- Published on
Succinctly, I’ll agree with what the mainstream has said about Arrival (2016): it’s smart Science Fiction … but I think what I found ‘smart’ and what they found ‘smart’ might end up being two very different things.
Let me explain …
Arrival tells the story of expert linguist Louise Banks (played with the usual big screen charm by Amy Adams). When twelve alien ships land at different locations about the globe, Banks and physicist Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner) are conscripted into military service as their expertise makes them perfect candidates to decipher not only how to communicate with a species that speaks in symbols but also what their intent may mean for our entire planet. As societies act out in panic, this elite team races against time to keep mankind from raising arms against an enemy it has little chance of understanding.
Performances are solid, but I thought Arrival did suffer a bit in the first half due to its lethargic pacing: as I’ve warned friends and family going in to see the flick, there’s an awful lot of set-up necessary to understand all of what’s happening culturally and scientifically; and – without spoiling too much of it – if you’re watching and listening closely then you might just see the feature’s last act development (i.e. plot twist) coming very early on. (I know that I did). Sometimes, that’s the danger of front-loading your tale with too many ideas: by requiring the audience to “keep up,” you inadvertently point them in a direction a script of slightly lesser virtue wouldn’t have, and you end up doing your story a narrative disservice. It’s a tricky balance, but to each his own as to whether you see the twist coming.
Also, I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that the production details are very good as well. Visually, Arrival brilliantly juxtaposes an almost subterranean (earthy) alien atmosphere against Earth’s utilitarian approach to managing science and crisis; you practically can’t resist cheering Banks’ realization to strip off the biohazard suit and show the aliens that we’re still a race of individuals underneath all of that look-alike protective garb. (It’s arguably one of the highlights of the film.)
Still, Arrival kinda/sorta cheapens its smart storytelling in two somewhat typical Hollywood ways.
Let me explain …
Arrival tells the story of expert linguist Louise Banks (played with the usual big screen charm by Amy Adams). When twelve alien ships land at different locations about the globe, Banks and physicist Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner) are conscripted into military service as their expertise makes them perfect candidates to decipher not only how to communicate with a species that speaks in symbols but also what their intent may mean for our entire planet. As societies act out in panic, this elite team races against time to keep mankind from raising arms against an enemy it has little chance of understanding.
Performances are solid, but I thought Arrival did suffer a bit in the first half due to its lethargic pacing: as I’ve warned friends and family going in to see the flick, there’s an awful lot of set-up necessary to understand all of what’s happening culturally and scientifically; and – without spoiling too much of it – if you’re watching and listening closely then you might just see the feature’s last act development (i.e. plot twist) coming very early on. (I know that I did). Sometimes, that’s the danger of front-loading your tale with too many ideas: by requiring the audience to “keep up,” you inadvertently point them in a direction a script of slightly lesser virtue wouldn’t have, and you end up doing your story a narrative disservice. It’s a tricky balance, but to each his own as to whether you see the twist coming.
Also, I’d be remiss if I didn’t mention that the production details are very good as well. Visually, Arrival brilliantly juxtaposes an almost subterranean (earthy) alien atmosphere against Earth’s utilitarian approach to managing science and crisis; you practically can’t resist cheering Banks’ realization to strip off the biohazard suit and show the aliens that we’re still a race of individuals underneath all of that look-alike protective garb. (It’s arguably one of the highlights of the film.)
Still, Arrival kinda/sorta cheapens its smart storytelling in two somewhat typical Hollywood ways.
First, Eric Heisserer’s adaptation of Ted Chiang’s original story (I mention both here as I’m not certain who originated the element) perpetuates the old staple of making the military into the real enemy. (Never mind the fact that those same militaries have been standing up for authors’ rights to impugn them throughout the years.) Sadly, every conflict needs to have a ‘heavy,', and I (for one) have tired of always blaming soldiers trained to defend us simply acting on their own accord since apparently none of us know better or worse. Accuse me of nationalism if you must, but indicting the military has become the easy way out all too often, especially in the realm of the SciFi thriller.
Second (and others may disagree with me on this point), Arrival sacrifices all the rules it rather ‘smartly’ established when it’s revealed in the last reel that the aliens apparently understood Earth speech (i.e. English) after all! Without revealing too much, circumstances require that mankind act (and act quickly!) to save itself (a late-breaking plot development), so Banks is hauled up in a transport pod (another last act creation) only to learn that the aliens never needed symbols to communicate after all: either they’re understanding her speech (my impression) OR they’re communicating telepathically (another possibility though it’s never quite qualified but strongly implied).
Therefore, I stated in the opening of my review that I probably thought Arrival was ‘smart’ for differing reasons than most: it smartly uses all of the best techniques of the major motion picture to weave an adult alien invasion story – think of this as “Independence Day for the CBS 60 Minutes’ Crowd.” It takes a few clever ideas and presents them in ways that heighten the creative aspect … but, all-in-all, I’d stop short of calling it a ‘smart’ film because in some aspects it does so by narrative trickery. In short, Arrival is one of these films wherein it’s honestly difficult to discuss all elements of it without spoiling it for audiences, so I’m hesitant to say more than that for fear that I would take away some of its magic.
I’ve been no big fan of Jeremy Renner’s work, and his part here despite being advertised as central could have been handled by anyone; his character is largely inconsequential to the action, and it’s even given a postscript existence some of us wouldn’t find all that admirable anyway. Despite her inability to express any range whatsoever, Adams continues to impress audiences and win accolades by showing up, appearing doe-eyed, and whispering lines while captured in close-up. It helps to have an attractive centerpiece as this is clearly her picture, but I wish make-up could’ve made her look tired when she claimed to be legitimately exhausted. (Maybe I’m nitpicking, but I’m only being honest here, peeps.)
