Axiom's Edge Science Fiction and Fantasy

Alice in Wonderland delivers a visually stunning, though artistically vapid film apparently calculated to launch a new fantasy franchise.

By John J. Joex

Rating: 3 out of 5 Stars

At first blush, one might think that for an updated version of Lewis Carroll’s beloved Alice in Wonderland what better pairing than dilettante of the eccentric Tim Burton as director and typecast bucking, superstar Johnny Depp in the lead role (that’s as the Mad Hatter, not Alice).  The two have paired up on multiple occasions and delivered some spectacular films including the all-time classic Edward Scissorhands (their first team-up).  And on their rendition of Alice in Wonderland they manage to deliver a visually compelling story that revitalizes the world that Carroll imagined for 21st century movie-going audiences, though it seems to lack some of the depth and soul that you might expect of a Burton/Depp collaboration.

The story of the girl named Alice who falls down a rabbit hole has actually been adapted over a dozen times worldwide on film and for television (including a previous Disney animated version in 1951), so wisely Burton chose to make this movie as a sequel of sorts to the original book (which had its own sequel in print by Carroll titled Through the Looking Glass).  Alice is twenty now and she does not remember her previous adventures in the “curiouser and curiouser” world except as a vague recollection from a dream.  She finds that her mother has arranged for her to marry a wealthy nobleman whom she does not particularly care for.  When he asks for her hand (in front of a large audience) she runs off in pursuit of the white rabbit she had seen lurking around previously and falls down a rabbit hole (didn’t catch if she swallowed a red pill, though).  Here, she experiences the same situation upon her first arrival that readers of the original book are familiar with.  However, we quickly find that she has made a return trip to “Underland” (I do not recall if they ever provided an explanation of the name change beyond stating that Alice had mispronounced it previously; probably just did it because they can trademark the altered name).

Alice meets this new world’s colorful collection of characters whom she does not remember and who are unsure whether she is the “real” Alice.  In short order, she hooks up with the Mad Hatter (Depp) and the story of her return to Wonderland (er, Underland) is off an rolling.  Sort of.

As a feast for the eyes, this movie soars.  Tim Burton applies his mastery of visual story-telling to create a stunning, bizarre setting that really captures the spirit Carroll’s book.  Again, though, he does that on a visual level.  Unfortunately, the script strays from the twists of logic, conundrums, and nonsense that made the book a classic of fantastical literature.  In fact, it instead delivers a fairly straightforward fantasy story.  You see, the Red Queen has subjugated the land and keeps it under her yoke employing the  Jabberwocky (who as it turns out in this movie is just your ordinary, run-of-the-mill dragon) as her strong-arm.  But a magical scroll has prophesized that Alice will return to the land and use the Vorpal Sword to slay the beast.  That’s it.  That’s the story.  A standard, by-the-numbers fantasy plot with some colorful, eccentric characters thrown into the mix to tie it back to its source material.  Oh, and Alice’s experiences in Underland ,which help her she decide that she will not let others tell her what to do (even though she ends up letting them tell her what to do), relate back to the real world and change her when she returns.

So ultimately this Alice fails to deliver the madcap antics and the celebration of eccentricity that you would expect from Burton and Depp and also never demonstrates the heart and soul of their better work.  And that puts this movie very much in the same camp as Avatar: a visual masterpiece that lacks a story to equal its technical accomplishments.  And I’m guessing this is more the result of corporate decisions trumping artistic direction.  By all appearances, Disney certainly seems to be setting this up as franchise that they hope will remain viable for years to come.  So I can see where they may have pushed for a “safer” story for the movie that will pilot the series.  And sure, I can see where Disney would embrace eccentricity and imagination, but only so far as it enhances the saleability of the product.  And much like corporate decisions pushed Burton’s remake of the Planet of the Apes out of his control in the interest of the franchise it would create, I have to believe that similar forces guided the final product here (otherwise I have to finally give in and admit that Tim Burton has lost his touch, and I’m not ready to do that yet).  With Planet of the Apes, though, the tinkering from above ultimately destroyed the movie and any chance of sequels.  With Alice in Wonderland, it appears they delivered just what the studio brass would want: a sequel-friendly movie with general appeal even though it may be artistically vapid.

So while Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland may not be the disaster that was the Planet of the Apes, it also falls well short of the best work of his career like Edward Scissorhands, Batman, Big Fish, and A Nightmare Before Christmas.  It does have the potential to grow on you, though, sort of like the last film mentioned did.  It’s worth seeing for its technical accomplishments alone, much like Avatar, just don’t go in expecting another Burton masterpiece and you will not be too disappointed.

