Battlefield Moon

The guy that directed Battlefield Earth directed this. I'm sure for some that's review enough of any movie.

"Stranded" (2013)
directed by Roger Christian
written by Roger Christian and Christian Piers Bentley
starring Christian Slater, Amy Matysio, Michael Therriault, and Brendan Fehr

How Is It?
It's almost as if they kidnapped a Roger Corman sci fi movie from the early '80s but made it worse. No, really. It's derivative in every possible way, but what sets it apart from most of those films it attempted to parrot, it has no soul of its own. It's a hollow, drab, gray, uninteresting movie. (It's still not as bad as this one, though.)

The Players
This is the depressing part: The ensemble of four good actors got stuck with a bad script and a director with a very checkered track record. Nobody was written a character to play. The movie is about four cardboard cutouts stuck in a crippled mining base on the moon. Slater plays the typical base commander. Therriault plays the typical engineer with a drinking problem. Therriault plays the typical level-headed, logical medical officer. Matysio gets the most to draw from out of the gang. She gets to play both the brave, capable first officer as well as the damsel in distress. It's just that the writing is so bad, so flat that all of their characters have only as much dimension as the descriptions of them you just read.

Behind The Camera
Roger Christian is am industry recognized, award-winning set decorator and production designer. He directed the cult horror classic "The Sender" (1982) as well as the universally decried and derided "Battlefield Earth" (2000). So the sets in this movie looks good, as does the lighting. The moonbase exteriors and other miniatures work are quite good. For the just over $2 million the film was made for, it looks pretty good. Looks. The look of the movie is where all the money wound up. Not enough of it made it into script rewrites, which is as much of a shame as it is becoming more common in movies. The look of a movie is its frame, and the script is the picture, the colors, textures, brushstrokes, and theme. "Stranded" is a frame without anything inside.

The Verdict
It would have been a different movie, could have been a different movie, a good movie, if only the script wasn't so derivative, joyless, and boring and there was anything there to watch. Avoid.

Sometimes it's just best to quit while you're behind.

Rutger Hauer in a 3D re-imagining of "Dracula" with a decent dose of T&A could work but for one thing: Dario Argento.

"Argento's Dracula 3-D" (2012)
directed by Dario Argento
written by Dario Argento, Enrique Cerezo, Franco Paolucci, and Antonio Tentori
starring Thomas Kretschmann, Marta Gastini, Asia Argento, Unax Ugalde, Miriam Giovanelli, and Rutger Hauer

How Is It?
It's about as sophomorically substandard as you have come to expect from Dario Argento, alas. Plodding, dull, cheap-looking, and frequently painful to watch. This is one of the worst films I have ever seen.

The Players
It is so hard for me to write this, but it was disappointing all around. Kretschmann as Dracula came across bored, as if he was simply going through the motions. Asia Argento was dutifully in her dad's movie. Gastini and Ugalde were wooden, and Hauer... oh dear. They were all there, but none of them looked present. The rest of the cast, on the other hand, chewed the scenery like it was going out of style. So in many ways, this was a typical Argento joint. Alas.

Behind The Camera
It was almost like watching a SyFy Original Motion Picture, just less fun and far less entertaining. A woeful script written by committee, nearly comically mediocre digital effects, low-end practical effects, sets and lighting that looked as if they barely tried at all, and a lack of apparent cohesive vision to the project are what hurt this film. In short, this movie died while it was being made. There was nothing new in it, and there wasn't even anything out of Argento's really old and dated bag of tricks that was done well. Overall, it was a lesson in incompetence.

The Verdict
Remember Argento's heyday thirty years ago. That's all there is to do at this point. Avoid this film at all costs.

Don't Be Afraid of Watching Something Else

For reasons we never really get to know a little girl we really never get to know or care about gets sent to live with her not terribly supportive, workaholic architect dad and his designer/girlfriend in a big giant spooky house that turns out to have awful little mischievous and bloodthirsty CG creatures in the basement. Hilarity via predictability and narrative paltriness ensues.

"Don't Be Afraid of the Dark" (2011)
directed by Troy Nixey
written by Guillermo del Toro and Matthew Robbins
starring Guy Peace, Katie Holmes, and Bailee Madison

How Is It?

To put not too fine a point on it, it's rather flat, all told. It's designed beautifully and looks great, but most of the story and script are rather tired. There are a few good bits here and there, but overall... it's generally a rather ineffective gimmick movie.

The Players

If Guy Pearce had enough screen time in it or if his character was terribly important, which you would think would have been the case, I could tell you how he did. He did alright as an archetype, the Career Success Oriented And Not Terribly Empathetic Father. Katie Holmes manages well as the Awkward Girlfriend/Surrogate Mother Who Doesn't Feel She's Ready To Be A Mother But Finally Finds The Strength When The Kid Is In Danger. To give credit where it's due, both did alright with the material they had to work with. The movie belonged to Bailee Madison, who played the Misunderstood And Terribly Socially Awkward But Allegedly Quite Bright Child, who was let down by two things. One was a woefully ordinary and overly long script for the story. The other was she couldn't carry it and didn't have any help in the effort, primarily from the script and direction.

Behind the Camera

The film looks great. The sets are very nice and lit and shot pretty well. The shots are well framed, and the movie has atmosphere. And the creatures look good. Troy Nixey's first feature length film looks good. It's just not got much in the way of substance, and it feels maybe like it's maybe twenty or thirty minutes too long. There is too much wandering in the dark, too much spotty lighting, too much emphasis on looking mysterious without there really being any mystery whatsoever. It's not so much a haunted house film as it is a mouse hunt, which is a real let down, and much of it has to do with the script.