I will say this: Arrival impresses in much the same way recent SciFi entries like District 9, Upstream Color, and Ex Machina have, the dirty little secret being these stories always say so much more about ourselves (as a race, as a culture, etc.) than they ever do about the involved aliens, consciousness, and robots. It’s for precisely those sentiments that I’ve long argued that the first Star Trek film from 1979 deserves a second look after suffering so much disdain and derision from fandom: way back then, even the Gene Roddenberry franchise knew that “the human adventure” was always going to be more earthbound than it ever was intergalactic. Arrival brings Science Fiction to our doorstep and forces us to ask ‘what are you going to do about it’ in a way that’s sometimes thoughtful, introspective, and intelligent ... but sometimes not.
Second (and others may disagree with me on this point), Arrival sacrifices all the rules it rather ‘smartly’ established when it’s revealed in the last reel that the aliens apparently understood Earth speech (i.e. English) after all! Without revealing too much, circumstances require that mankind act (and act quickly!) to save itself (a late-breaking plot development), so Banks is hauled up in a transport pod (another last act creation) only to learn that the aliens never needed symbols to communicate after all: either they’re understanding her speech (my impression) OR they’re communicating telepathically (another possibility though it’s never quite qualified but strongly implied).
Therefore, I stated in the opening of my review that I probably thought Arrival was ‘smart’ for differing reasons than most: it smartly uses all of the best techniques of the major motion picture to weave an adult alien invasion story – think of this as “Independence Day for the CBS 60 Minutes’ Crowd.” It takes a few clever ideas and presents them in ways that heighten the creative aspect … but, all-in-all, I’d stop short of calling it a ‘smart’ film because in some aspects it does so by narrative trickery. In short, Arrival is one of these films wherein it’s honestly difficult to discuss all elements of it without spoiling it for audiences, so I’m hesitant to say more than that for fear that I would take away some of its magic.
I’ve been no big fan of Jeremy Renner’s work, and his part here despite being advertised as central could have been handled by anyone; his character is largely inconsequential to the action, and it’s even given a postscript existence some of us wouldn’t find all that admirable anyway. Despite her inability to express any range whatsoever, Adams continues to impress audiences and win accolades by showing up, appearing doe-eyed, and whispering lines while captured in close-up. It helps to have an attractive centerpiece as this is clearly her picture, but I wish make-up could’ve made her look tired when she claimed to be legitimately exhausted. (Maybe I’m nitpicking, but I’m only being honest here, peeps.)
I will say this: Arrival impresses in much the same way recent SciFi entries like District 9, Upstream Color, and Ex Machina have, the dirty little secret being these stories always say so much more about ourselves (as a race, as a culture, etc.) than they ever do about the involved aliens, consciousness, and robots. It’s for precisely those sentiments that I’ve long argued that the first Star Trek film from 1979 deserves a second look after suffering so much disdain and derision from fandom: way back then, even the Gene Roddenberry franchise knew that “the human adventure” was always going to be more earthbound than it ever was intergalactic. Arrival brings Science Fiction to our doorstep and forces us to ask ‘what are you going to do about it’ in a way that’s sometimes thoughtful, introspective, and intelligent ... but sometimes not.
- Published on
Throughout the years, the Syfy Channel (formerly known – more appropriately – as the SciFi Channel) has taken a lot of flak for (oh!) so many of its broadcast choices. In fact, I could make a great, grand argument that many of its programs and direct-to-TV movie releases have very little to do with legitimate Science Fiction, but even I’d be remiss if I didn’t accept the reality that the classification of what is SciFi and what isn’t has been heavily diluted over the decades. These days, many of the network’s younger viewers take fantasy – both traditional and urban – to represent what the genre has to offer … but here’s hoping the ratings-fueled excursion into (ahem) professional wrestling never quite sticks the way Syfy’s suits perhaps figured it would.
But I digress …
The inclusion of fantasy-themed properties does allow us to consider properties like the TV classics of The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, and even Night Gallery as being something akin to the more traditional takes such as Farscape, Battlestar Galactica, and The Expanse. I suspect that’s why Syfy was pleased to add this season’s Channel Zero: Candle Cove to its line-up … and I, for one, am pretty jazzed that they did.
Seriously, are you watching this?
Candle Cove tells the story of budding psychologist Mike Painter (played by Paul Schneider) and his trip back home to the town of his youth where an unspeakable tragedy occurred decades ago: the death of children and his supposed involvement in all of it forced him to abandon his hometown, but a recent reconciliation with his estranged mother (Fiona Shaw) brings him back, only to soon realize the evil that was is also nostalgic for a reunion. Before you know it, he’s wrapped up in a new series of killings which appear to involve a creepily suggestive children’s program called (you guessed it) “Candle Cove.”
Now – as I suggested in the above – Channel Zero isn’t Science Fiction, except for the fact that it might involve parallel dimensions or some other kind of fringe elements (I won’t spoil it for you) genre fans are generally happy to include. It’s most definitely Fantasy with a healthy helping of horror thrown in for good storytelling measures. What promises to be an ongoing anthology series boasts multiple-episode story arcs, and it’s safest to describe this as a kinda/sorta Twilight Zone wherein the tales stretch out to more miniseries proportions. And Candle Cove – as the inaugural tale – is pretty exciting: it combines elements from The Twilight Zone with a modern-day spin by way of a side trip into Twin Peaks territory. As TV mindbenders go, it’s compelling.
