Examining A Movie: The War of the Worlds (1953)

Hey there Chaos followers and assorted mutants. Old Man Chaos has been working on lots of Warhammer stuff- I'm trying to finish up my Harlequin vehicles while also working on some new stuff for my Khorne Daemonkin force (loving that book at the moment). However, I'm not done with anything to show yet, and as you know I don't want this blog to just be about 40K... So, I've decided to do a little movie review. With that, let us now turn to...

First, a little personal background: I loved this movie as a child. My parents were both into Sci-fi to one extent or another, and between the two of them I was introduced to tons of Sci-fi stuff, including Star Trek, The Black Hole, Star Wars, Alien, and a whole lot more. So, of course my parents ended up watching this, and I was just sucked in. Since they owned it on the old Videodisc format, I know I saw it many times as a young kid. It would also be a movie I would revisit quite often; I watched it over the weekend on Netflix, as a matter of fact!

The movie is very, very loosely based on the famous book of the same name by H.G. Wells. I have read it twice- the book is about a British man trying to survive a Martian invasion of England. The character (who is the narrator and hence never gives his name) tries to find his wife, while seeing the horrors of an alien invasion. The Martians, in their tripod walkers, lay waste to the British army with both "heat rays" and poison gas ("black smoke"). The book is written in older English, and it really helps if you know the geography around London. The book was quite revolutionary for its time, and also serves as a critique of British Imperialism. The Martians, so technologically and mentally advanced are able to sweep the British away so easily (just as the British seemed to do to other Asian/African peoples). Allegory? Perhaps, though the book has more than just that going on. The book has become a classic, inspiring Sci-fi creators for over a century.

The 1953 film is, as I said, a rather loose interpretation of the book, though they are accurate when it comes to the broadest strokes (and gist). This time, the story takes place in America, where Dr. Clayton Forester takes the lead in examining a crashed meteor in California. Of course, its not a meteor, but a cylinder that contains three Martian war machines. The American military goes against these Martians, and they are totally destroyed. Now, Forester and Sylvia must try to survive while also, hopefully, finding a way to defeat the alien invaders, who are seemingly unstoppable.

First and foremost, the special effects make the movie so memorable and striking. Now, I admit they are dated, but actually hold up better than you might actually think. The Martian war machines hover and tick menacingly, gently gliding along, incinerating anything in their path. The heat ray is quite simple in look, but effective due to the sound effect that goes with it. The martians themselves, which you never get a close look at, or appropriately weird. Their eyes are obviously a poor effect, but their flesh moves and pulses, which actually looks creepy and real. You also get to see all kinds of US military hardware on display, including a flying wing and an atomic bomb.

The big battle scene, which takes place in the middle of the movie, is still rather exciting, even now. Tanks, planes, and all kinds of ordinance are fired at the Martians, blowing up spectacularly, but also without result. Martian shields prevent any damage, while their death rays just vaporize the army. It is thrilling to watch, even now. We throw everything at them, and they just move forward at an even rate, not stopped by our "powerful" weapons. Later in the film, even nukes cannot harm them.

The other big scene of destruction comes at the end of the movie, with the war machines descending upon Los Angeles. There is no army. No resistance. The Martians are just destroying everything in their path without mercy. It is not as thrilling as the earlier battle, but you get the feeling of hopelessness. It seems no power on earth con stop them.

The movie, surprisingly for 1953, isn't afraid to get its hands dirty. As the people flee LA, there is chaos and anarchy. Mobs of wild people (some criminals, others just left behind) attack any trucks or cars. One of the trucks has important scientific equipment on board; Forester begs the mob to stop, but they won't listen. From that point on, Forester is a desperate, slightly crazed man, without any hope. Not bad for 1953.

The movie is not an allegory, though the Cold War comes up obliquely here. The Martians are cold and unsympathetic, their home world a frozen wasteland. They are advanced in technology, but not in morality. Americans viewed the Soviets in such terms (even before Sputnik was launched). Their "godlessness" is also emphasized. One of the first people the martians kill is a minister; later, references are made to God, creation, etc. Finally, as the Martians burn LA, the only place of safety is the church- take that you godless commies, er, Martians.

What this movie really is, though, is a kind of prototype of future Hollywood sci-fi / destruction films. Whether its Independence Day (which is, in many ways, a direct rip off) or any other large scale disaster film, it is War of the Worlds that sets the tone. The film's main character is a famous scientist advising the military. The smaller characters are either killed or forgotten with total abandon. The scenes of destruction are top notch. The film also has a montage, showing other nations fighting (and losing to) the Martians. This film set the tone and troupes that many movies would use. Frankly, it does it better than half of them do today, that's for sure.

The acting is good enough, as it is the action and effects that will make the movie, not the actors. That said, Gene Barry does a good job of making a "thinking man's hero" out of Dr. Forester. He is a genius, but he realizes early on that even his gifted intellect is of no match for the Martians. As his hope evaporates, he breaks down, becoming near hysterical at the end. His "girlfriend" (they aren't dating but they fall for each other during the Martian assault) Sylvia, played by Ann Robinson, has little to do but scream and run, though she suffers the personal loss of her minister uncle. Finally, Les Tremayne plays General Mann, an Eisenhower-esque soldier who relies on Forester's knowledge and America's brute strength, and he too does a good job of showing frustration and defeat, though he never "loses" it as Forester does. Tremayne has a the air of command, making Mann a tough, but reliable soldier.

The film starts slow, but once it gets going it simply doesn't stop. The action, special effects, music, and solid lead acting make War of the Worlds a first rate classic. It may not be as thought provoking as say Day the Earth Stood Still or Invasion of the Body Snatchers, it is still a great movie, and it set up incredible precedents, which are still with Hollywood today. If you are a Sci-fi fan, check this film out. I know you won't regret it.