The script is subpar. There. I said it. There's not enough story for its hour and a half, and the story that we get is, well, more than a bit hackneyed. It pains me to say this about a script by Guillermo del Toro, who is one of my favorite directors and storytellers and a true artist of the macabre, but the script, by and large, is just painfully below average. The characters are cardboard and not original, plain and simple. The scares, or what passes for them, come quite by the numbers and are for the most part visible from miles away. And the whole thing reeks of melodrama and fails to establish even an internal reality beyond "This is supposed to be scary." The script is the foundation, and it doesn't work well.

The Verdict

A very weak script in the hands of a novice director has the odds against it at the outset. "Don't Be Afraid of the Dark" didn't beat the odds. The few good moments it had weren't enough to hold my attention as a viewer. Honestly, if I had not been watching it to review it, I would have switched it off before the thirty minute mark.

Not frightening. Dreadfully predictable. Characterless. Uninspiring. Not recommended.

The Thursday List, Episode 5 (Early Edition)

"Soylent Green" (1973)

Usually ecological disaster movies are crap. They're preachy and irritating and weakly written. "Soylent Green" isn't one of those. It's the ecological disaster movie all the others are trying to be. It's solidly written and directed, and it features the final and quite moving film performance of the legendary Edward G. Robinson. The worst thing about the film, aside from Charlton Heston's mediocre performance for the first half of the film, is that it's so dreadfully 1970s, with the fashions and the language. And if that's the worst part of the film, that's doing pretty good. This film's a classic for good reason. Recommended.

"Dead Again" (1991)

"Dead Again" is a neo-noir psychological thriller and one of my favorite movies. It stars Kenneth Branagh, Emma Thompson, Andy Garcia, and Sir Derek Jacobi and is a veritable master class in film direction, screenwriting, and performance. It's gorgeously shot and features scenes both in color and in black and white while the plot develops and the action moves back and forth between the 1940s and the 1990s. It's a tight, lean story, very engaging, and should have you quite rapt until the very end. Highly recommended.

"The Mangler" (1995)

Robert Englund and Ted Levine in a horror movie based on a Stephen King short story and directed by Tobe Hooper. Holy cow! This should be pretty good. Except that "The Mangler" is a laundry folding machine... that gets possessed a demon... and terrorizes the people at the laundry service, while a detective (Levine) tries to investigate and the owner (Englund) tries to find it new victims. Holy crap. Now it seems like it should blow. To be fair, it's an all around very competently made film. It's just clunkily written, but more than that it just doesn't work as a story. I've not read the short story, though. I'll wager it worked a lot better there. The movie blows. Avoid.

?!?!?!

Where did my "Attack the Block" review go?

I wrote it on the fly last night and posted it. Only now it is not here.

I wrote it in on the form, not in Word to cut-and-paste-and-post. So it's not saved anywhere.

Sorry, folks. I've to write it again.

*grumble*

At least it's better than "Neighbor".

A guy and his girl go visit the guy's old friend at his exclusive apartment in the big city. They meet some new, generally shallow people, and things go kind of downhill from there. Oh, and then... space aliens invade. And no hilarity ensues.

“Skyline” (2010)

directed by The Brothers Strause

written by Liam O'Donnell and Joshua Cordes

starring Eric Balfour, Scottie Thompson, and Donald Faison

How Is It?

There's not much to say, really. It looks way better than it ever had any hope of being. The production value of the film is high, and nothing else about the film even comes close to it. The only things not done on the cheap in the film are the special effects. It's pretty bad, really.

The Players

Eric Balfour plays Jarrod, and Scottie Thompson plays his girlfriend, Elaine. Donald Faison plays Jarrod's best friend and old partner in crime, Terry. All three a decent enough actors. It's just with the lackluster script and pretty hackneyed story at hand, it was probably all they could do to go through the motions. They aren't the stars of the “Skyline” anyway. The aliens are, and directors Greg and Colin Strause made sure that's obvious. The actors are just there to get the audience to the next special effects shot, a grave disservice to them and to us viewers.

Behind the Camera

The writing is mediocre, at its best moments. “Skyline” is a rehash of every major alien spaceship invasion movie of the past fifteen or so years, and nowhere does it even try to be original. The dialogue is clunky, and the entire script is far too long. The biggest problem of the script is that it seems to have been made to service the visual effects desires of the Strauses. It comes across as a story and script built around preconceived “cool moments” and/or “awesome visuals”, not a solid (at least least serviceable) story and script from which such moments and visuals would be inspired. For the most part, when the characters are talking the film is really quite boring. The script seems accidental.

The physical production cost of the movie was around $500,000. The special effects budget was somewhere between ten and twenty million dollars -- going into CG aliens, space ships, aerial battles, and lots of blue lights. It looks good, of course. Though the aliens and the ship are blatant rip offs of popular movie alien baddies we've seen many times, it was millions well spent. It's a technically well made film, but as directors, whose jobs are supposed to include drawing the audience in and sustaining interest, Greg and Colin are breathtakingly lacking. There is no sense of atmosphere in “Skyline” other its emotional vacuity. The Strauses made a video game, not a movie – and not a very good video game at that. Decent video games at least engage you and keep your interest throughout.

And the film's ending, if indeed one could call it that, is just absolutely cringeworthy.

The Verdict

“Skyline” is a prime example of the all too familiar problem of spectacle over substance. It's not a good story, nor is it well told. There's no story to speak of. The whole film is an excuse for big CG effects, and that just doesn't cut it.

“Skyline” is like “Birdemic”, just with better effects and no fun in watching it whatsoever.