Perhaps the greatest strength of Cove is the setting: this is meant to be small-town America … and I do mean “small town.” It’s the kind of place where houses have big yards with open expanses of grass. Gone is the suburban influence wherein families are pressed up against one another for efficiency: these folks have room to run and ample space to stretch their legs. There are forests and water towers and empty, abandoned factories; all the vestiges that healthily (or not) depict those little burgs some of us once called home. I think it’s safe to say that it’s the kind of place wherein one could commit a murder (or a series of them) and no one would know where the bodies were buried for quite some time; and Cove’s storytellers have made great use out of its unique, disappearing setting. (I say this as one who did grow up in such a time and such a place myself.)
Schneider is an odd choice for a lead, and (again) that might be why this tale works as well as it does. Most folks will recognize the actor for his stint as Mark Brendanawicz aboard NBC’s Parks and Recreation, a program where he never quite ‘seemed’ comfortable. His soft-spoken city employee just seemed too ‘average’ for the cast of borderline weirdos (maybe that was the intent), and he ended up disappearing from after only two seasons (it went on for seven). Here, Schneider’s character is wrapped in a cloak of duplicitousness, and viewers are never quite sure whether he’s told them everything he knows about the past OR the present. All the more reason to stay glued to the events.
But I digress …
The inclusion of fantasy-themed properties does allow us to consider properties like the TV classics of The Twilight Zone, The Outer Limits, and even Night Gallery as being something akin to the more traditional takes such as Farscape, Battlestar Galactica, and The Expanse. I suspect that’s why Syfy was pleased to add this season’s Channel Zero: Candle Cove to its line-up … and I, for one, am pretty jazzed that they did.
Seriously, are you watching this?
Candle Cove tells the story of budding psychologist Mike Painter (played by Paul Schneider) and his trip back home to the town of his youth where an unspeakable tragedy occurred decades ago: the death of children and his supposed involvement in all of it forced him to abandon his hometown, but a recent reconciliation with his estranged mother (Fiona Shaw) brings him back, only to soon realize the evil that was is also nostalgic for a reunion. Before you know it, he’s wrapped up in a new series of killings which appear to involve a creepily suggestive children’s program called (you guessed it) “Candle Cove.”
Now – as I suggested in the above – Channel Zero isn’t Science Fiction, except for the fact that it might involve parallel dimensions or some other kind of fringe elements (I won’t spoil it for you) genre fans are generally happy to include. It’s most definitely Fantasy with a healthy helping of horror thrown in for good storytelling measures. What promises to be an ongoing anthology series boasts multiple-episode story arcs, and it’s safest to describe this as a kinda/sorta Twilight Zone wherein the tales stretch out to more miniseries proportions. And Candle Cove – as the inaugural tale – is pretty exciting: it combines elements from The Twilight Zone with a modern-day spin by way of a side trip into Twin Peaks territory. As TV mindbenders go, it’s compelling.
Perhaps the greatest strength of Cove is the setting: this is meant to be small-town America … and I do mean “small town.” It’s the kind of place where houses have big yards with open expanses of grass. Gone is the suburban influence wherein families are pressed up against one another for efficiency: these folks have room to run and ample space to stretch their legs. There are forests and water towers and empty, abandoned factories; all the vestiges that healthily (or not) depict those little burgs some of us once called home. I think it’s safe to say that it’s the kind of place wherein one could commit a murder (or a series of them) and no one would know where the bodies were buried for quite some time; and Cove’s storytellers have made great use out of its unique, disappearing setting. (I say this as one who did grow up in such a time and such a place myself.)
Schneider is an odd choice for a lead, and (again) that might be why this tale works as well as it does. Most folks will recognize the actor for his stint as Mark Brendanawicz aboard NBC’s Parks and Recreation, a program where he never quite ‘seemed’ comfortable. His soft-spoken city employee just seemed too ‘average’ for the cast of borderline weirdos (maybe that was the intent), and he ended up disappearing from after only two seasons (it went on for seven). Here, Schneider’s character is wrapped in a cloak of duplicitousness, and viewers are never quite sure whether he’s told them everything he knows about the past OR the present. All the more reason to stay glued to the events.
As for the villain?
Well, children who grew up in the 1970’s (guilty, as charged) might recognize the influence of the programs of Sid and Marty Krofft. As shows go, these were odd ducks, ones relying on characters in sometimes bizarre costumes or ‘puppety’ creations not unlike those found on Sesame Street. Having stumbled across a few sequences recently (thanks to YouTube and the greater World Wide Web these things continue to have a second life), I can say that it’s surprising to me as an adult what somehow captivated my young mind, so Channel Zero’s pirate clan built around the fictional ‘Candle Cove’ fits in perfectly as a throwback to a culture when big things were achieved on a simple budget. Maybe it’s best to think of this as The Muppets if they were done by Charles Manson instead of Jim Henson, and I think you’ll get the picture.
And the biggest twist?
This couldn’t be done the way technology is today, but the pirate-themed Candle Cove appears on what would’ve been a UHF channel: Weird Al Yankovic cleverly and warmly satirized them in UHF (1989), a series of kinda/sorta unofficial channels on the ol’ TV dial. (The closest thing today would possibly to community access networks, the kinds of places that allow local programming performed on the cheap.) In the program’s biggest twist of irony, Candle Cove – a show about pirates – was purported to be a legitimate pirate broadcast: no one knows where it originated, so no one knows where it went much less what it was all about.
Well, apparently Candle Cove is encouraging the town’s youngest to commit murder, a kind of technology-themed “Children of the Damned.”
Creepy.
Major Creepy.
If you’re not watching it, then you’re truly missing out something wonderful. Its final hour of a six-episode run is slated for November 15th on Syfy, so I encourage those of you who might be interested in checking out the first five on the web before its big finish. It’s definitely been a wild ride.