** For the record, Steven Spielberg made a version of War of the Worlds in 2005. That movie is also very good (for different reasons). It is a "bit" more faithful to the book, and the alien war machines are very cool looking. The film is also a strong Allegory to the War on Terror- is that blood or oil? However, I prefer the 1953 version (I can only take so much Tom Cruise running and little girl screaming, which the movie does in spades). Perhaps I should review this one in the future...

Until next time...

  

Examining a Movie: The Black Hole

Hey there, foul inhabitants of the warp! Old Man Chaos here, very excited by the new Bloodthirster coming out this week- can't wait to get my mitts on him! But first I have to finish the 8 Billion projects I already have going... I have been going through a case of painters OCD, but I should be able to finish a few models fairly soon... At any rate, I said a few weeks ago that I wanted to write posts about things other than my main hobby, so here it is...

Examining a Movie: The Black Hole

The film The Black Hole was released by Disney in 1979. It was Disney's answer to Star Wars' big success (and Trek was having a big screen come back as well that year). However, when the film opened it bombed badly, and was an embarrassment to Disney. It fell into a strange obscurity thereafter- known by die-hard sci-fi fans, but ignored and unknown by everyone else. Even many of those sci-fi fans dislike the movie.

However, I feel this film needs to be re-evaluated on a number of levels. I think its bad reputation is not only NOT deserved, but unfair. This is not just nostalgia, though I did see the movie as a kid. I watched the movie recently with my wife, who had never seen it before. At the end, she said she liked it a great deal. She admitted it had flaws, but was an interesting movie. Now, my wife will tell me if she thinks a movie I get her to watch blows (she has reminded me about how much she hated Watchmen oh so often). She liked this movie, with no rose colored lenses of nostalgia.

I would like to discuss the movie in some categories. Forgive me if I jump around a bit...

Plot: I don't want to give spoliers at this point, so here is the set-up: The movie is set in the future- when is somewhat unclear. We have space travel, though it is risky, dangerous, and, frankly, arduous. We also have robots- they have "personality", but are they "living things" (one of the film's many ambiguities). The crew of the Palomino, led by Captain Dan Holland. Their mission is to explore and find "intelligent life". Without the crew saying so, it seems the universe is pretty empty indeed, and their mission has not been much of a success. At any rate, the Palomino encounters a Black Hole, more powerful than any recorded. They are nearly pulled in, but they escape due to the "aid" of another, almost ghostly ship. Upon scanning, the crew finds it is the USS Cygnus- a huge, behemoth, yet graceful and elegant, ship; one presumed lost in space. Holland and the crew decide to investigate.

On the Cygnus, they find only one man alive, Dr. Hans Reinhardt, commander of the vessel. Reinhardt explains that his ship had been damaged by meteors years ago, and that he had the crew abandon ship (he didn't leave the ship though; Captain is the last man on board deal, going down with the ship), and he didn't know what happened to them. He repaired the ship with the help of his robots. But rather than return home, he stayed in space, exploring the galaxy's mysteries. The one "challenge" that has eluded him is the Black Hole, and he is in the process of unravelling that one too. He is planning to go into the Black Hole, proving science (and his ego) can overcome anything, even the power of a Black Hole.

As the crew deal with Reinhardt, they notice three things. One, he is definitely on the "eccentric" side- is he crazy, or is just that he has been alone for so long that it has made him a bit weird? Two, the Palomino crew realize Reinhardt's story just isn't adding up, for reasons they can't explain. Third, they find that Reinhardt's robots are, well, threatening, to say the least, particularly Maximilian, Reinhardt's own special design. Holland and company have more questions than answers. Then, as the film goes on, Reinhardt begins to reveal his true motives and intentions, which have Holland's crew running for their lives, trying to escape the Cygnus, and the Black Hole. Can they escape? Will Reinhardt accomplish his plans? And just what is the true nature of these robots?

From here, I'm going to get into different aspects of the film. There will be spoilers, so if you don't want spoilage stop here and see the movie... If you haven't seen it, you really should...

 What Went "Wrong" in 1979 (and after): The movie was a box office disaster for Disney, and at first glance, you can see why. This is NOT Star Wars (or Trek). The Black Hole is a complicated movie, part Sci-fi actioner, part mystery, and a whole heaping dose of questioning morality. The film is slow at the beginning, with a hefty amount of exposition. Once the threat is revealed, the movie then kicks into gear, progressing quickly. However, the nature of the threat is rather "dark" and frankly, a little scary- kids certainly would be scared. It is a "dark" film- somber, with some disturbing questions about life in the universe. It does attempt some humor with VINCENT, the robot member of the Palomino, but it is minor at most. So, when sci-fi people went expecting a Disney Star Wars type of film, they got a bleak movie. So, it failed. Further, the film does break some of the basic rules of physics (even my wife snickered at some of the rather implausible space physics). That turned off serious sci-fans too.

But "Wrong" is actually (mostly) "Right": Disney should be respected for taking a risk. They could have made a simple Star Wars clone, but instead they opted for something very different. This wasn't a space epic, it was a morality play. Disney didn't take the easy way out, and it hurt them, though it didn't deserve it. The pacing isn't fully action packed, but it isn't really that type of movie. One needs to "get" that in order to appreciate the film. This movie is examining big ideas, and even uncomfortable ones. Further, though the science/physics are wonky, one must accept it as the price of admission. It might be a bit of a leap of faith, but if you can really suspend your disbelief, you might be able to ignore the "bad" science. If you can, it won't actually matter to the plot of the film.

Special Effects/Music: If there is one area that people can agree on this movie, even the haters, it is that the Special Effects are top notch. The two ships are very well detailed miniatures. The Palomino is a small, but trusty vessel, while the Cygnus is just sweeping and ornate, with a hint of both grandeur and menace. The various robots are mostly cool (some hate VINCENT and BOB, but I get what they were doing here- they are "friendly" robots, so they look "cute", unlike Reinhardt's creations). In particular, the robot Maximilian is just the stuff of absurd nightmare- he is painted devil-red, hulking, fast, but with an odd assortment of weapons.