You can check showtimes in your area and buy tickets online for Alice in Wonderland and other movies now playing at Fandango.com:

The Crazies, both new and old, delivers an interesting enough twist on the Zombie movie genre.

By John J. Joex

Rating:

Original: 3 ½ out of 5 Stars

Remake: 3 out of 5 Stars

THIS REVIEW CONTAINS SOME SPOILERS

Those people familiar with director George A. Romero most likely know him for the zombie franchise he kicked off with the seminal Night of the Living Dead and also look on him as the godfather to that particular sub-genre.  He also did a movie in the 1973 called The Crazies that offered a twist of sorts on the zombie-flick but which never gained quite as much notoriety.  For me, that movie flew under the radar and I was not even aware of its existence until the announcement last year of the recent remake, which opened in theaters last week.   So just this last weekend I picked up a copy of the original and then this week I caught the updated version in the theater giving me a good opportunity to compare the two while still fresh in my memory.

Both movies follow a very similar plotline: the government has been experimenting with bio-weapons and a virus from these experiments gets loose and infects a small town.  This virus causes dementia in its victims, essentially turning them into homicidal zombies, though not the undead variety.  The government tries to contain the outbreak through severe methods but a small group of people breaks away from their quarantine and flees from trigger-happy military personal as well as their friends and neighbors afflicted by varying degrees of dementia.

The original movie follows a very direct approach to the story.  The military shows up almost immediately and there is no question as to what the townspeople suffer from.  However, a lack of trust in the ill-prepared military personnel leads to the decision to break free from their yoke.  This movie develops its tension and suspense in the central characters’ flight to safety along with their inability to trust or feel secure with anybody they meet or even themselves as they start to see the virus manifest itself.  The 70’s version is a low budget affair with bargain-basement actors which requires that you get past the cheese-factor in order to enjoy it.  But ultimately it delivers a satisfying, if not spectacular, science fiction yarn steeped in government conspiracy (a precursor of sorts to The X-Files).

The remake follows a similar story to the original but develops a bit more slowly and keeps the viewer in the dark longer about what has inflicted the town (assuming, of course, they have not seen the original).  It also adopts the vernacular of the horror movies that followed the 1973 version, from Jaws to Halloween to Friday the 13th to A Nightmare on Elmstreet, and delivers the in-your-face, jump-out-at-the-screen moments of horror that the original eschewed (it even has its own version of the mayor from Jaws who is determined not to ruin the season, though fortunately this time around the sheriff just ignores him).  This approach provides more of a rollercoaster ride and more of the thrills that modern-day audiences expect, but it also too often descends into the predictable and contrived.  Still, the remake delivers an enjoyable movie if maybe a bit less satisfying than the original (depending of course on your capacity to tolerate cheesiness over predictability).  Both movies wrap up with fairly grim endings, though the current movie makes the leap to the extreme scenario that the original just suggested.  And both movies leave us with the expected setup for a sequel.  That never surfaced with the original, but the updated movie has seen a decent take at the Box Office so far and will almost certainly make its way back to the big screen with additional installments.

Ultimately, both movies manage to deliver a decent enough distraction and elevate themselves a notch or two above the average.  Neither would rank as a classic in Science Fiction or Horror, but they also avoid disgracing their genres and are definitely worth a look.

But the Original Movie on DVD from Amazon.com:

The Wolfman delivers a decent film with atmosphere that pays homage to the classic Universal monster-movies.

By Sam Christopher

Rating: 3 ½ out of 5 Stars

Just so you know: The Wolf Man (1941) was always my favorite Universal Monster film. I know that Dracula and Frankenstein were more celebrated, and you’ll get no argument from me that Bela Lugosi and Boris Karloff were better actors who more effectively pulled off most of their roles than Lon Chaney Jr., whose main stock-in-trade as an actor always seemed to be that he was just a nice easy-going guy who was lucky enough to have that thoroughbred bloodline. More, I would submit that while vamps and lycanthropes are rather even on the human psyche scale, the story of a man-made monster—technology run amok, as it were—from Frankenstein is a much more frightening and realistic proposition, especially today. Despite these things, the tragic story of Larry Talbot and his furry alter ego has always grabbed me. I loved the Old World setting (although I could say that for all of the original Universal Monster films) and the story of a man who had a compulsion over which he had no control always appealed to me, but I think the thing I liked best was Chaney’s breezy portrayal of the character. This wasn’t the story of a brilliant though off-kilter scientist or of long-dead demon-possessed royalty. The original Wolfman was just a regular guy who was cursed mainly for having the bravery and wherewithal to help someone else who was in trouble. He was selfless and earnest, unthinking in his efforts to help someone who needed it for no other reason than because they needed it.