Well, children who grew up in the 1970’s (guilty, as charged) might recognize the influence of the programs of Sid and Marty Krofft. As shows go, these were odd ducks, ones relying on characters in sometimes bizarre costumes or ‘puppety’ creations not unlike those found on Sesame Street. Having stumbled across a few sequences recently (thanks to YouTube and the greater World Wide Web these things continue to have a second life), I can say that it’s surprising to me as an adult what somehow captivated my young mind, so Channel Zero’s pirate clan built around the fictional ‘Candle Cove’ fits in perfectly as a throwback to a culture when big things were achieved on a simple budget. Maybe it’s best to think of this as The Muppets if they were done by Charles Manson instead of Jim Henson, and I think you’ll get the picture.
And the biggest twist?
This couldn’t be done the way technology is today, but the pirate-themed Candle Cove appears on what would’ve been a UHF channel: Weird Al Yankovic cleverly and warmly satirized them in UHF (1989), a series of kinda/sorta unofficial channels on the ol’ TV dial. (The closest thing today would possibly to community access networks, the kinds of places that allow local programming performed on the cheap.) In the program’s biggest twist of irony, Candle Cove – a show about pirates – was purported to be a legitimate pirate broadcast: no one knows where it originated, so no one knows where it went much less what it was all about.
Well, apparently Candle Cove is encouraging the town’s youngest to commit murder, a kind of technology-themed “Children of the Damned.”
Creepy.
Major Creepy.
If you’re not watching it, then you’re truly missing out something wonderful. Its final hour of a six-episode run is slated for November 15th on Syfy, so I encourage those of you who might be interested in checking out the first five on the web before its big finish. It’s definitely been a wild ride.
- Published on
Here's the thing: I'm a fanboy (true), but I'm not always a 'traditionalist' as fanboys go.
For example, I know that there's a huge following of writer/director Luc Besson's work ... but color me unimpressed. In fact, outside of his exceptional The Professional (1994 and most definitely not Science Fiction) I really haven't been all that enamored with his storytelling abilities. I thought The Fifth Element (1997) was the kind of flick conceived by a high schooler ... so imagine by surprise (not) when Besson himself admitted he wrote the screenplay when he was in high school. Granted, some of his screenplays have been entertaining (both the film franchises for Taken and The Transporters remain his creations), but the characters have no real depth and the worlds created certainly have significant limitations.
Still, fandom erupted in cheers when Besson announced that he'd be bringing Valerian And The City Of A Thousand Worlds to the silver screen, and good for them: we can all appreciate another adaptation of a sterling property, right?
Well, not long after the announcement, I ordered myself a copy of the graphic novel via Amazon. I took the time and the interest, and I read the piece. While I found it good (it definitely had a great classic Flash Gordon feel to it at times), I wasn't all that jazzed. It seemed kinda/sorta juvenile -- flashy ideas but not a lot of substance -- and I questioned how so much of it could, would, and should be brought to the multiplexes.
In any event, the trailer is here today, and I'm posting it below. Like so much of what accounts for big screen SciFi these days, it looks like yet another video game fueled frenzy. I'll hold out hope that it isn't all pop and sizzle, and feel free to sound off if you're inclined.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
For example, I know that there's a huge following of writer/director Luc Besson's work ... but color me unimpressed. In fact, outside of his exceptional The Professional (1994 and most definitely not Science Fiction) I really haven't been all that enamored with his storytelling abilities. I thought The Fifth Element (1997) was the kind of flick conceived by a high schooler ... so imagine by surprise (not) when Besson himself admitted he wrote the screenplay when he was in high school. Granted, some of his screenplays have been entertaining (both the film franchises for Taken and The Transporters remain his creations), but the characters have no real depth and the worlds created certainly have significant limitations.
Still, fandom erupted in cheers when Besson announced that he'd be bringing Valerian And The City Of A Thousand Worlds to the silver screen, and good for them: we can all appreciate another adaptation of a sterling property, right?
Well, not long after the announcement, I ordered myself a copy of the graphic novel via Amazon. I took the time and the interest, and I read the piece. While I found it good (it definitely had a great classic Flash Gordon feel to it at times), I wasn't all that jazzed. It seemed kinda/sorta juvenile -- flashy ideas but not a lot of substance -- and I questioned how so much of it could, would, and should be brought to the multiplexes.
In any event, the trailer is here today, and I'm posting it below. Like so much of what accounts for big screen SciFi these days, it looks like yet another video game fueled frenzy. I'll hold out hope that it isn't all pop and sizzle, and feel free to sound off if you're inclined.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
- Published on
For those of you either living in denial or raised on an island, those insufferable holiday are right around the corner; and that means it's time to start thinking about what to get that special SciFi someone in your life. Me? I'm always on the lookout for great gifting suggestions, which is why I thought this year I'd 'put up or shut up' and start providing a helpful Public Service Announcement by way of informing you -- my faithful readers -- about what's out there for fans of our beloved genre. Who knows? Maybe it'll provide some mild inspiration for those looking for something other than socks, underwear, and rum cake.
Today, I'm shucking the Aliens minimate line, and you can check out the Aliens Minimate Deluxe APC Set available from the stellar Things From Another Planet website right here or from Amazon right here. After all, who among us doesn't love Aliens (1986), the James Cameron film that amped up the Alien franchise on steroids? Ripley came back. Brought Hicks with her. Found Newt. It's the ultimate SciFi nuclear family right there (pun intended, given the fact that they nuked the planet at the end), and I suspect that there are plenty of geeks, nerds, and general SciFi enthusiasts on your shopping list who'd love to have this little gimme added to their toy collection.
There you are. You've been warned.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
Today, I'm shucking the Aliens minimate line, and you can check out the Aliens Minimate Deluxe APC Set available from the stellar Things From Another Planet website right here or from Amazon right here. After all, who among us doesn't love Aliens (1986), the James Cameron film that amped up the Alien franchise on steroids? Ripley came back. Brought Hicks with her. Found Newt. It's the ultimate SciFi nuclear family right there (pun intended, given the fact that they nuked the planet at the end), and I suspect that there are plenty of geeks, nerds, and general SciFi enthusiasts on your shopping list who'd love to have this little gimme added to their toy collection.
There you are. You've been warned.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
- Published on
Believe it or not, I do more than a fair share of reading about Science Fiction films. This isn’t meant to say that I’m bookish on the subject; rather it clarifies that I’m always checking out flicks and SciFi-related series in my efforts to continue to grow SciFiHistory.Net’s own data citations. When a title catches my interest, I’ll bookmark it so that I can return to it when I have more time. And when a title keeps popping up in my reading, I’ll scour the cable listings to see if it’s subject to some near-future airing so that I can see personally just what all the fuss is about.
I can’t begin to tell you the number of times The Satan Bug (1965) has appeared on my radar. Honestly, it seems like every week for the last year I stumbled across it in scouring IMDB.com’s biographies. A Blu-ray version even “streeted” of it a year back in 2015 (I think that may be the first time the United Artist release caught my interest), so you can imagine my delight when it finally dropped onto Turner Classic Movies’ schedule. I finally watched it the other night, and I wanted to sound off on it briefly.
Basically, Bug is a biological warfare thriller kinda/sorta in the same vein of The Andromeda Strain, which would be released by Universal Pictures six years later. The difference between the two of these closely-related films is that Andromeda’s man-killer comes from space while Satan’s “bug” (as it were) is entirely man-made. Here’s the (edited) plot summary as provided by Amazon.com:
“The Message is clear: put an end to war research... or prepare for the end of the Earth. Officials have no doubt about the madman s ability to carry out his threat; they know he has access to The Satan Bug. George Maharis, Dana Andrews and Anne Frances face the terror of a death germ in this race-against-time thriller directed by the great John Sturges. The Suspense begins at a top-secret U.S. germ warfare laboratory when containers of lethal microbe are stolen and soon after the group behind the theft proves its deadly resolve by using the weapon to completely annihilate the residents of a small town Florida community. The next target: Los Angeles... unless government agent Maharis and an elite task force can somehow prevent the City of Angels from becoming Hell on Earth.”
I can’t begin to tell you the number of times The Satan Bug (1965) has appeared on my radar. Honestly, it seems like every week for the last year I stumbled across it in scouring IMDB.com’s biographies. A Blu-ray version even “streeted” of it a year back in 2015 (I think that may be the first time the United Artist release caught my interest), so you can imagine my delight when it finally dropped onto Turner Classic Movies’ schedule. I finally watched it the other night, and I wanted to sound off on it briefly.
Basically, Bug is a biological warfare thriller kinda/sorta in the same vein of The Andromeda Strain, which would be released by Universal Pictures six years later. The difference between the two of these closely-related films is that Andromeda’s man-killer comes from space while Satan’s “bug” (as it were) is entirely man-made. Here’s the (edited) plot summary as provided by Amazon.com:
“The Message is clear: put an end to war research... or prepare for the end of the Earth. Officials have no doubt about the madman s ability to carry out his threat; they know he has access to The Satan Bug. George Maharis, Dana Andrews and Anne Frances face the terror of a death germ in this race-against-time thriller directed by the great John Sturges. The Suspense begins at a top-secret U.S. germ warfare laboratory when containers of lethal microbe are stolen and soon after the group behind the theft proves its deadly resolve by using the weapon to completely annihilate the residents of a small town Florida community. The next target: Los Angeles... unless government agent Maharis and an elite task force can somehow prevent the City of Angels from becoming Hell on Earth.”
Honestly, The Satan Bug isn’t a bad film.
The capable Maharis is introduced late in the film’s set-up, and the script fashions him rather easily into what I suspect was intended to be a ‘thinking man’s James Bond.’ However, rather than show us just how good he is, the audience is informed of his exploits, and this necessarily removes some of the visual excitement that accompanies the standard Bond picture. Otherwise, everyone else in the film is rather flat and non-descript; even the normally plucky Anne Frances delivers her dialogue with somewhat surprising seriousness, even when flirting with Maharis. No one injects his or her character with much … well … character.
Perhaps Bug’s greatest sequence is when the cast is being treated to the videotaped aftermath of the first terrorist attack, that on the unsuspecting Floridians. A plane flies over a state highway lightly filled with stopped automobiles and dead people lying about the road; the virus killed them not quite instantly (as evidenced by the fact that they could get out of their vehicles), but the graveyard is captured in almost documentary fashion, leaving the cinema audience of its day to feel a sense of rising dread over what science has wrought. No words are required, and the sequence plays out long enough to make its point: this is serious stuff, and mankind ought to be alarmed.
Also, Bug fashions a pretty spiffy underground laboratory where scientists work to understand the science of biological warfare. Granted, it isn’t as high-tech looking as what eventually makes the aforementioned Andromeda Strain so memorable, but the production staffers should be commended for a job well done.
Lastly, Bug certainly deals with an interesting subject matter – the probable end of life as we know it by our own construction – and so far as stories go this one has an obvious beginning, middle, and end with plenty of modest “developments” sprinkled along the way. I think my issues with the film is that despite the premise of a world-destroying-virus-on-the-brink-of-being-released there’s just so little suspense delivered in the leaden performances of all involved (far too much seriousness and everyone seems like a cinema character instead of folks wrapped up in jeopardy). It’s good, but it’s no “owner” as today’s consumers might attest.