The interior of the Cygnus is cavernous, but again brilliant and just larger than life- Gothic is a good word for it. Finally, there's the Black Hole itself- omnipresent, in space, always swirling, moving, destroying. The effect will stick with you, as does the entire production design. Plot aside, the LOOK is unique, and no sci-fi film has this look and feel. The score, by John Barry, is equally good- ominous, brooding, and on occasion rousing. The score adds to the feel of the film.

The Plot Thickens: Now, here I want to get into the "twists", turns, and themes. The film is about the human mind- Reinhardt's in particular, but in general as well. Reinhardt is mankind- looking to the stars, blessed by God with intellect. Humanity wants to solve the mysteries of the universe. The NEED to know is great. It may be arrogance that man THINKS he can control science and conquer all, and what happens to man if he does accomplish this?

This is where we find Reinhardt. A brilliant man who believes that "the ends justify the means". He will achieve what none have been able to. He will solve this last great mystery- what lies on the other side of the Black Hole. His genius will make it happen. Unfortunately, he will do ANYTHING to achieve his (noble?) goal. Morality, humanity, God... all irrelevant to Reinhardt's quest. Reinhardt believes that the other side of the Black Hole is a place why the concepts of right and wrong are gone, fundamental laws of nature do not apply, they vanish. And one could live forever there.

As it turns out, the Cygnus' original mission was to find new life- the government spent a fortune building the Cygnus, based on Reinhardt's own singular vision. After a good amount of time exploring space, Earth contacted the Cygnus and ordered Reinhardt to come back, his mission deemed a failure. That was something he could not tolerate, and he refused to obey. His crew mutinied, but he managed to put down the revolt using his "Sentry Robots". However, he was faced with a dilemma- the ship was too large to be run by one man with the rest of the crew locked in the brig. So, bending his intellect to the problem, Reinhardt came to a horrifying conclusion. He decided to lobotomize his crew- basically he destroyed their free will and "programmed" them to continue working on the ship as they had before. Now, they are mute, wraithlike. He dressed them in robes and masks so he wouldn't have to look at their faces- he thought of them as robots, without troubling his mind too much over what he had done. He then turned to his obsession- the Black Hole, without worrying about any one else's needs. He is Niche's "Superman"- nothing can stand in his way of achieving great feats.

Interestingly enough, NONE of his robots speak, not even his greatest creation, Maximilian. Free will troubles Reinhardt. This is why humanity cannot accomplish anything- free will is too troublesome. You need a singular vision- an iron will and steely determination. Get rid of free will, and the "great man" can do anything. Or so it seems to Reinhardt.

However, the film has more to say on that. Religion (or, perhaps, a spirituality) is a major theme in the film. BOB says that intelligent life is the MOST important thing in the universe, and Reinhardt disregards that basic, important rule. Reinhardt himself quotes the Bible at one point. One Palomino crew member, Dr. McCray, has minor ESP abilities (more a psychic spirituality and empathy than anything else, though she can mentally communicate with VINCENT. Is that a huh? Yes, it is odd, yet the theme of Spirituality covers this- VINCENT has free will and is therefore alive). One character calls what lies on the other side of the Black Hole the "mind of God". There is a religious quality at work here that many Space Sci-fi movies lack.

And just to be clear, the theme of religion dominates the film. Reinhardt expresses SOME slight guilt over his deeds, and he IMPLIES that Maximilian is responsible, as if the creation is in control of the creator. Could it be? Or is Reinhardt simply projecting his evil onto his robot? Is Maximilian the DEVIL (as he appears)? Or is he just a physical representation of Reinhardt's Id? The movie gives no answers here. Is there a devil, or are we evil all by ourselves?

The end of the movie just adds to the Spiritualism. The Cygnus is struck by meteors (irony or karma?), and drifts into the Black Hole, breaking apart. Reinhardt has a smaller probe ship, and he intends to fly it into the Black Hole. However, his command center collapses, and he is stuck in the wreckage, surrounded by his lobotomized crew who, thanks to his evil handiwork, can only focus on their tasks running the ship, and thus pay no heed to his cries of pain. Maximilian ignores Reinhardt as well, following his last order to prepare the probe ship. Is Maximilian the devil leaving his pawn Reinhardt behind and discarded, or is the robot simply following its master's last order?

In the end, the surviving Palomino crew members destroy Maximilian and board the probe ship, with no choice but to fly into the Black Hole. Time, space, and matter begin to distort, as the ship plummets faster and faster down the Black Hole. In McCray's (psychic) mind's eye, we then see something bizarre, yet fitting. We see Reinhardt spinning in infinity- alive? How can this be? What the...? His hair has grown long, his beard immense. How long has he been there? Then, when it looks like he will be there forever alone- he sees Maximilian. He grabs hold of his wicked robot. Then, with a quick camera pan, Reinhardt's eyes are WITHIN Maximilian's red visor. Reinhardt is INSIDE his creation, his eyes frantically looking about in abject horror. The robot is then stuck on a rock, immobile, looking down on a field of fire, with the lobotomized crew standing by. It is a rather creepy image, and it just begs the question- is this hell? Is this Reinhardt's punishment for his disregard for morality? And the crew? Did he not only strip away their free will, but also their very souls? Are they damned as well? Intriguing, and uncomfortable.

But then, the hellish scene gives way to a bright corridor, through which a robed figure glides through- Jesus? God? The Human Spirit? With a flash, and without word, the probe ship comes out of the other side of the Black Hole. Ahead of the ship is a planet, bathed in white light. Heaven? Sanctuary? Just an alien world? The film ends here, leaving you to ponder their fate.

