Reviews

3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
Immortal (2004)
Beautiful. Uneven. Flawed.
11 August 2004
Director Enki Bilal is a supremely skilled comic book artist from the same stylistic school as Moebius (who influenced the visual style of Blade Runner and designed part of Alien).

Bilal's comics are invariably sombre, textured, exquisitely drawn worlds with strong internal logic.

"Immortel" is the film adaptation of the "Nikopol" trilogy of comics by Bilal. This trilogy of comics I highly recommend.

The film opens with some lovely CGI sequences: Nice environment and craft - gritty, textured, dystopia, a catchy steam punk take on the Blade Runner aesthetic.

The main characters work well in this setting, especially the fetchingly beautiful Linda Hardy (a former Miss France).

But without warning the quality drops jarringly -- as a host of secondary CGI characters are introduced.

What you thought was a movie, suddenly turns into something resembling a video game cut-scene: The amateurishly animated, dated CGI characters would be booed out of Tron. The voice acting is awful. The lip sync a joke.

To really grind it in, the CGI actors get lots of close-ups. Painful.

The plot progresses through a series of surreal events in a New York of the future. If you haven't read the comic, things won't make too much sense on first viewing.

Stick around for the ride, for there are a number of very successful scenes in this movie -- a hauntingly beautiful museum sequence, some fine sci-fi thrills, a gritty symbolist apartment in which a dreamlike love story takes place. Atmospheric music, too.

The really good stuff is invariably bookended by poor scenes, including the worst CGI explosions you'll ever see, awful dialog, and tinny sound effects that suddenly intrude on an otherwise coherent sound design.

This has got to be most uneven movie I've ever seen.

But give the comic books a go.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Stranded (2001)
2/10
...on the bottom shelf of the video store
21 May 2004
Human explorers crash-land on Mars and have to weigh their options for survival.

The landing craft can only sustain the lives of a few, so necessity dictates that most of the crew has to strike out across the barren planet surface with little hope of rescue.

The acting is unbelievably bad, even for this type of movie. The actors all have thick Spanish accents and they deliver the cliché-ridden dialog like it's being read straight from the page.

Voice-overs have been added to remedy the unintelligible dialog. Also, the actors sigh before and after each sentence, to telegraph their hardships to the astute viewer.

The middle third of the movie is a long, uneventful slog across the surface of Mars - which happens to be the same old red-tinted gravel pit that we've seen in all the other Red Planet movies.

The boredom is enlivened by the movie camera and film crew being clearly - and I mean CLEARLY - reflected in the helmet visors during every single close-up. Classic stuff.

This is an unashamed B movie which might have been attractive for fans of the genre. Sadly, it has a dramatic curve as flat as a board, and no great shakes in the way of plot development or payoff at the end.

There are hardly any props or locations either, so unless you are heavily into gravel pits and bum acting, the verdict has to be...

Rock bottom. Avoid.
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
Bizarre continuity is the real star of the movie
18 May 2004
This is so poor it's watchable.

The plot deals with a grizzled spaceship crew happening upon a drifting, apparently abandoned Russian craft.

In the empty vastness of space, the two craft accidentally collide (!) - and 'Alien'-esque fun ensues as a cyborg from the Russian ship menaces our crew.

The spacecraft interiors are clearly a dolled-up factory set (metal walkways, boilers, piping). In this entirely unconvincing setting, 'Kody', 'Snake' and the rest of our hero crew grimace, grunt, run about and continually and repeatedly rack their shotguns without firing them.

The continuity gaffes are what define this movie, and they are nothing short of amazing:

Stuff appears and disappears. The shotguns are racked. A cigar gets longer by being smoked. The shotguns are racked again, just to make sure. Content of a bottle increases by being drunk from.

The film progresses through the usual clichés by way of intense ham acting, poxy camera work and Ed Wood quality props to a showdown climax.
15 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed