to the war in Afghanistan.

Why this excellent, suspenseful, well-acted and beautifully shot series is so misunderstood in the review here, beggars belief.

No, it's not perfect. But it is undeniably a classy production and a gripping story for patient viewers. Even the music by Max Richter is excellent. I am enjoying every episode.

If you're impatient, watch something else. Stop carpet-bombing 'Invasion' with childish low scores, when it clearly wasn't made for you.

Merlin (1998)

Stellar cast. Poorly aged CGI.

The biggest drawcard of 'Merlin' is seeing Sam Neill, Rutger Hauer, Miranda Richardson, Helena Bonham Carter, Martin Short, and even a young Lena Headey, all taking part in this single, lengthy Arthurian TV fantasy.

The biggest deterrant is the running time (3hrs), and a very mixed bag of 1990s TV-level CGI. Think 1990s video game cut-scenes, and you'll get the idea.

Sam Neill lends Merlin his charismatic smirk, while witchy nemesis Mab (Richardson) is a devious puppeteer of Kings, fretting over her waning influence. The two embark on a lifetime trying to engineer the rule of Britain.

Mildly diverting throughout, some of the quirky performances occasionally elevate this familiar material. And unlike some reviewers, I got the impression the cast were likely enjoying themselves, but who knows.

There's nothing especially bad about 'Merlin', and there are even one or two laughs. But it hardly raises a pulse, either.

A minor shame then that the sometimes acceptable, but mostly baffling CGI and some juvenile editing (such as fast-forward effects to make characters appear to move fast) distract from a plodding, but amiable story.

When viewed against the practical effects-driven fantasy films of the 1980s, 'Merlin' hasn't aged well. But this is still worth a look for fantasy film completists.

Departure (2019)

Rushed and unconvincing

'Departure' ultimately turned out to be Christopher Plummer's final acting role. But this flashy potboiler about a missing passenger plane feels like little more than an extension of one of those "CSI" shows from America.

Chatty and frantic, with rushed characters introductions, and a range of typically American drama gimmicks you've seen a hundred times before (unrealistically glossy offices, dramatic flashbacks, pompous soundtrack), even the cast looks a bit uncomfortable here.

For some reason, Archie Panjabi even turns up in a strikingly similar maroon leather jacket as her iconic private investigator Kalinda from the superior 'The Good Wife'. It's just a pity the Good Wife writers didn't come with her cool wardrobe.

"Let's find that plane!" declares Archie's Kendra O'Malley in episode 1, in case that weren't obvious as the entire premise. But it's the rushed pace and lack of sensitivity required by material like this, that truly derails any interest.

Compare this to the masterfully suspenseful submarine drama 'Vigil', and you'll truly see what should have been.

Breach (2020)

Was this satire?

Even with a film like this, on a small budget, I am sure that a lot of work and effort was involved. I watched Breach right through to the end. Which is more than I can say for a lot of even worse films. So if you worked on this movie, good for you.

Alas though, I can't let this one slide, when better movies were being made on similar budgets, 30 or 40 years ago...

As a longtime fan of the space-horror subgenre, I'm only giving this 2 stars.

This a really terrible, cheap-looking, silly film. Was it a joke? A barely coherent plot is dressed up with terrible CGI effects. From the ships to the machine gun blasts, to the fake CGI flamethrower fire. I've seen better special effects in Jimmy Kimmel skits.

In the 80s, with the limitations of the practical FX of the day, a lot of scifi-horror films were made on tiny budgets that still managed to look far more authentic than this. Check out films like Moon 44, or DeepStar Six. I miss that amazing model work. Breach just seems lazy in comparison.

Heck, even check out the recent short films based on "Alien", that were made with tiny budgets.

Yet here we are in 2021. And Breach is an embarrassment compared with all of the above. Don't believe any mild praise you see for it, either. Some other reviewers appear to have lost their minds, or they'll just excuse anything.

From the action, to the monster, to the acting, I wondered if I was being "punk'd" the whole way through this. At one point, our heroes go from shooting at the bad guys, to having an all-in fist fight brawl with the nasties. I couldn't stop laughing. The first act does build some low-level interest and tension. But there's far too much student-film on display here, to take this seriously. Nearly every scene contains something amateurish. Incessant lens flare, goofy acting, empty dialogue...

How on Earth (or in Space) did Bruce and Thomas ever agree to this?

2/10.

If I had made this film myself, in college, I'd be mildly pleased with myself. Instead, I'm astounded this was released to the general public.

The Midnight Sky (2020)

Ignore low reviews. An intelligent drama about our fragile existence.

