Science-Fiction films - 2017
| Star Wars: The Last Jedi | Blade Runner 2049 | Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets |
| War For the Planet of the Apes | Alien: Covenant | Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 |
| Ghost In the Shell | Life |
____________________
 |
Star Wars: The Last Jedi is the eighth film in the Star Wars trilogy of trilogies. This film picks up where the previous film - The Force Awakens - left off. Rey (Daisy Ridley) has found Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), rebel resistance leader Princess Leia (Carrie Fisher) and X-Wing fighter pilot Po (Oscar Isaac) battle against the villainous First Order, Finn (John Boyega) recovers from his injuries and assists the resistance using his past experience as a First Order soldier, and Ben Solo / Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) chafes against the rule of Emperor Snope while seeking to find Luke and Rey. This film has generated some controversy. While it is visually impressive, possibly moreso than any of the preceding films, the directions taken with the characters and the tone of the film have put many fans off.
Good points: Writer/director Rian Johnson has crafted a good story that both fits into the Star Wars universe but which is also quite original. Many people had felt that The Force Awakens had too closely paralleled A New Hope. While The Last Jedi serves as the second act of a trilogy as The Empire Strikes Back did, the individual character stories are markedly different. This is also the only Star Wars film that I can recall that has a distinct theme - dealing with failures and disappointments and moving on. "The greatest teacher, failure is." and "We are what they grow beyond."
I also felt that John Williams did a masterful job with the score of The Last Jedi. There were several instances that referred back to Williams' original character themes in A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back. Even the Millenium Falcon has its own unique theme as it soars into action.
< I move into less of a review than a discussion of the film here, so spoilers lie ahead. >
Quibbles: Though I tried to be open-minded, the more I think about it, the more I hate the way Luke was portrayed. Johnson's writing has him rejecting his role as a Jedi. He considers Ben's transformation into Kylo to be his fault and he allows himeslf to be broken by it. For those of us who saw Luke as Anakin's redeemer and the hope for the future, it was terifficly disappointing to see him show such a lack of character. Hamill's portrayal makes it even worse. If he had played the role with a grim stoicism, it might have been possible to retain some respect for him. Instead, he seems more like a fearful, bitter old man. He only redeems himself at the end of the film. But it seemed too little, too late.
I'm also irritated by the trend towards killing off older characters. There was a lot of this in last year's Independence Day: Resurgence. The newer, younger characters don't need for the older characters to die for them to exist. People over 50 can serve purposes besides sacrificing themselves for the next generation.
I also felt that the film was somewhat misogynistic, though not in the usual sense of the word. Rey (the fledgling apprentice) shows Luke (the Jedi master) the error of his ways. Can you imagine Luke threatening Yoda while he was training him? Leia and Holdo (Laura Dern) show Po how his approach is wrong, but only after keeping their plans from him to the point of making him act in desperation. Rose Tico (Kelly Marie Tran) shows up Finn with her bravery, resourcefulness, and moral center. I'm reminded of the old saying "If a man says something and there is no woman there, is he still wrong?"
Praise and complaints aside, the thing about the Star Wars stories that I feel make them resonate so much with so many is their depiction of good and evil as palpable forces. Most people still consider Star Wars to be science-fiction because of the spaceships, rayguns, and robots, but it is really heroic fantasy set in a science-fiction world. The forces of good and evil each seem to have their own attributes aside from just their goals. The dark side seeks to control and destroy. The light seeks to enlighten, protect, and liberate. "A Jedi uses the Force for knowledge and defense, never for attack." And yet, this whole notion of the light side opposing the dark creates a paradox. Must one use the same tools as evil to fight it? And if so, hasn't evil won by tarnishing the light? "To answer power with power, the Jedi way this is not. In this war, a danger there is, of losing who we are."
If the dark side practitioners - primarily the Sith - represent the dark side of the force do the Jedi necessarily represent the light? The way they fight, with light sabres cutting things and people to pieces doesn't seem to indicate it. And if there is anything the Jedi have proven they have a talent for, it is creating powerful force users who decide to go to the dark side. Anakin Skywalker and Ben Solo are the most obvious examples, but which Sith didn't start out as a Jedi? The concept of balance is referred to by Luke in The Last Jedi. Could it be that the role of the Jedi is to use the force in a balanced way, understanding the values of growth and decay, peace and violence, all having their place as the situation calls for it?