Whoa, That Is Weird: Yes, the film is certainly an oddity. And I love it for that. It has big ideas, and isn't afraid to make you think about the darker side of human nature and the technology we have created. The film is anchored by Maximilian Schell and Robert Forster. Schell gives a great performance as Reinhardt. His German accent adds to the character (and the Niche threads). But, he is larger than life, full of grand thoughts and gestures. But he is also warped beyond all repair- knowing the evil he has done, but believing the evil was for a greater goal. The actor evokes awe, sympathy, and disgust in equal measures- which is no small feat.

 Robert Forster, on the other hand, is in many ways the opposite of Reinhardt. He is neither brilliant nor grand. He is, in some respects, an everyman. He is captain, and his responsibility to to protect the lives of his crew. He does have an innate, quiet decency, even when it comes to the robots VINCENT and old BOB, which Reinhardt lacks entirely. It is certainly the less flashy role, but works as a good contrast to the antagonist.  The other cast members are good as well, particularly Anthony Perkins, whose Dr. Durrant admires Reinhardt's brilliance and finds it hard to believe that genius has led to insanity.

This may be the strangest movie review I have written, but it is also a strange movie, so I guess it is fitting. I think any sci-fi fan owes it to themselves to check this film out (Disney, you need to make a special edition on Blu-ray, immediately). You need to put it into the context of the time in which it was made, as well as being able to have a stronger suspension of disbelief than you are used to. If you can do those things, you should watch this film. It is visually interesting, has a good cast, and does make you think.    interestingly, Interstellar recently had somewhat similar questions about Black Holes and human nature, though that film is FAR more upbeat, optimistic, and positive than this older movie.

I give this film 3 out of 4 Marks of Chaos. If you're a space / sci-fi fan, you may want to check this out. 

Until next time!!

Movie Review: Prometheus

Hey there Chaos fans. I know its been a while since I posted, but frankly, it's been a bit busy here in the Eye of Terror, with the forces of Chaos building mighty war machines and making sacrifices to the gods and... OK. Well, I've been busy doing work, family, and house-related stuff. On the 40K front I am working on some more Wyches and a few other surprises that I won't get into just now. However, I have also gotten a chance to see Prometheus. So, is it a grand return to the Alien universe? Or is it just a continual slide into mediocre sequels? Let's take a look...

You knew right off the bat that this movie would be unique since Ridley Scott was coming back to direct. He directed the original, groundbreaking Alien, so if anyone could/should do a sequel, its him. But, as a director, he is very, very hit or miss. When he hits, its huge- Alien, Blade Runner, Legend, and Gladiator redefined their respective genres, changing the very discourse of movie-making. Others have been solid, entertaining movies but not at all revolutionary, such as American Gangster and Hannibal. Others still have been misfires- I look at the director's cut of Kingdom of Heaven, and I see the potential but it doesn't quite work. Then, there are the absolute failures- Robin Hood, G.I. Jane, 1492, and Black Hawk Down (yes, I view it as a failure). Now, some might say that this "inconsistency" make Scott a bad director- I say that's what makes him a modern great- you never quite know what you'll get from him, but you know that he has and does continue to push boundaries.

First thing first- this is NOT Alien. While it IS a prequel, it is not 100% connected either. It is indeed the same universe, and the "Space Jockey" is prominent, it simply isn't like Alien in terms of horror, tension, nor as a movie structure. It is quite different and unique, for good and ill. Ultimately, Alien was a slasher movie- the Alien could have been Leatherface or Michael Myers chasing down people... We have this unknowable thing that seems to exist just to kill. Now, of course, its a xenomorph and it implants in people and all that- but, at the end of the day, it is stalking people and killing them, a good, old-fashioned slasher movie.  Its a great piece of sci-fi, but at its heart it is a genre blending of sci-fi and slasher-horror, which is simply a brilliant conceit, and of course it is handled so well, with no moments of being meta or self-referential.  And for the record, Aliens, equally good as a movie, is simply a Romero zombie movie, but now with Aliens. Check it out- the "marines" have guns, but there's just too many Aliens, so they hunker down and barricade themselves in for protection- and you know how well that works out in zombie movies. Cameron did a great job on Aliens- he understood the genre-blending, and took it to the next logical step. (The rest of the Alien franchise doesn't exist to me- sorry). But that begs the question- what is Prometheus, then?

On the face of it, it is not really a horror movie at all. It is more sci-fi than either of the other two. The movie asks serious sci-fi questions: was the human race created by another race? What is our purpose in the universe? Can we control our own destiny? Does a "higher power" care about us, as children or kindred? Now, nearly every sci-fi venture has tried at least a cursory look at these questions at some point or another- Star Trek, The Outer Limits, The Twilight Zone, Battlestar Galactica (yes, both series), and more have all looked at these questions. Usually, the answers are either totally ambiguous or positively re-affirming- Kirk doesn't find God in STV, but believes he exists, for example. Now, this is where the "horror" comes in: there may be no solid answers, and those answers that are there are not in the least bit positive. Indeed, one can interpret the events of Prometheus as quite damning- we were created, but... our "creators" don't care for us, and indeed may well hate our very existence.

I don't want to hit too many spoilers at this point, because I think that all sci-fans should see this in theaters- love it or hate it (and there's arguments for both) it deserves to be seen and critiqued. So, let me boil down the basic plot outline, give a few pros and cons, and then my rating. Then, I'll delve into some spoilers, if you wish to have a look.