Think of this Bug as likely good for a single viewing but with practically zero re-watch quality.
The capable Maharis is introduced late in the film’s set-up, and the script fashions him rather easily into what I suspect was intended to be a ‘thinking man’s James Bond.’ However, rather than show us just how good he is, the audience is informed of his exploits, and this necessarily removes some of the visual excitement that accompanies the standard Bond picture. Otherwise, everyone else in the film is rather flat and non-descript; even the normally plucky Anne Frances delivers her dialogue with somewhat surprising seriousness, even when flirting with Maharis. No one injects his or her character with much … well … character.
Perhaps Bug’s greatest sequence is when the cast is being treated to the videotaped aftermath of the first terrorist attack, that on the unsuspecting Floridians. A plane flies over a state highway lightly filled with stopped automobiles and dead people lying about the road; the virus killed them not quite instantly (as evidenced by the fact that they could get out of their vehicles), but the graveyard is captured in almost documentary fashion, leaving the cinema audience of its day to feel a sense of rising dread over what science has wrought. No words are required, and the sequence plays out long enough to make its point: this is serious stuff, and mankind ought to be alarmed.
Also, Bug fashions a pretty spiffy underground laboratory where scientists work to understand the science of biological warfare. Granted, it isn’t as high-tech looking as what eventually makes the aforementioned Andromeda Strain so memorable, but the production staffers should be commended for a job well done.
Lastly, Bug certainly deals with an interesting subject matter – the probable end of life as we know it by our own construction – and so far as stories go this one has an obvious beginning, middle, and end with plenty of modest “developments” sprinkled along the way. I think my issues with the film is that despite the premise of a world-destroying-virus-on-the-brink-of-being-released there’s just so little suspense delivered in the leaden performances of all involved (far too much seriousness and everyone seems like a cinema character instead of folks wrapped up in jeopardy). It’s good, but it’s no “owner” as today’s consumers might attest.
Think of this Bug as likely good for a single viewing but with practically zero re-watch quality.
- Published on
In all honesty, Star Trek Beyond was a film I had very little faith in, much of it owed to the trailers released to promote it, which I thought were just awful. I have nothing personally against The Beastie Boys or making a non-car-chase-film look like a car-chase-film, but at some point one has to wonder just whom the studio suits are trying to entice ... and those ads tell me it wasn't a die-hard fanbase promised a legitimate Star Trek film for its fiftieth anniversary.
So despite Paramount's best efforts to convince the "Fast and Furious" fanatics that Star Trek was their next best friend, Star Trek Beyond pleased older fans (such as myself) while still playing nice with those who've really only cut their teeth on the JJVerse and this new timeline. Mind you, I still had some quibbles with the storyline and plotting of the feature, but overall the cast and crew finally delivered a film that fit thematically closer to the spirit of the original television program much of the time instead of turning canon on its head.
In any event, the feature 'streets' today on home video, so be sure to pick up your copy as I imagine it'll be available in any of the major retailers as well as online.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
So despite Paramount's best efforts to convince the "Fast and Furious" fanatics that Star Trek was their next best friend, Star Trek Beyond pleased older fans (such as myself) while still playing nice with those who've really only cut their teeth on the JJVerse and this new timeline. Mind you, I still had some quibbles with the storyline and plotting of the feature, but overall the cast and crew finally delivered a film that fit thematically closer to the spirit of the original television program much of the time instead of turning canon on its head.
In any event, the feature 'streets' today on home video, so be sure to pick up your copy as I imagine it'll be available in any of the major retailers as well as online.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
- Published on
In between my box set viewing of the 1959-1960 American science fiction adventure series Men Into Space (I watched the first 10 episodes over a five-day period) I decided to take a break after episode 15 and look at what else I could watch on YouTube that was similarly space-related. From Shepperton Studios in England I noticed this little slice of futurist fancy.
"This film invites you to step into the future, a half century from today…”
The titles begin with a scrolling text similar to that made famous by Star Wars. I'm sure this had been used before, but my first thought was Star Wars.
Actually this science fiction film -- Spaceflight IC-1: An Adventure in Space -- invites you to step into the year 2015 (I'm sure that it sounded really futuristic back then), but as we know, it really hasn't turned out to be that futuristic. I mean where are the reusable rocket ships, the daily commute-to-work jet-packs and the flying cars?
The film begins with a uniformed American military type explaining the premise of Spaceflight IC-1 and introducing us to the main characters. We have a cross section of people on board the Interstellar Colony (IC) ship – doctors, teachers, engineers and a spacefarer (Doctor Garth) of the future whose body has been replace by components duplicating the functions of his original organs. As played by John Lee, Garth is referred to as a “closed-cycle man” and can compute faster than the humans, monitor the ships systems and -- since he has no bodily needs, such as food or water -- can be on duty 24 hours a day. Basically all you see of him is his head inside a glass dome on top of a large box. (I'm sure it seemed a good idea at the time, but it seems a tiny bit silly now.) We did, of course, see the similar idea of machines looking after a crew with the robot in TV's Lost in Space; HAL9000 in 2001: A Space Odyssey; the computer in the John Carpenter classic Dark Star; and the android Data in Star Trek: The Next Generation. Still, none of them ever appeared as a disembodied head in a fish bowl.
The colony ship is comprised of husbands, wives and children heading on their way to a new earth. All have been chosen for the age, health and intelligence. The mission is funded by the United States, United Kingdom and Canada. The mission is under the command of a governing body called RULE, which seems to be some sort of a New World Order.
The ship’s captain, Mead Ralston (played by Bill Williams a pretty well known Hollywood film and television actor back then), is a bit of a disciplinarian who feels slightly guilty over the fact that he and his wife have yet to have children, even though that’s the main purpose of the ship. He also obeys the rules set for the mission no matter the cost. He has been given absolute authority and expects absolute discipline.
When one member of the crew discovers she is seriously ill and asks the captain about having a child before she dies, he basically informs her that all children must be approved by the governing council and that no evidence of genetic impurity must be present. So eugenics is alive and well and flourishing in the year 2015.
The children we see onboard seem to have extremely advanced psychic ability, although not a great deal is made of this. They easily “read” playing cards hidden from them by the teacher. One even feels pain when their father is attacked.
"This film invites you to step into the future, a half century from today…”
The titles begin with a scrolling text similar to that made famous by Star Wars. I'm sure this had been used before, but my first thought was Star Wars.
Actually this science fiction film -- Spaceflight IC-1: An Adventure in Space -- invites you to step into the year 2015 (I'm sure that it sounded really futuristic back then), but as we know, it really hasn't turned out to be that futuristic. I mean where are the reusable rocket ships, the daily commute-to-work jet-packs and the flying cars?
The film begins with a uniformed American military type explaining the premise of Spaceflight IC-1 and introducing us to the main characters. We have a cross section of people on board the Interstellar Colony (IC) ship – doctors, teachers, engineers and a spacefarer (Doctor Garth) of the future whose body has been replace by components duplicating the functions of his original organs. As played by John Lee, Garth is referred to as a “closed-cycle man” and can compute faster than the humans, monitor the ships systems and -- since he has no bodily needs, such as food or water -- can be on duty 24 hours a day. Basically all you see of him is his head inside a glass dome on top of a large box. (I'm sure it seemed a good idea at the time, but it seems a tiny bit silly now.) We did, of course, see the similar idea of machines looking after a crew with the robot in TV's Lost in Space; HAL9000 in 2001: A Space Odyssey; the computer in the John Carpenter classic Dark Star; and the android Data in Star Trek: The Next Generation. Still, none of them ever appeared as a disembodied head in a fish bowl.
The colony ship is comprised of husbands, wives and children heading on their way to a new earth. All have been chosen for the age, health and intelligence. The mission is funded by the United States, United Kingdom and Canada. The mission is under the command of a governing body called RULE, which seems to be some sort of a New World Order.
The ship’s captain, Mead Ralston (played by Bill Williams a pretty well known Hollywood film and television actor back then), is a bit of a disciplinarian who feels slightly guilty over the fact that he and his wife have yet to have children, even though that’s the main purpose of the ship. He also obeys the rules set for the mission no matter the cost. He has been given absolute authority and expects absolute discipline.
When one member of the crew discovers she is seriously ill and asks the captain about having a child before she dies, he basically informs her that all children must be approved by the governing council and that no evidence of genetic impurity must be present. So eugenics is alive and well and flourishing in the year 2015.
The children we see onboard seem to have extremely advanced psychic ability, although not a great deal is made of this. They easily “read” playing cards hidden from them by the teacher. One even feels pain when their father is attacked.
The film is very character-driven, which kind of makes up for the less-than-special “special effects”. The space ship IC-1 is similar to something you may see in a Flash Gordon or Buck Rogers serial. The cabins or rooms are probably bigger than some people's living rooms, and the artificial gravity (a mainstay of low budget 1950s and 1960s SciFi) keeps all the bits and pieces that fill the rooms nice and neat. There are tensions: a bit of rebellion and a tiny bit of mutiny instigated by the ship's chief medical officer Dr. Steven Thomas (played by Scottish actor John Cairney who is best known to many for his one-man shows on Robert Burns, Robert Louis Stevenson and Charles Rene Mackintosh).
Onboard, as well as the fully functioning humans and the much less functional Dr. Garth, are four crew members in suspended animation, a bit like those characters in the thought-provoking 2001: A Space Odyssey. However these “caskets” seem a bit more wooden box with windows rather than the hi-tech hibernation chambers of the space ship Discovery in the 1968 Stanley Kubrick classic.
I did actually see bits of the set that I thought were very Star Treky (made up word), thinking they must have taken ideas from episodes that they had seen; it was only when I checked the date of release I noticed it was from 1965, one year after the un-aired Star Trek pilot ‘The Cage’ had been made and one year before the series aired on US television. So who took what ideas from whom? I think if you watched early episodes of Star Trek in black and white, you would feel comfortable with this film.
Is it brilliant? No.
Is it entertaining? Yes.
It’s also just slightly over an hour long making it a good way to pass some time.
So get your mug of tea and some chocolate digestive biscuits (other brands are available) and give it a go and see what you think. And if you think “I’ll never get those 65 minutes of my life back”, well you would have just squandered them away doing something else.
Onboard, as well as the fully functioning humans and the much less functional Dr. Garth, are four crew members in suspended animation, a bit like those characters in the thought-provoking 2001: A Space Odyssey. However these “caskets” seem a bit more wooden box with windows rather than the hi-tech hibernation chambers of the space ship Discovery in the 1968 Stanley Kubrick classic.
I did actually see bits of the set that I thought were very Star Treky (made up word), thinking they must have taken ideas from episodes that they had seen; it was only when I checked the date of release I noticed it was from 1965, one year after the un-aired Star Trek pilot ‘The Cage’ had been made and one year before the series aired on US television. So who took what ideas from whom? I think if you watched early episodes of Star Trek in black and white, you would feel comfortable with this film.
Is it brilliant? No.
Is it entertaining? Yes.
It’s also just slightly over an hour long making it a good way to pass some time.