We have seen instances where our Jedi heroes have faced masters of the dark side. In Return of the Jedi, Emperor Palpatine would have fried Luke to a crisp but for Anakin's intervention. In The Last Jedi, Emperor Snoke throws a helpless Rey about like a rag doll and then holds her in a force death grip for Kylo Ren to finish off. How is it that the dark side seems to be so much more powerful than the light? I had hoped this final trilogy would have given us a confrontation between true masters of the darkness and the light - Snoke versus Luke, perhaps - but since both are now gone, this will probably never be seen.
If the Jedi represent balance and the Sith represent the embrace of darkness, then are there those who embrace the light? Perhaps this is what leads older masters to go into seclusion. One cannot exert undue control or teach methods that serve the darkness if one is hidden away. There is also another intriguing possibility. The force exists whether the Jedi do or not. Though not a jedi, could Leia be a light force master? Her actions have been to protect and to liberate and she does have enough strength with the force to survive being on a ship which was blown up in space. She is also apparently the line at which Ben's journey to darkness has been unable to cross. It would have been interesting to see this played out, but with the loss of Carrie Fisher this seems unlikely now.
If you are a Star Wars fan, you pretty much have to see this film. While it fits in with the Star Wars universe and its ongoing mythology, it also turns some of its tropes on their ears. How you feel about this, decide you must.
- JC
____________________
 |
Thirty-five years after Ridley Scott's Blade Runner (1982) we now have Blade Runner 2049. This time around, however, Scott assumes the role of executive producer and hands off the directorial tasks to the very-accomplished Denis Villeneuve (Prisoners (2013), Sicario (2015) and our pick for 2016's best sci-fi film Arrival). Did Blade Runner need a sequel? Is this just another attempt to create a film franchise? And most importantly, is it any good?
Blade Runner was on of the first films from that period in the late 70's and early 80's where writers and directors took a different approach to science-fiction from the relatively "optimistic about mankind" Star Trek and heroic space fantasies of Star Wars. Like Scott's other space sci-fi horror film, Alien (1979), Peter Hyams' Outland (1981), and John Carpenter's Escape From New York (1981), the not so distant future is a dark, bleak, dirty place. Technology has largely crushed nature under its wheels and the shortsightedness, selfishness, and callousness of humans has made the world barely worth living in. In fact, technology has been harnessed to bring back one of humanity's greatest evils - slavery.
"Replicants" are bio-engineered humanoids, though what this means exactly isn't well explained. They are manufactured, fully-grown, and given artificial memories so their minds aren't total voids and to help them interact with people. Other than generally being stronger and more durable than humans, they are nearly indistinguishable from them. But humans look down on them, calling them "skin jobs" and they are told they lack souls because they weren't born as humans are.
Our story: Ryan Gosling portrays "K," a replicant hunter, or "Blade Runner," as Harrison Ford's character, Deckard, was in the first film. It is 30 years later and while newer obedient replicants have been integrated into society as a worker class, the older models are still being hunted. While apprehending one of the rogue models, K uncovers evidence of something which would threaten the structure of their society and starts him upon a personal journey as well. I can say little else without ruining the reveals which continue throughout the entire film.
This is a science-fiction/mystery/drama with action scenes. Those expecting more of an action film may be maddeningly frustrated by this. But that is fairly true to the feel of the first film. The only thing notably missing is Deckard's future-noir hard-boiled narrative. While Deckard could be something of a charming rogue, K is more understated - nearly stoic. If Deckard was an extroverted killer, K is more on the introverted side. Not everyone will necessarily take to this difference in protagonists.
Villeneuve and composer Hans Zimmer both do a remarkable job of re-creating the look, feel, and sounds of the original film as directed by Scott and scored by Vangelis. In this regard, it almost seems less like their own work, since they essentially are providing film pastiche. But the style of Blade Runner is such a fundamental aspect of this world, it was really necessary. Not everyone could have done it so well and they deserve credit for that.
When I have spoken in the past about what makes great science-fiction, I have noted the need for a mystery to unravel (which we have here), but also whether or not it examines the human condition. My feeling is that the overarching theme in this film is what defines a person? Is it how they were born or what they are made of? Could it be something simpler, such as the capacity to love? Interestingly, in this world of humans and androids, the most emotionally touching moments came from Joi (Anna de Armas), K's holographic companion. Her portrayal is reminiscent of Scarlett Johansson's in Her (2013). It makes one give more thought to the possibility of consciousness in AI. Could a machine develop beyond its initial programming? Don't we? In a world of humans, artificial humans, and digital AI, it's the humans who seem the least humane and the most sympathetic character is the farthest from human. Such a sad commentary on humanity.
Did we need another Blade Runner film? No, not really. However, good science-fiction that makes us think is always welcome. Was this to set up a franchise? Possibly. Blade Runner 2049 stands up well as a sequel to Blade Runner and there wouldn't need to be more. But story elements were left unresolved, more so than in the first film. If the public interest is enough, there could easily be more of these. Was it any good? It's probably the best sci-fi we've seen so far this year. Though the visuals are quite impressive, it's still a bit of a subdued, understated film and some may find it dull. But if a thoughtful, well-crafted story is to your liking, this is for you.
- JC
____________________
 |
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets is action film writer and director Luc Besson’s (Nikita (1990), The Fifth Element (1997), The Transporter (2002), Lucy (2014)) adaptation of the French science-fiction comics series Valerian and Laureline to film. Does he do the source material justice? Is this a good science-fiction film? Well, let’s talk about it.
The Back-Story: Our tale is set in the 28th century and largely around “Alpha,” a space city which evolved from Earth’s International Space Station. As the station embraced visitors from other Earth cultures over the years, it also came to welcome alien cultures as well. These alien cultures turned out to be multitudinous and many chose to stay. Alpha grew to gigantic proportions and eventually left Earth’s orbit to become its own independent multicultural community.
The Story: Federation officers Major Valerian (Dane DeHaan) and Sergeant Laureline (Cara Delevingne) serve as special peacekeepers for humanity in this larger universe. As they are about to be sent on their latest mission, Valerian has a vivid dream of the destruction of a peaceful alien race by wreckage falling from the sky. His “dream” is actually a message which relates to the mission at hand. Of course, multiple harrowing and imaginative adventures follow.
So, how was it? The visual effects for Valerian are very impressive and look as realistic as such things can be. Considering all of the alien races, space locales, and inter-dimensional effects depicted, this is quite an achievement. Much of Valerian’s style is reminiscent of that from The Fifth Element, Besson’s most significant other sci-fi effort. However, even Element wasn’t a perfect film. It suffered from a favoring of style over credibility and sometimes its humor made certain characters outright silly. But Element had some things going for it that Valerian lacks – a credible hero played by Bruce Willis, an exotic alien played by Milla Jovovich, and a fairly coherent plot which ran from beginning to end.
“Super-agent” Valerian, who should have come off as a futuristic James Bond, is simply unbelievable as portrayed by DeHaan, who seems more like a cocky frat boy than humanity’s top operative. In the original comics, Laureline was a girl from 11th century France, who Valerian met while on a mission which took him back in time. This added an interesting flavor to her character which was abandoned here. Though to Delevingne’s credit, she seemed the more likeable and every bit as competent of our two heroes.
As to the plot . . . I recall a time when films were sometimes described as “episodic.” In other words, a two-hour film would feature certain characters, but there would not be a single plot for the entire film. Rather, it would seem like a string of serialized “episodes” related to these characters, similar to patching together episodes in a TV series to movie-length and calling it a movie. Valerian is a bit too much like this.
The plot involving the aliens in Valerian’s dream should have been the unifying plot for this film, but there are at least three extended action sequences that seem barely related to this main story. The worst example is an over-extended and too often ridiculous story tangent where Valerian needs help from an alien shape-shifter played by Rihanna, to rescue Laureline from a group of aliens that look like walking manatees and have a taste for human flesh. Yes. Seriously. The only story element that runs the length of the film and which each scene relates to is the relationship between the two leads, and sadly, they have practically no onscreen chemistry at all.
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets may earn some affection due to its looks and its film treatment of source material many people have an attachment to, but the weak character portrayals and incoherent storytelling keep it from being quality sci-fi.
- JC
____________________
 |
War For the Planet of the Apes concludes the trilogy of films began with Rise of the Planet of the Apes (2011) and Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014). And as trilogies go, it is one of the best I have seen. Each of these films stands well on its own, but together they form a history of the rise of apes and the fall of man as seen through the eyes of the heroic ape leader, Caesar.
The BackStory: In Rise, we meet Caesar (played in motion-capture by Andy Serkis), the first ape whose intelligence was medically-enhanced by scientists. However, the same virus used to make Caesar, and then other apes, more intelligent, turned out to be lethal to the majority of humans. Dawn, set 10 years later, finds Caesar and his fellow escapee apes living in the wilderness and encountering some of the few remaining humans. While Caesar wished to live in peace with the humans, his fellow ape, Koba (played in motion capture by Toby Kebbell), who had suffered at the hands of men, was unable to let go of his hatred of them. He ignites a war with the humans which continues in spite of his death.
The Story: Some time later, soldiers send teams into the woods to hunt the apes. One particular group, the Alpha-Omegas led by "The Colonel" (Woody Harrelson), has been ruthlessly persistent in hunting the apes intending to exterminate them. After a deadly attack at he beginning of the film, Caesar relases the surviving human soldiers as a message that he wants peace. However, the response is another even more devastating attack. The apes plan to move to another location far enough away that they believe that the humans will not try to reach them there, but Caesar is determined to end the threat of The Colonel, and with a few of is closest ape allies, makes his way to deal with him.
The good: So many things. Good science-fiction informs us on the human condition. When Rise came out and before seeing it, I found it hard to believe one could really connect with a story where the starring character was an ape. Needless to say, I and many others are far past that now. The genre of science-fiction allows this story to be told, but really this is more of a serious drama. That the characters in the story are apes is incidental. This is a story about people, and when I say "people" I am speaking of humans and apes alike. This is the story of a group of people who look different from the rest, but despite a desire to simply live in peace, are hunted by those who won't tolerate their existence and who blame them for their woes. How many times have we seen this? In the past, Star Trek created alien races that were allegories for other cultures we struggled with in order to examine our motivations, our prejudices, and our inhumanity to one another. The Planet of the Apes series takes a hard look at how humanity would deal with another intelligent species sharing the planet. I would like to believe we could find a way to live in peace. But could we conquer our fear? Would our governments allow it? (This is similar to a theme in Man of Steel. How would humans feel about an alien living among us that had the powers he had? What might we do?)
Andy Serkis renders another amazing performance as Caesar, though I have to wonder where the man ends and the computer imagery begins. Woody Harrelson is chilling, but still believable, in his role as the villain of the piece. Matt Reeves returned against as director after having helmed Dawn. Rupert Wyatt's direction in Rise was good, but I liked Reeves' presentation of ape culture and the staging of his action scenes.
I really have no complaints about this film. It won't be for everyone. Not everyone likes sci-fi, nor will some people ever be able to see the apes as people. But for everyone else who can, this is quality story-telling, presented well. To me, the theme of these films is how people who are feared and demonized by society can hope to survive and have a chance for a peaceful life without becoming just like those against them. Caesar struggles with this through all three films. The answer is largely that you have to stay strong and keep your wits about you, while the people who fear, attack, and try to hoard what they think the world owes them will eventually destroy themselves. Caesar - the ape - may be one of the best role models in modern fiction.
- JC
____________________
 |
Ridley Scott's Alien was a landmark sci-fi horror film when it was released back in 1979. It introduced a dark, grungy atmosphere into science-fiction stories that up to then, had been either "good-guy with a raygun" movies, ones with sterile-looking futuristic environments, the post-apocalyptic type, or plain-out bug-eyed monsters. Alien showed us working class people on an enormous commercial spaceship, working for faceless people who didn't care about their employees' welfare, where technology wasn't always on your side, and - oh, by the way, if you thought Earth had its share of hostile predators, you ain't seen nuthin' yet.
20th Century Fox, has been using the H.R. Giger-designed "xenomorph" as a money-making property ever since. This was especially fueled by the success of James Cameron's Aliens in 1986. The story shifted from sci-fi/horror to sci-fi/action and made Sigourney Weaver an film hero as the iconic Ripley.
In the early 2000's, both Scott and Cameron had both been working on ideas for a fifth Alien film exploring the creatures' origins. These ideas were shelved in favor of the Alien vs. Predator (2004). But later on, Scott indicated he was still interested in the project. In 2012, Prometheus, the first of the Alien prequels was released. Now we have Alien: Covenant.
The Story: It's 2104 and a space vessel carrying a few thousand colonists and embryos in statis are interrupted from their multi-year journey to a remote planet by a neutrino burst which damages the ship. There are also a number of casualties, including the ship's captain. While making repairs on the ship, the crew intercepts a transmission from a nearby planet which seems to indicate the sender was from Earth. The second-in-command and new Captain Oram (Billy Crudup) decides to divert from their journey long enough to investigate. A team of colonists, including Daniels (Katherine Waterston), the original captain's widow, and Walter (Michael Fassbender), the ship's android, descend to the planet in a smaller vessel to find the source of the signal.
At first, the planet seems inviting - a beautiful setting with gravity similar to Earth's, a breathable atmosphere, majestic mountains and forests, rivers and lakes, and even fields of wheat. But shortly after their arrival some of the expedition team members are taken violently ill by a pathogen present in the environment. Things quickly go from bad to worse and just as it seems the entire group is about to be wiped out, they are rescued by a mysterious cloaked figure who drives off their attackers and leads them to safety. The figure turns out to be the rebuilt android, David (also Fassbender) who survived the mission of the Prometheus from 11 years ago. Needless to say, the crew doesn't remain safe much longer. David's intentions may not actually be those of a rescuer and the planet houses threats beyond even those they have already encountered.
The Good: Even though it covers familiar territory, Covenant manages to create several effective scenes that generate genuine white-knuckle tension. It also manages to create enough of a sympathetic bond with some of the principal characters to make the audience care about their welfare, mainly Daniels, Walter, and the ship's pilot Tennessee (Danny McBride).
The Not-so-good: While Scott is able to re-create some of the dark, ominous flavor of the environment of Alien in a terrestrial environment, my complaints are with his take on the mythology around the origins of both the aliens originally seen in Prometheus and the xenomorphs. (Potential spoilers in the next paragraph.)
Scott is building a universe in which an alien race called the Engineers may have been the seeders of human life on Earth and as they build worlds, they occasionally decide some cultures are failures and have means of wiping them out - usually in the form of distributing a mutagenic pathogen. Apparently some of this pathogen breached its containment on the planet in Prometheus and exterminated the Engineers that were there. David, the psychopathic android, who is not a fan of man or the Engineers took it upon himself to make the pathogen into something even more virulent.
My complaint is simply that I was quite satisfied with the idea that out in space we might encounter dangers far beyond anything we have on Earth and really, we should be prepared for that. The notion of exploring the universe is exciting and enticing. But as the alien entity Q said in an episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation, "It's not safe out here." Scott's idea that the origin of the deadly alien xenomorphs is that they were derived from a biological weapon of our creators and made more dangerous by one of our creations seems extremely self-centered. They couldn't just be a deadly alien. They had to be a deadly alien created by our "father" and made worse by our "son." But if that is what it takes to turn a scary monster into a film franchise, then by all means continue.
Additionally, viewers can scarcely figure out what's going on in these prequels. The films are so into the "show" and not "tell" approach to storytelling one spends a lot of time trying to understand what everything means. A little more exposition might actually be in order. What good is this elaborate story if no one can follow it? I had to read Ridley Scott interviews to understand it to the extent that I have.
But that's just my opinion.
It's not a bad film and it really has its suspenseful moments. I think they are taking the mythology a bit too far. If you like that kind of thing, these films are up your alley, if not, just don't dwell on the puzzles too much. One day, I'm sure all will be explained. Or not.
- JC
____________________
 |
Lightning in a bottle. The first Guardians of the Galaxy (2014) was a bit like that. Taking a relatively obscure group of space-oriented comic book characters and turning them into one of Marvel's most lucrative franchises is a bit like catching lightning in a bottle. Hats off again to director James Gunn as he gives us another installment in the lives of Peter Quill and his companions.