In several pre-historic cave paintings, the same painting of a large being (godlike) is shown pointing to 5 stars- each cave painting is separated over distance and thousands of years- the scientists investigating, Elizabeth Shaw and her boyfriend Charlie Holloway believe that aliens (Shaw calls them engineers) must be responsible for this, and perhaps they hold the answers of humanity's origins. Although it is not shown, the scientists convince the wealthy Peter Weyland that they can find these beings (imagine the director of 1492 doing a riff on Columbus asking Isabella for cash to find a new route to Asia). Weyalnd builds the state of the art Prometheus space vessel to bring the group of scientists to the source of these paintings. After 2 years in cryo-sleep, the crew finds LV-223, they land and begin to explore. They find ruins, dead "engineers", and of course... something terrible. Something that is so unpredictable, lethal, and terrifying that even the "engineers" had reason to fear. The crew must then fight for their lives- not only from without but also from within as several crew members begin to act on shadowy motives. Can they uncover the secrets of the "engineers"? Can they escape with their lives? Will their discovery threaten all of Earth?

The Good:

The movie has great ideas, no doubt there. As I mentioned above, it is asking big questions, and the answers that are given or hinted at are not at all re-assuring. Indeed, this is existential horror- all of our lives are insignificant, as nothing, in a hostile universe. At best a mistake, at worst- a crime to be expunged. Hehe- a bit of 40K Gothic horror right there, I think. I appreciated the darkness of the movie. There seems to be little hope by the end- for the crew, for us as individuals, and for us as a race. The lessons of the movie are bleak, and not all questions have clear answers, and faith may not be enough. I don't mind my movies being this murky, and as Scott has proved with Alien and Blade Runner, bleakness can be effective. It certainly is here. If Alien's tag line was "In space, no one can hear you scream", Promethus' could be: "Don't even bother screaming; the universe doesn't care".

The main actors all do a great job with their roles. Noomi Rapace is solid as Elizabeth Shaw. She is not in any way like Ripley- she's a scientist who has deep religious sentiments and is hopeful that she may be on the way to finding a wonderful, spiritual truth for mankind. Of course, it turns into a decent into hell, and she does a great job of showing the spiritual and physical strain this journey hits her with. If her warm and compassionate character is the yin, Michael Fassbender's David is the cold, calculating and truly inhuman yang. David is the requisite android on board, who is supposed to advance the mission- however, he has several agendas all his own, and he pursues them without any real moral compunction. He is neither good or evil- he is amoral, and Fassbender knocks it out of the park- just as he did when playing Magneto in X-Men First Class. The main cast is rounded out by Charlize Theron, Idris Elba, and Logan Marshall-Green. All three do a fine job, though Fassbender and Rapace are the highlights.

The special effects and the score are both absolutely top notch. Scott has outdone himself visually here- and we're talking about the director who did Alien, Blade Runner and Gladiator here- all of which have stirring images and camera-work. Scott does an amazing job of making us feel as if we are seeing a real alien planet landscape- it is so striking, so otherworldly, and yet something we can relate to. Of course, then there's the "engineers'"... uh... dwelling (don't want to give too much away here), which is equally stunning. The designs of Geiger are felt here in these dark, labyrinthine corridors. Finally, the ship Prometheus itself is a wonderful ship inside and out- hearkening to the Nostromo but being far sleeker (and smaller). The movie is visually stunning. The score is great too- while Alien was minimalist (appropriately so), Prometheus' score is bombastic- fitting, considering what these scientists are looking for (and what they find).

The Bad:

The actual script/dialogue could use some work, as far as the secondary characters go. They are quite annoying and distracting from the high-minded dialogue of Fassbender et al. Some of the lines just fall flat, and the actors saying them just aren't convincing. There were certain bits of banter that just pulled me out of it- I was surprised at that from Scott. Then, there's the actions of several of these guys that don't make sense. I mean downright stupid- such as the Captain leaving things unattended at a critical point. Now, I cant tell if that is poor scripting, or if Scott is being so cynical about humanity that they are selfish and constantly mess up (which, if you read the movie that way, may certainly be the case).

Second is the pacing. Now look, I'm the guy who has sat through all three LotR movies in a row. I love movies that are given time to breathe and explore. I also love quick action too. Prometheus tries to do both, and suffers from this several times. The action scenes go by so quick, and then there's longer stretches in between that are occasionally too slow as compared to the rest of the movie. This makes the movie a bit haphazard. It needed to be one or the other- not both. Some characters, like Captain Janek, are good characters, but they don't get enough time to be built up (which hurts when Janek pieces a clue together, without the audience even knowing he knew to ask the question to begin with).  Finally, big questions are asked, themes hinted at, but they fall quickly by the wayside in a rush of action, and then decompression. Intentional? Challenging? A mistake? I don't know if this can be remedied by a "director's cut" or what, but the pacing is off, no doubt about it.

The ending- now, I don't mean the end of the story of the Prometheus. It's after that. Something happens- something is thrown in at the last minute to firmly tie Alien and Prometheus together- and it was handled poorly. Indeed, it was almost insulting. It was so unnecessary- it was almost as if Scott was told by the studio- you had better put this in so people will KNOW it is an Alien prequel. Let me put it this way- it could have been an after the credits wink wink to the audience... for a crappy B-movie. It should NOT be here, and it ruined the power of the ending a strong sci-fi movie.

So, I can't get into more without spoilers, so it is here that I bid you adieu, unless you want to read a few spoilers, which I place below... As for the movie, I give it three out of four Marks of Chaos. It's a thought provoking movie, with great effects, strong main characters, and solid suspense. Its not fantastic though, due to some pacing issues and some questionable dialog and actions that don't seem to fit in with the rest of the movie- making for an occasional jarring experience. Perhaps a director's cut can alleviate this? Regardless, if you are a sci-fi fan, you owe it to yourself to see this- even if you come away not liking it, it will cause some thought and discussion, which so many movies can't be bothered with on ANY level. I think the movie succeeds, but even if you view it as failure, it tries hard to push the boundaries of what s sci-fi/horror film can be.