I just got back from seeing The Midnight Sky at a local cinema.

My first impression is that if you are a fan of films like "Contact" (Robert Zemeckis) or "Mission to Mars" (Brian De Palma), and perhaps also "Solaris" (the highly underrated Steven Soderbergh version from 2002, which also starred Clooney), then this is a beautiful and emotive film in a similar vein to those classics. I absolutely loved it, from beginning to end.

Gorgeously shot, and realistically acted, this is no overblown sci-fi actioner. It's a human drama, set in a possible future. A disastrous, fragile future. Making this a fable about our vulnerability, and our tiny place in the cosmos. And most importantly, the regret we may feel both collectively and individually, from opportunities wasted.

I found it profoundly moving at times. And certainly nowhere near as "slow" as some gibbons have complained. There are in fact, numerous gripping set pieces that had the audience on edge. The story is divided between action on Earth and aboard a spacecraft. And both have their share of drama and tragedy, hanging on to their existence by a thread of gossamer.

The effects and performances were excellent. It was also refreshing to see characters making sensible and logical choices when dealing with life-threatening situations. (Nearly every character in the film is a scientist, after all).

Looking at some of the other reviews... the problem in many cases, clearly rests with the viewer's expectations, and not this film. At least the Washington Post got it right - their reviewer Michael O'Sullivan gave it 4 stars out of 5. Entertainment Weekly got it right, too.

Have people's attention spans become so short that they cannot appreciate a moderately paced, human/sci-fi drama anymore? Or is this film somehow attracting the wrong audience? Is it a problem with Netflix audiences? (where this film debuted simultaneously, along with a brief cinema run).

The Midnight Sky is by no means perfect. But I found it difficult to spot any major flaw in it's pacing, visuals, action, acting, or the delivery of the story it set out to tell. It's not a complicated narrative. It's a straightforward and quite realistic story of survival, set amidst a planetary disaster and a fragile attempt to begin again on another world.

If you want explosions and superheros - go elsewhere. If you can't stop playing with your smartphone for 10 minutes - go elsewhere.

But if you appreciate an Arthur C. Clarke or Isaac Asimov style chapter in humanity's (and the individual's) struggle for survival against our collective penchant for self-destruction, then this simple and emotive story is well worth your ticket.

Star Trek: The Next Generation: Sarek (1990)

Vulcanic tempers

Mildly interesting at first, but ultimately one for serious fans only.

Does watching Picard meld minds with an emotionally fragile, elderly Vulcan, and feel his pain... seem like fun to you? It's all very significant for the characters. But ultimately a tad miserable for the viewer to observe.

Serious and thoughtful, but flat compared to the series finest episodes. 6/10.

The X Files: Rm9sbG93ZXJz (2018)

Silly

Nice idea (the pitfalls of big data and smart technology), but this just comes off like a very weak Black Mirror episode.

Scully's reactions to it all are more realistic than Mulder's, but even then - I was half expecting them both to wake up from a dream at the very end. Such was the silliness of all this.

Also, where are their guns? Where are their realistic FBI agent reactions to such outrageous and gross invasions of privacy and breaking of the law, by autonomous drones?

Instead they just run around - where are they running to?

At the three-quarter point of the episode, it wasn't clear what their objective was. Or what truth or justice they were seeking, from the situation. It was all just apropos of nothing.

Mulder and Scully - mere victims of corporate technology like the rest of us. And even worse - with absolutely nothing to say about it.

What a fatal mistake for an X Files episode.

Memory: The Origins of Alien (2019)

Fascinating, insightful.

Please be skeptical of reviewers who can't spell, or who appear to be "triggered" by any political discussion in film theory.

As a lifelong fan of Alien, who has seen every single documentary ever made, and read every single book about this film, "Memory: The Origins of Alien" is a truly excellent retrospective of this classic piece of history.

It is packed with fresh information about the film, it's creators, and it's underlying themes.

For context: 95% of the documentary focuses specifically on the journey of the films creation. So if that's your motivation, I think there's plenty here for you to enjoy. And to that end, a generous selection of the creative talent behind it's inception are interviewed here - from Ron Shusett, to Roger Christian to Veronica Cartwright and several more.

The remaining portion is devoted to speculation around the film's "window into the collective subconscious" of society in 1979 - why it both appealed to, and shocked, the audiences of the day. What it said about us as a society - and continues to say. Credit is given to it's use of a female heroine, in an era when the film industry greatly objectified women. While a similar portion looks at the potential meaning behind how shots are staged and framed. As well as the dynamics of how a group of blue collar working class "space truckers" are depicted, and how they deal with their "expendability".

This documentary therefore serves as both a fresh "making of" (even dispelling several myths about the production perpetuated by previous documentaries - and adding several facts even I had never heard about before!). And an intelligent speculative discussion about why Alien continues to resonate, over 40 years after its release.

I cannot imagine why a true fan of the film, who appreciates cinema and science fiction for more than mere gore and thrills, wouldn't find this essential viewing and a valuable addition to their Alien collection.

I went into it with low expectations based on some of the inasane rantings here on IMDB. And I was pleasantly surprised.

8/10.

What Happened to Monday (2017)

What happened to my two hours?

A far-fetched, though somewhat interesting concept is marred by artless direction and plot holes galore, in this dystopian overpopulation potboiler.

Looking every bit a made-for-TV movie, What Happened To Monday is violent, ludicrous and only occasionally thought-provoking. But only if your brain comes pre-formatted with low expectations, and free of critical thought.

Willem Dafoe is the father of 7 identical daughters, in a world where siblings have been outlawed due to dwindling food and resources. Managing to raise them in secret, we flash forward to the 7 adult women (all played by Noomi Rapace) spending their lives hiding in an apartment with only 1 venturing into society each day, and always under the same shared identity.

This silly, though superficially amusing "what if" quickly descends into a dim-bulb action farce once their secret is found out, and an endless procession of "Population Allocation" goons come to hunt them down, lest their existence be an embarrassment to the leader of an organisation (or government?) committed to reducing world population.

Yes, the entire plot of the film would not have taken place, were it not for one person's "embarrassment".

Glenn Close (looking oddly fake in corporate weave and garb) hams it up for a few lines as aforementioned leader, rounding up excess "siblings" (a word snarled throughout the film) for forced incarceration. She's putting them all in cryo freeze though - with the promise of future revival once the population has become more manageable. Or something.

The main event though of course, is Noomi Rapace, who throws everything into the role of 7 subtly different characters, each named after a day of the week (corresponding to the day they go out - see what they did there?). Though its frequently hard to tell which is which, or even remember what name each one has.

But even Noomi's considerable efforts cannot distract from a barrage of gaping plot holes.

In this dystopia, most of the population just seems to march about comfortably in business suits heading to and from offices. Yet the streets are surrounded by armoured future-cars and riot police. And when whole apartment blocks explode or are raided by SWAT teams, and bystanders are shot... there's barely a whiff of widespread panic or uprising?

The end result just doesn't carry. Too silly to believe, yet played oh-so-earnestly - right to the last messy shootout, or embarrassing death scene. The twists also pile-on - as if the writers just didn't know when to stop.

This film might have worked better as a completely over the top satire (think: Robocop). Don't believe the over-positive reviewers who think they've discovered a diamond in the rough. WHTM is all rough. For Noomi completists only.

5/10

The Predator (2018)

Utter Rubbish

If you enjoy looking at your phone during an entire movie, this is the movie for you.

From it's opening minute, The Predator isn't interested in the suspense or atmospheric jungle build-up that made the original film the all-time action classic that it is. To wit - Predators are immediately shown on screen, fighting in space, before one crash lands on Earth - conveniently mere metres from a hostage/sniper operation. From there, a soldier investigates, and within moments has stolen some Predator tech and mailed it back home to his ex-wife and child in the suburbs.

Sound legit?

And so begins this rollercoaster of implausible action, confusing scene cuts, internal leaps of logic, and witless coincidences that will only feel acceptable if you were a cast member of this film and stand to profit from it.

Don't bother even trying to suspend your disbelief. Held beside earlier films, this is a film of leasts and mosts:

• The least suspense of any entry in the series.
• The least believability.
• The least character development.
• The most gore.
• The most incomprehensibility.

At one point, Olivia Munn's "character" is introduced by being taken by agents to a secure compound. Once there, her arrival coincidences precisely with the moment when decades of government research into Predators, descends into chaos. And in seconds, she tranforms from University Professor to gun-wielding commando.

Shane Black ought to be ashamed of this garbage. The film is packed with snappy lines, but how can an original cast member of Predator be so utterly clueless as to the structure and tension which made the original film a success? Or why it's enduring appeal still gave him the opportunity (30 years later) to make yet another sequel?

"The Predator" is a Marvel-ized atrocity of a once-beloved sci-fi suspense franchise, edited by and for people with Attention Deficit Disorder. This is the final death-knell of this franchise for fans like me. A film so overblown and childish, I wouldn't even download it for free.

No matter what they release after this, I won't be watching. Well done everyone.

1/10.