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2, continues the adventures of Quill (Chris Pratt), Gamora (Zoe Saldana), Drax (Dave Bautista), Rocket (Bradley Cooper), And Groot (Vin Diesel). After fleeing from the wrath of an egotistical, literally golden-skinned race of beings, Quill and the other Guardians meet his father, Ego (Kurt Russell), who actually turns out to be a nearly god-like being. While Quill, Gamora, and Drax spend time at Ego's home, Rocket and Groot are faced with an attack from Yondu and his crew of pirates who were sent after them by the golden aliens.
Some reviewers have griped that this film lacks the "freshness" of the first, but I think this is a bit unfair. As in The Avengers (2012), much of the thrill of the movie is in seeing these characters brought together for the first time. But even though that initial satisfaction can't be duplicated exactly, I will still want to see more of those characters. I appreciated finding out the mystery of Quill's parentage and why he's not just some guy from Earth who has a love for the Golden Oldies. It was nice seeing that there was actually a bond of sorts between Gamora and her "sister" Nebula (Karen Gillan). The revelation that Yondu (Michael Rooker) wasn't quite the rat that he appeared to be in the first film added depth to both his character and Quill's.
Gunn, with the help of a dream cast and a nostalgic score - which coincidentally or not may have been popular while Marvel was first creating their cosmic/comic stories and characters - has created a world with the otherworldly fun of Men In Black (1997), the imperfect believable heroes of Serenity (2005), and a hint of the dramatic gravitas of Star Wars (1977). He is able to make the characters sympathetic enough and the stakes serious enough to keep the viewer invested while blending in enough wonder and humor to show the audience a good time.
Near the end of the film, Quill comments that "sometimes that thing you're searching for . . is right by your side and you never see it." It's funny to imagine the moral of this story playing the same chord as The Wizard of Oz (1939) - "If I ever go looking for my heart's desire again, I won't look any further than my own backyard." It's a common irony that may have truth to it and how better to revive the idea? One good fantasy deserves another.
- JC
____________________
 |
Imagine the scenario – You wake up on a hospital table, unable to recall who you are. Breathing is difficult. Someone starts telling you that your body was destroyed but they have “saved” you. They tell you you’re alive but that's not how you feel. You don’t even know what you have lost. A year passes and you still don't know. All you can remember is being a machine.
Ghost in the Shell was originally a manga series published in Japan in 1989. It told the story of a counter-cyberterrorist organization – Section 9 – featuring the adventures of Major Motoko Kusanagi in mid-21st century Japan. The stories were adapted to anime in Ghost in the Shell (1995). This film is generally considered one of the greatest anime films of all time for its high quality visuals and themes of the individual’s identity in a world where technology has redefined the idea of self. Stephen Spielberg’s Dreamworks acquired the rights to adapt Ghost in the Shell as a live-action film in 2008. Rupert Sanders (Snow White and the Huntsman) was chosen as director of a script completed by Will Wheeler (Queen of Katwe, Ray Donovan).
Our story begins with a young woman named Mira Killian (Scarlett Johansson) waking after a procedure to place her brain into a cybernetic body, or “shell.” We leap a year ahead and Mira is now an operative for Section 9, referred to as “the Major.” Because of her cybernetic body, she is possessed of superhuman abilities – strength, speed, durability, and accuracy. She is also skilled with firearms and is able to become virtually invisible. She fights cyberterrorists with the other members of Section 9, including her closest friend, Batou (Pilou Asbaek) and Chief Aramaki (Takeshi Kitano). She lives in a world where technology has become pervasive and most people have been augmented with cybernetic implants. She commonly sees her doctor/designer, Dr. Ouelet (Juliette Binoche) who monitors her progress and repairs her “injuries.”
While attempting to thwart a terrorist attack on a business conference for Hanka Robotics – the corporation that manufactured Mira’s new body – she becomes aware of a hacker who is able to seize control of cybernetic devices, including robots and some humans with implants, and has a vendetta against the corporation. As she pursues the shadowy figure, she unexpectedly uncovers details of her own past.