Still there? OK. I don't want to go into every single thing, but I want to hit the big points/spoilers:

1- One Engineer created mankind. That is the implication of the opening scene. Now, was this directed by the engineers as a whole? Or... was he a rouge? Did he kick start human life on his own accord? If so, that would give a new meaning to the title Prometheus. So, was mankind a planned event? Or the act of a renegade? Or was it an experiment not meant to get this far? Which leads us to...

2- Why are the engineers now hostile to humanity? They seem to be mad at humanity, and its apparent that the "black mutagen" was meant to wipe us out. Is it to erase the mistake? Or has  humanity grown too powerful and/or wicked? Or weak, if it comes to that. Of course, the "black mutagen" was too much for the engineers to handle, and the engineers on LV-223 are wiped out. Now, why other engineers on other planets didn't act against Earth, I'm not sure, yet. So, the "mutagen" is a bio-weapon, as Captain Janek suggests (how he comes to this conclusion, I'm not sure- as I cited earlier- he just come out of the blue with this- he needed more screen time).

3-  One of the themes seems to be that man is wicked/imperfect/sinful. While Shaw is a good person, the same can't be said for... Weyland himself. He is hiding on board. He wants to meet the engineers, thinking they might cure him / give him the boon of immortality. Now, he is not a "nice" man- he has been instructing David to lie to the crew, and is only looking to benefit himself. However, Weyland himself is a creator too- he created David. He has "created", but has not taught David anything of morality, respect, compassion. Weyland has rejected this responsibility- he uses David, and that's all. Oh, and Vickers is an android too. The evidence is right there all the time. She may or may not know it, but she is. Look closely for those clues.

4- As for David, he is amoral. The things he does puts everyone at risk, as he seeks answers to what is happening on the planet. Ostensibly, he is doing Weyland's bidding. However, I think its more complicated than that. David simply wants to be his own being. Interestingly, Holloway wonders to David about how Weyland is seeking his maker while ignoring that which Weyland himself has created. Later, David says that all children want to see their parents dead. If one is looking to judge humanity, just look at their works. If David is an example of man's work, you can see how the Engineers might judge humanity as lacking. Indeed, what does David tell the cryogenically frozen engineer when he is reawakened? That brings me to the last point...

5- The only living engineer becomes very hostile, attacks the humans, and then begins to prep the ship to fly- apparently for Earth. Did the engineer not know what happened while he was in stasis? Was there a malfunction, or was it that there was no engineer left alive to wake him? As for David, I suspect he tells him that the humans have invaded (duh- they are standing right in front of him) and killed his brethren, which leads him to attack. To stop the ship from heading to Earth with the "black mutagen",  Captain Janek heroically flies the Prometheus into the ship, wrecking both- one of the most thrilling moments in the movie. However, Shaw knows there are other Engineers out there... and she still wants to know WHY things are like this with the Engineers.

Now, this all adds up to a bleak tale, in which humanity is weak and sinful, and the Engineers seem to be quite hostile toward us- whether we were created by accident or not. I haven't even touched on Shaw being "impregnated"...My views you have read, but I have seen other views- people have plenty of theories on all of this, touching on things I haven't even considered yet. Some have a more positive take on the events here, though I look at them as an existential crisis. That is what I like about the movie- there's lots of angles you can look at the movie from. I really need to see this again, so I can dissect it further...

Anyways, that's my 2 cents. Until next time...

Movie Review: Star Trek V: The Final Frontier

Hey there Chaos fans. I'm back with my semi-regular review of the Star Trek movies. This time, we're going to look at the infamous Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, directed by William Shatner. So, is this the legendarily bad movie that nearly killed the franchise, or is it a fun, albeit cheesy movie that gets knocked way too much? Let's dive on in and find out...

Personal Background: I saw this movie when it came out in 1989. I was like, 10 or 11 years old when I saw it over the summer. I remember liking the movie then. I can't say if I loved it, but I do recall it fondly from my youth. As I got older, I came to appreciate ST II (as a kid it was scary!) and the like, and came to see the flaws of STV very strongly. Nevertheless, I have always maintained  a spot in my heart for this one, warts and all.

Basic Plot: Well, the crew of the USS Enterprise are on shore leave on Earth, waiting for the new Enterprise to be repaired (yes- the 'new' ship has lots of bugs to be worked out- leading to some funny and some not so funny moments). Kirk, Spock, and McCoy are out mountain climbing and camping (as odd as that sounds). Kirk is then ordered to cancel shore leave and head to the planet of Nimbus III- a planet co-operated by Humans, Klingons, and Romulans, There has been a revolt on the planet, and the 3 races' ambassadors have been taken hostage. Kirk and crew must go and rescue them quickly, as a Klingon ship has also been sent to the scene, and the Federation fears it might spiral violently out of control.

The architect of the "revolt" is a vulcan renegade called Sybock. This man may be one of the most complicated antagonists in Trek. Sybock has rejected logic, and instead has embraced emotion. Sybock's embrace of emotion has also given him broader psychic powers than regular Vulcans; Sybock is able to read people's minds, seek out their pains, secrets, and vulnerabilities, and thereby manipulate them. All of this has led him on a journey to find God. Not "find" him metaphorically, but literally. Sybock believes that, based on the religions found in all sentient life, that God really is on this plane, in the center of the galaxy. But the center of the galaxy (like the edge of it) has a great barrier, which can destroy almost any ship. To that end, Sybock plans to start a riot on the "Planet of Galactic Peace" and force a starship to come to him.

Kirk and crew arrive, and they are overpowered by Sybock and his army of people that his powers have "brainwashed". At one point, Spock gets the drop on Sybock, and Kirk orders Spock to shoot him. Spock refuses, and we learn that Sybock is Spock's half-brother. With Sybock on-board, he begins to brainwash the rest of the crew, and he makes his plans to head to the center of the galaxy and breach the barrier.