Stranded (2001)

A slow, but thoroughly engrossing sci-fi drama

If you dislike slow pace, and needs lots of explosions or adventure in your science-fiction films, avoid Stranded. You won't enjoy it.

But if you like slow, realistic, thought provoking sci-fi (films like 2001 or Solaris) with a twist of psychological drama, then give Stranded a go.

On a tiny budget, I believe the makers of Stranded have achieved a deeper, more interesting Mars film than any other to date.

Six Astronauts aboard the first mission to Mars, crash their ship when landing, and the only hope of rescue is a potential 3 year wait for another ship from Earth. With not enough air, water or energy to last for 3 years, the film asks - what would you do? The settings are believable, the acting a little varied (some accents might even be dubbed), and the special effects merely OK. It looks like a mere BBC TV special. But try not to be distracted by these quibbles.

Apart from an initial space travel shot or two, special effects aren't needed. The film's real strength is the tension between the characters as they sit huddled in the wreckage of their ship, and the harsh reality of their situation.

Even a science fiction twist at the end remains believable, thanks to it's understated nature.

I went into this film expecting a terrible b-grade sci-fi film. Instead, I found myself on the edge of my seat from beginning to end, and was frankly blown away by it's mature effort (on such a tiny budget) to portray a sci-fi scenario on Mars.

Highly recommended for lovers of sincere and realistic sci-fi drama.

District 9 (2009)

Worthy, original blend of horror sci-fi thrills, hard sci-fi themes, and social satire.

(Relax, no spoilers here) Please ignore the twits who've lately been rating this "one star" or any such nonsense. I sometimes wonder of there's a negative vote-bombing campaign going on? A fair and realistic score for District 9 is: 8/10 Make no mistake. District 9 is excellent and well worth your ticket. It isn't perfect. But it is excellent and quite original.

I won't rehash the plot. The film blends influences, ranging from Robocop to Starship Troopers, to that hand-held documentary style.

Some have called it the next "Aliens". I disagree. It doesn't have the empathy or character development of Aliens. The hero embarks on an arduous struggle, yes, but the film ultimately sacrifices pathos for satire. You'll be rooting for certain characters by the end. But there's no pure hero to follow from beginning to end (like Ripley).

Also, it's not a particularly suspenseful or scary film. Really, it's just not that similar to Aliens, other than the two films both broadly being lumped under "horror/sci-fi".

The ending is great, and the film is exhilarating in parts, as seemingly hopeless situations suddenly take a turn for the better.

The effects are *AWESOME*. I walked out of the cinema thinking "This only cost $30million??".

I haven't got a clue how the makers of Transformers 2 or GI Joe managed to blow $200million on such boring, forgettable movies. Maybe they literally burned crates full of money in all those fires and explosions? Go see District 9, and put Hollywood on notice.

No more cartoon wars based on toys, or rehashes of superheroes, TV shows, or old movies.

We want original and thoughtful sci-fi, full of genuine conflict, and this movie shows how it's done. Well done Neill Blomkamp and Peter Jackson! Let's hope James Cameron's "Avatar" is this much fun.

The Descent (2005)

Thrilling story and setting, but stumbles at the end. 6/10

The Descent is a thrilling tale involving six adventurous women on an underground caving expedition, who run into serious trouble mid way when they encounter some vicious subterranean creatures.

The film pays obvious homages to Alien and Predator, and to it's credit the first half of the film is filled with slow-build tension, just like the aforementioned greats of the sci-fi/horror genre. All six of the characters are given just enough screen time for you to learn who is who, which is vital for building up the scares, yet something that many other such films fail to do.

* SPOILER WARNING * Sadly, despite being a huge fan of this genre, and sitting through most of the movie with sweaty palms and marveling at the great sets, minimal CGI and overall claustrophobia of it all, the film was undone for me in the final quarter.

I was actually sitting there thinking "What??", when two of the characters turn on each other rather than face the menace around them. I won't elaborate on "why" this happens, except to say the reasons are simply not strong enough. The victim in this instance is simply not "evil" enough, and no amount of back story justification can excuse her death. In fact she's not evil at all. Just irresponsible.

It's an atrocious end that rips all the sympathy from the "hero", and utterly flattens a film that was heading for 8/10.

Instead, The Descent stumbles badly like a Olympic hurdler who was leading, only to finish 4th - outside the medals. It's a shame. I can only hope Neil Marshall will try this genre once more, and get everything right. Perhaps watch Aliens and witness how the Ripley character is equally strong, sympathetic and heroic? Even a dark ending needs to have a silver lining, albeit at least a moral one.