This film has taken something of a beating from critics over its opening weekend. And while I can somewhat understand some of the complaints, I found much to appreciate in this film and hope that the naysayers don’t toss it in the trash heap of failed screen adaptations.
Most of the complaints I have heard have been either those of fans of the source material who were outraged by the divergences of the adaptation from the original. Others complained that the film didn’t have enough action and was too dull.
Having only seen the animated version of the film from 1995, I wasn’t as wedded to the original mythology. I also didn’t think that film was so good that it couldn’t have stood some improvement. Some aspects of the original were changed and I felt the choices were good ones, making the character more relatable, but clearly some do not agree.
As to the level of action, the Ghost in the Shell universe was supposed to have a less spectacular and more “noir-ish” quality, so the darker and less over-the-top action was actually more appropriate. But perhaps audiences have simply become too spoiled with superhero and Star Wars movies.
As I watched this film I was reminded of several other films I’ve seen, interestingly mostly from the nineties (or close) – the futuristic world of Minority Report (2002), the action of Total Recall (1990), the mental reality-warping of Strange Days (1995). The visual effects of the film are impressive and combined with the techno-Japanese score serve to draw you into the Major’s world. I found it to be an engrossing film, though it might seem too moody and cerebral for some.
In all, I felt this was a good origin story for our techno-heroine and I hope we get to see more of the Major’s future in ours.
- JC
____________________
 |
There have been many yarns spun depicting humanity encountering extra-terrestrial life. These stories span the range from fancifully optimistic - Close Encounters of the Third Kind, E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial, Contact, Arrival - to horrifying - War of the Worlds, Alien, The Thing, Species. Life returns us to this familiar territory, but does it have anything new to offer?
Our story gives us a multi-national crew of six men and women aboard the International Space Station studying a soil sample recovered from a probe of Mars. Hugh (Ariyon Bakare), the ship's biologist, discovers a single cell within the sample and begins examining it. By exposing the cell to oxygen and glucose, he is successful in its re-animation. The discovery of extra-terrestrial life is met with great excitement on the space station and upon Earth as well. As part of a public relations program back home, the organism is named "Calvin" by the school children of America. But, predictably, Calvin turns out to be more dangerous than the researchers had cause to believe and the story becomes a cautionary tale. Be careful what you go looking for.
The greatest strength of this film is its visual effects. The depiction of life within the station and its presence in space are completely convincing. One will accept that this is actually happening in a zero-gravity environment in space. Also, the alien effects are equally convincing. Unlike many alien creatures presented in films over the years, this particular one looks like something one might expect alien life to look like. At first, it almost resembles a flower. But later, as it grows, it looks aquatic. Given the zero-G environment, it's quite eerie having a creature floating before your eyes as it would underwater.
If it wasn't for the heavy science-fiction trappings of this film, I'd have included it on our horror page. Calvin turns out to be a terrible threat and the crew becomes caught up in a life or death struggle against it. And while the film is suspenseful and horrifying it still felt just a bit flat.
Though Life boasts a wealth of highly-regarded actors, including Jake Gyllenhaal, Rebecca Ferguson, and Ryan Reynolds, it fails to develop the characters much beyond the superficial. Gyllenhaal's character prefers living in space to being on Earth. Bakare's character is fascinated with life. Hiroyuki Sanada's character just became a father. Reynolds' character is funny. Ferguson's character is responsible for keeping the creature from Earth if it's found to be dangerous. Unlike other films in the genre such as Alien and The Thing where characters were developed enough to give them some dimension, this seems lacking here. The actors do their best with what they have to work with and their portrayals feel genuine. But since the characters weren't sufficiently developed it's hard to identify a theme to the story except just the general, "be careful what you wish for" and maybe we're not as ready for the perils of other worlds as we think.
While Life is suspenseful and there are several truly horrifying scenes, it may suffer a bit from showing the creature too much. Calvin never loses its horrifying quality nor does it look fake. But I do wonder if having it stay out of sight more often so you're not sure when or where it may suddenly appear might have added to the film's tension.
If you like the idea of a space horror film with wonderful actors and the realistic quality of Gravity, then this film may be just for you.
- JC