So get your mug of tea and some chocolate digestive biscuits (other brands are available) and give it a go and see what you think. And if you think “I’ll never get those 65 minutes of my life back”, well you would have just squandered them away doing something else.
- Published on
Happy Monday, dear readers, and -- much more importantly -- Happy Halloween!
Seriously, am I the only one who thinks it's a downright dirty shame that this holiday only comes once a year? I love it when people play dress-up: the young, the old, the in-between. Personally, I think it's the kind of thing that we could easily swing at least twice a year if not making it a quarterly event. Yes, I realize that it might do horrible things to our blood sugar, and of course Hallmark and other companies (not to mention the candy manufacturers) would make a mint off such a predicament ... but wouldn't it give us a better world?
I spent several hours over the past week decorating the yard, so I'm ready for the kids to come a'knocking this evening. I hope you and yours are prepared as well.
Wherever you are, have yourselves a wonderful day! (And try not to eat too much.)
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
Seriously, am I the only one who thinks it's a downright dirty shame that this holiday only comes once a year? I love it when people play dress-up: the young, the old, the in-between. Personally, I think it's the kind of thing that we could easily swing at least twice a year if not making it a quarterly event. Yes, I realize that it might do horrible things to our blood sugar, and of course Hallmark and other companies (not to mention the candy manufacturers) would make a mint off such a predicament ... but wouldn't it give us a better world?
I spent several hours over the past week decorating the yard, so I'm ready for the kids to come a'knocking this evening. I hope you and yours are prepared as well.
Wherever you are, have yourselves a wonderful day! (And try not to eat too much.)
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
- Published on
This morning, I noticed that Bluray.com is running the public service announcement heralding the future release of Syfy's hit drama 12 Monkeys is slated for home video release on January 17, 2017 (just in time for the new year!). (NOTE: The DVD slipcase art featured above is for a different region, and that's because there was no accompanying artwork for the US release that I could find online.)
I don't know if you've been following the show, but I thought the second season was a marked improvement over the first, which wasn't all that bad when it found good pacing. The second expanded on the mythology and brought in a few more smilers to the fold, so much so that I'm not sure how they're going to resolve all of the various plotlines amicably in the near future.
You can follow the link right here to check out Bluray.com's citation.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
I don't know if you've been following the show, but I thought the second season was a marked improvement over the first, which wasn't all that bad when it found good pacing. The second expanded on the mythology and brought in a few more smilers to the fold, so much so that I'm not sure how they're going to resolve all of the various plotlines amicably in the near future.
You can follow the link right here to check out Bluray.com's citation.
As always, thanks for reading ... and live long and prosper!
- Published on
In the year 2000, the Earth spaceship “Hope One” sets off to explore strange new worlds for the purposes of colonization ... well, that's according to the 81 minute Canadian produced little pot boiler Space Probe Taurus released in 1965.
The start of the film is actually very enjoyable: it has a nice bit of what appears to be a Mercury Atlas launch, followed by star field imagery which is very 'Star Treky' (new word), and some narration that really could easily have been read by Captain Kirk.
The next part of the film sees the only survivor of Faith One requesting a “destruct” command from some very stoic U.S. military types back on Earth; and then the story moves on again with some rather nice NASA stock footage of rocket launches and orbital images.
There is a great plot setting piece from a General being interviewed by a typical 1960s television reporter, about the specifications of the next exploratory mission and its ship (Hope One) including the “artificial gravity” system (more money saved on special effects). There's a bit of friction between the commander and the only female crewmember in the four “person” crew, making it obvious from his "women don’t belong on a job like this” speech that he’s not keen on her being there.
As you may have guessed, things do not go well. Let’s face it; if they did it would be a pretty boring little movie. As it is, an alien encounter and then a swarm of meteorites propel the ship dramatically off course into a sea on an previously uncharted world where they encounter sea monsters.
I have to say the control room of the “Hope One” is very nice, with lots of dials, switches and lights that look like they would be fun to play with. The ship does have a bit of a closed-in feeling, but not in the same way as the “old” Apollo moon shots did. It did remind me of the now-defunct space shuttle interiors. It’s not a bad little film; it does have a good story line and the usual square jawed types. If you want to see it have a look on YouTube, it’s there.
So, put on your fish bowel helmet and head to … infinity and beyond.
The start of the film is actually very enjoyable: it has a nice bit of what appears to be a Mercury Atlas launch, followed by star field imagery which is very 'Star Treky' (new word), and some narration that really could easily have been read by Captain Kirk.
The next part of the film sees the only survivor of Faith One requesting a “destruct” command from some very stoic U.S. military types back on Earth; and then the story moves on again with some rather nice NASA stock footage of rocket launches and orbital images.
There is a great plot setting piece from a General being interviewed by a typical 1960s television reporter, about the specifications of the next exploratory mission and its ship (Hope One) including the “artificial gravity” system (more money saved on special effects). There's a bit of friction between the commander and the only female crewmember in the four “person” crew, making it obvious from his "women don’t belong on a job like this” speech that he’s not keen on her being there.
As you may have guessed, things do not go well. Let’s face it; if they did it would be a pretty boring little movie. As it is, an alien encounter and then a swarm of meteorites propel the ship dramatically off course into a sea on an previously uncharted world where they encounter sea monsters.
I have to say the control room of the “Hope One” is very nice, with lots of dials, switches and lights that look like they would be fun to play with. The ship does have a bit of a closed-in feeling, but not in the same way as the “old” Apollo moon shots did. It did remind me of the now-defunct space shuttle interiors. It’s not a bad little film; it does have a good story line and the usual square jawed types. If you want to see it have a look on YouTube, it’s there.
So, put on your fish bowel helmet and head to … infinity and beyond.