Kirk, Spock, and McCoy try to stop Sybock, but he foils their attempt. Finally, Sybock lays all his cards on the table, explaining that his quest to find God will change everything; galactic peace will be obtained, and all life will learn the true glory of God. At this point, Sybock attempts to brainwash the three, by exposing their dark sides. We learn that McCoy euthanized his dying father, and that even at birth, Sarek felt disdain at Spock's  half- humanity. When it's time for Kirk, he resists the attempt, telling Sybock that his pain can never be taken away. Before Sybock can go further, they have arrived at the barrier.

The ship gets through, and they find a planet at the center. Kirk decides to then aid Sybock, by going down with him to investigate. Sybock heartily agrees, as he simply wants to show everyone the truth. The three and Sybock go to the planet, which is oddly rocky and barren, with no signs of life. As they walk, the sky grows dark violently, and suddenly, and a being of light appears, claiming to be God. However, when questioned, the being attacks Kirk and Spock. Sybock quickly realizes that this entity is a liar, it is simply an evil creature seeking to escape it's planetary prison. Sybock then decides to sacrifice himself so that his brother and the others can escape.

Of course, the crew escapes certain death, as usual, and the entity is destroyed. The crew is left to reflect on this adventure, with Spock mourning the death of his brother, and Kirk explaining that God exists in every heart. The movie ends with the crew going back to Earth to complete their shore leave.

The above is the plot, which sounds interesting and entertaining, and it is. The problem is, the movie also tries to inject a ton of humor into the proceedings. Sometimes the jokes are funny, but often they fall totally flat, and embarrass the actors involved. There are also goofy things here, like Spock's rocket boots, which, if they existed like that in the 23rd century, people would be flying around the world like Superman, not needing transporters or shuttle craft or anything. Further, Shatner can't seem to figure out how to strike a balance between humor and seriousness, and he sometimes forgets that this isn't the 1960s- all the actors are older, and some of the things they do is just ridiculous. There are so many bad jokes and goofs that they detract from the overall movie. In fact, they pile up and nearly overwhelm the movie.

STV does try to rise above that.

STV, with all of its faults, tries to explore big questions. First and foremost, does God exist in this futuristic galaxy? There have been some rather vague references in the series about religion as it is practiced by humanity in the 23rd century. It seems that Earth of the 23rd century is all about secular humanism (Roddenberry's intent), though there have been references to things like Christmas, marriage, etc. In this movie, Shatner tries to tackle that head on, stating that all sentient life has "myths" about the origins of creation and God. Intelligently, Shatner offers no clear answer. The thing at the center of the galaxy was not God, but that doesn't mean he does not exist... As Kirk says "Perhaps he's right here- the human heart". He offers the statement without any easy answers.

But there is more to it than just "we go looking for God" (which, interestingly, is an inverse of ST TMP, in which WE are god to V'Ger). This movie also plays with the themes of good and evil that exists in all of us. This movie questions the role of this eternal struggle in each and every person. Each of the main players has this internal conflict within them- not all have evil feelings, but they do have dark sides. Anger. Pain. Jealousy. Contempt. Ego. Each of the main characters demonstrate this theme. Kirk orders Spock to kill Sybock- and Spock can't just kill his brother, no matter the cost. McCoy confronts the decisions of his past and how they have "poisoned" him ever since. Even Kirk, who is supposed to be the strong man, has moral difficulty in resisting Sybock (indeed, he allows them to go through the barrier and escorts Sybock down).

Then there is Sybock himself, as the formalization of this question. Is Sybock good or evil? Some people say he's another "poor man's Khan", but this simply isn't true. He is not a "villain" in that sense at all. He is an extremist, but he's not a murderer. He has broken laws, but in his mind he is striving to prove a higher law- that God exists. He emotionally/mentally manipulates people, but he thinks he is doing it for the greater good. There is a duality in Sybock- he is not a cookie-cutter villain, and his goals are not based on revenge, or greed, or the like. He does bad things to achieve what he thinks will be the highest good. At the climax, this dichotomy becomes literal, when 'god' takes Sybock's image/form. There, his faults are laid bare- "my arrogance, my vanity", Sybock says. This 'god' symbolizes Sybock's self-righteousness gone out of control. When Sybock says enough and attacks this false 'god', you see he is fighting himself- good versus evil within himself.

STV has many, many, faults. The truth is though, that this movie has great themes and ideas, and they do come across well enough. I think the problem is that these 'big ideas' are surrounded by stupid jokes and bad director choices, which blunt these otherwise strong and compelling themes.

Characters/Acting: Well, here is a mixed bag. The regular crew members do what they can, but frankly, they have to do silly or embarrassing things. Kirk mountain climbing, Spock with rocket boots, Uhura dancing in the desert to distract the rebels, Scotty walking into an engineering pipe and being knocked out, etc. are occasionally painful to watch, especially since we like these actors so much.

What were they thinking?!

I do want to point out two performances that are noteworthy. First up is De Kelley as McCoy. This guy has always been the secret weapon of Trek, obscured by the flash of Kirk and the other-worldliness of Spock. The fact is, McCoy is the stand in for us- a regular guy in this crazy 23rd century world. In this movie, though, McCoy becomes our surrogate when confronting Sybock. The renegade Vulcan makes McCoy face his pain: the doctor committed Euthanasia on his terminally ill father. How many of us have lost a loved one to disease? How many of us wanted to see the suffering of a family member ended? De Kelley handles it brilliantly- his pain is our pain, and it's amazing to see him pull it off. The way he responds to the question of why he did it: "To preserve... his dignity" is delivered so well, so convincingly, that it gives me chills still. Of course, Kelley also knows when to hit the sarcastic humor button, such as "You don't ask the almighty for his ID" (a priceless line).



The other performance of note is that of Lawrence Luckinbill as Sybock. It was rumored that Sean Connery was asked to play the role. And while Connery is great, he would have been the wrong fit here. As it is, Luckinbill has a tough role here. He is the antagonist, but he can't be villainous. He is an extremist, but he can't turn people off. He breaks laws and uses people, but he must remain sympathetic. This is a hard balance to maintain, but Luckinbill pulls it off. His Sybock combines just the right amounts of charisma, menace, righteousness, compassion, ambition, and hopefulness. Luckinbill is helped by his strong voice and height. He plays the role with earnest, and yet he has a twinkle in his eye. His disappointment in the evil entity (and his own failings) is memorable, even though the director does not give him a stronger and more proper coda. Again, any attempt to say he's "Khan-lite" is not doing the role or the actor justice, as it is a very different role.

Special Effects: According to Shatner, he was denied the money to do the special effects that he wanted, that he had envisioned more, but just couldn't get it on the screen. Some fans have even hoped to see a special edition with the effects improved/restored. Be that as it may, the truth is the effects on this movie as it is are very rough. At times, the special effects scenes are almost too well lit- that Klingon ship looks way too bright. As does the shuttle craft. Same goes for some of those matte paintings- I love matte work, but they look jarring in the way this film's lighting is composed.

Rather sub-par effects

On the other hand, though, there is some nice camerawork here in other areas. Kirk scaling the mountain in Yosemite is well shot. Further, the scenes on Nimbus III look really cool- its obviously a desert planet, and it looks quite barren. The city of Paradise itself is rough and tumble looking, not as good as say Mos Eisley, but it is evocative of some of the older Trek sets (but with more money, obviously). Its a grimy part of the galaxy, and certainly not as squeaky clean as Roddenberry had come to espouse. That makes it interesting, if not great. As for the planet beyond the barrier, it is just as bland and dry as Nimbus (on purpose or not, I can't be sure). It has a strange purple filter, but that's about it. Speaking of, the center barrier of the galaxy is not particularly interesting or threatening. As for the final showdown, the 'god' effect is actually pretty good, if not spectacular or intriguing. It simply gets the job done of conveying this entity.

Simple but effective

Ultimately, STV has rather poor special effects, and may be the weakest of the series on that front. However, STIV was mostly on contemporary Earth and had fewer effects overall, so make of that what you will. STV's effects are at best serviceable, which is too bad, as it could have been better with just a few changes during production.

Musical Score: Jerry Goldsmith has scored Trek before, and is solid here too. His music conveys a sense of excitement, even when the movie itself fails to do so adequately. Particularly the music when the shuttle craft is trying to get to the Enterprise and evade the Klingon ship gives the scene an extra jolt. The cue for the planet at the center of the galaxy is also a great mix of hope and foreboding, adding to those scenes, particularly when 'god' arrives. However, the score needs not be loud or action packed-  soft music also makes things interesting when Sybock explores McCoy's pain- the scene speaks for itself, with the music not getting in the way. Overall, a solid score, if not the best in the series at any rate.

Lasting Legacy: Oh boy! This is a good one! Hehe! STV failed to do big business at the box office (it made money, but was not as strong as ST IV), and was regarded by many as a failure. With Next Gen on the TV at this point, it seemed that the Original Crew are a bunch of has-beens. Unfortunately, the movie seemed to prove that, with these old people doing ridiculous things that should make them break their pelvis or something.That sounds harsh, but its true... Uhura dancing, Scotty slamming his head so embarrassingly, Kirk mountain climbing, etc.

As for the story itself, it contributed nearly nothing to the series that would endure. Indeed, Roddenberry himself came out against it- in fact, he denied that Sybock existed, thus throwing the whole thing OUT OF CANNON. Holy cow! That never happened before so blatantly in Trek, even when the series tweaked things episode to episode.

As an aside, IF Sybock is cannon, it makes Spock's drive to not feel emotion and suppress his human side all the more important, as he doesn't want to be like Sybock. Also, it makes Sarek's rejection of Spock's enlistment in Starfleet "logical", as Sarek doesn't want BOTH of his children to be outcasts from the Vulcan way. Interestingly, Spock comes to the same conclusion as Sybock in TMP (!) "Is this all that I am- nothing more... V'Ger is barren, cold- no meaning, no hope. Logic is not enough". Again- great ideas, but they are garbled in the presentation of STV. They are just not handled the way it should have been.

However, despite that aside, the movie's legacy is that of failure. Shatner himself said it best: he had his chance at the brass ring, and he blew it. Sure, he had not gotten the money to do the special effects as he wanted, and there was a writers strike issue, but the final product is the final product. This is considered the weakest entry in the Classic Trek series for all of those reasons.

Wait... I thought... I... was...God....

This movie ultimately is a missed opportunity. It had all the elements of being a solid entry into the Trek series- the themes of the duality of good and evil, the quest to find God, and living with one's 'pain' are great ideas, as is the notion of a renegade Vulcan. The problem is twofold- one, Shatner just didn't have the direction skill to put it together, and two- they kept going for humor like they did in ST IV, but the humor mostly falls flat. Can you imagine? An older crew, facing the end/retirement, literally going out to find God? That could have been amazing. Instead, we have rocket boots, beans, geriatric Uhura dancing, and an Enterprise that should have failed ALL safety tests (just for humor). I like this one better than ST IV believe it or not though- because it DOES try. It DOES play with bigger ideas, without giving clear or simple answers. If only the stupidity had been culled, this could have been a great one. Instead, I view it as a noble failure- big ideas that didn't get a proper set up. Unlike ST IV, which seemed to be designed to put butts in seats, at the expense of larger themes, continuity, or maturity. ST V had bigger ambitions, but it just didn't work. As a result, I give it 2 1/2 Marks of Chaos out of 4.