Benicio Del Toro, who stars as Talbot in the film of this review, gives us exactly the same kind of performance. He comes to us here as a stage actor who has not been to his ancestral home of Blackmoor, England since witnessing a tragedy as a child and being shipped off to first an asylum, then to America (out of the frying pan…). Talbot here returns at the behest of his brother’s fiancée, Gwen (played by Emily Blunt), who asks that he help find the now-missing brother. The brother, we learn in short order, was the man killed in the opening sequence by a werewolf. We also meet Sir John Talbot (Anthony Hopkins), the family patriarch, who is sly and funny, with a strange way about him. We are then led through a series of perfunctory meetings, first with the suitably superstitious and easily-led-to-violence townsfolk then on to the gypsies (can’t have a werewolf without gypsies I always say). We will eventually meet Francis Aberline of Scotland Yard (Hugo Weaving), who will accuse Larry Talbot of being Jack the Ripper, of all things. I do not wish to give the whole film away but I will say that it is a retelling in style and feel rather than substance. The viewer who has experienced the original will most likely feel a sense of familiarity with the characters and most especially with the setting and situations while being led in totally different directions story-wise than the trail blazed by the original movie’s writer, Curt Siodmak. There was one particular twist involving Hopkins that I can’t seem to figure out. I hated it at first but then I was all right with it for awhile before hating it again; now I like it again. There is also, of course, a marked improvement in makeup and sfx over that available in Universal maestro Jack Pierce’s time.

I understand some of the criticism that could easily be directed at this film. There are times when the story seems aloof, the viewer seeming to be so far away from the action as to not have to care about it, and then there was the reference to Jack the Ripper, which I personally find to be a rather tiresome device in so much sf (I almost hoped Talbot would turn out to be JtR here, although I simultaneously prayed he wouldn’t). But, for me, the feel of the picture was enough. I had no problem with the expansion and twisting of the original story (akin in some ways to Tim Burton’s Sleepy Hollow, as someone pointed out to me after the showing), just as the lack of genuine horror did not worry me. When was the last time vampires were played for true horror to any great effect? 30 Days of Night (which I personally didn’t find to be all that frightening)? I won’t say these monsters can’t be made to be scary for most audiences anymore but I do think that the Underworlds and Twilights and even the beloved Buffy the Vampire Slayers of the world have rendered them very nearly impotent on the horror scale. But if atmosphere and serious, well-conceived and at least attempted originality of storyline are all I can hope for from my classic monsters these days then I’ll take it. Beats the hell out Saw Whatever-Number-They’re-On-Now any day.

Buy the Original Wolf Man Movies on DVD from Amazon.com:

Legion gives us a semi-interesting cross between The Prophecy and Terminator

By Sam Christopher

Rating: 2 ½ out of 5 Stars

What do you get when you cross The Prophecy with The Terminator? If your answer was, “An unruly mess”, you’re half-right. The other half would be this semi-interesting, if shallow, film. Credit where it’s due: I at least had some unease about where this one was going, unlike a certain much more celebrated film currently taking the world by storm I could name. Not that I was on the edge of my seat or anything, and this isn’t a film that just has to be watched on a big screen to get its full effect, but it was all right for an afternoon matinee. One thing I don’t understand after seeing the film is what I heard it was about before watching it, but I’ll get to that in a little bit.

The story starts with Michael the Angel (played by Paul Bettany) crash landing on Earth and hacking his own wings off. I didn’t really understand that but he does also pull a collar off at the same time so maybe there’s a significance there I missed—somehow, I find it hard to believe that the wings and collar made it somehow easier for God to track or control him. Anyway, he then breaks into a weapons store and, in breaking out, is accosted by two police officers, one of whom having been shown—sort of—to be a racist (it’s kind of hazy, really, but that is the general gist I think), and the encounter ends up with both of the cops dead. Then the scene switches to the desert, where Bob Hanson (Dennis Quaid) runs a little out of the way diner named Paradise Falls (and if you don’t get that pun just stop reading now) with his son, Jeep (Lucas Black), who’s sweet on a very pregnant chick named Charlie (Adrienne Palicki). Charlie works as a waitress in the diner, along with Percy Walker (played by the stellar Charles S. Dutton), the cook. Add to this mix a suburban couple on their way somewhere else with their young daughter when their car broke down—I will refer to them here as The Coopers, although I know that wasn’t their name (NOTLD reference)—and the urban black guy with the handgun everyone whines about (more on that in a few), and we have the makings of… well, a movie, anyway.

It’s not long before the possessed folks start showing up trying to whack the unborn baby of Charlie, a baby Michael describes as humanity’s last hope. Luckily for us, guns will stop them, even though frying pans won’t. This happens and that happens, then Michael shows up to tell us everything we know about the situation is wrong. I won’t give the whole thing away here but I will say that I liked the story better than I thought I would going in. Honestly, I had come to think of this film as being just The Prophecy with a bigger F/X budget, and that is pretty close to the truth. But there is more to it than just that; not much more, but a little more.

Two things more. First, I had heard and read going in that this film was all about Armageddon, God’s Final Judgment on Mankind, and that Charlie was carrying the Anti-Christ. One, it doesn’t appear to be about Armageddon; Michael himself likens it all more to the Great Flood of Noah’s time—although he does also speak a few times as though it is the end of all things here, too. Two, the only mention of anything that could be thought of as a Final Judgment is the one that God’s already made about us, according to Michael. And finally, the only thing Michael ever says about Charlie’s kid is that it’s the last hope for us—he never mentions anywhere that it has anything to do with Satan—Satan is never mentioned anywhere in the film at all, in fact, which I admit I found strange.

Second, there is a part of the film early on where the urban black man (Tyrese Gibson) pulls his 9MM (I’m guessing, really didn’t get that good a look at it) and stops everyone in the diner from being murdered. Later, after Michael shows up and hands everyone an “assault weapon” (a designation we use to differentiate the really scary-looking firearms from those other cute and cuddly ones that could never be used to assault anyone), a couple folks take the guy to task for having a handgun. “Wha…?!?” was the only thing I could think in watching that. I guess it would have been much better if the old lady from the trailer had just slaughtered everyone in the joint right off the bat.

Avatar is a darn good movie, but as cautionary tales go, it’s too in-your-face.

By Carl Lawrence

Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars

I have nothing against a good cautionary tale, having been weaned on them watching the original Star Trek television series when it first went into syndication back when I was a kid. I’m the classic definition of a Trekker (I never cared for the term “Trekkie”), and I loved The Twilight Zone. So I definitely know how to appreciate a good cautionary tale when I see one, and while Avatar might fall short in that respect, frankly it is a darn good movie otherwise.

Not only is it a measurable leap forward in terms of cinematic techniques and special effects, but it’s also a stellar tale, impeccably presented. The 3D aspect of what is shown (I saw it in IMAX 3D) fell short however. There were only certain scenes where I could actually see the intended 3D affect, and none of them were the more memorable scenes that the movie has to offer. In that respect the movie didn’t really live up to that aspect of the hype in my humble opinion, but even as a standard 2D movie, which it isn’t, it’s still an incredibly paced, dynamic film. However, as a cautionary tale, it peddles and preaches a clear and distinct ideological view to its audience, and therein lays my biggest problem with the film. In spite of the technical innovations achieved, it’s also just more in the way of anti-corporate, anti-capitalist, anti-military, pro-Green, anti-human sentiment. I feel compelled to ask whether we haven’t had more than enough of that by Hollywood titans out to dazzle us with their brilliance as they enjoy many of the societal benefits that they decry in their films.

Early on in the movie, one of the central characters—an alien from the Pandora Moon no less—talks down to the protagonist for the dire sin of his being utterly unfamiliar with the environment in which she lives. Cameron was making a point, but he was also talking down to his audience as though we are all children, telling us in effect to pay attention to our surroundings and to act accordingly and to be respectful in situations foreign to us. And it turns out much of the movie comes across that way unfortunately. I know you’re probably thinking to yourself right now that apparently I didn’t like the movie after all, so why give it four stars? Well, in a nutshell because it is also entertaining, very well executed for the most part, and magnificently crafted in spite of its condescending approach.

Roughly forty percent of the movie is live-action, with the other sixty percent pioneering CGI, and Cameron manages to deliver it all in an almost seamless fashion. The viewer can identify with the alien creatures and their world as though they’re just as real as their human counterparts, which is really saying something, because they are portrayed as the more sympathetic of the two groups. That might well have been a tougher sell had the Na’vi race not looked authentically realistic in their own right, but they do, and the battle sequences that take place on Pandora are truly spectacular.

Sam Worthington turns in a decent performance, although I felt he was better in “Terminator Salvation.” Zoe Saldana is especially good considering she’s never actually seen in the movie, only her computer-rendered character. The real stand-out for me, however in terms of performance, is Stephen Lang, who looks as though he pumped up on steroids just for the sake of making this film. He plays the human Colonel and primary villain who’s hell-bent in succeeding in his mission to level a significant portion of Pandora, and to eliminate anyone that dares to get in his way, be they human or native, in order to get to the precious mineral that lies beneath the alien colony living there. (Cameron actually named this precious mineral “unobtainium” for metaphorical reasons obviously, but it’s ridiculous to hear said aloud nonetheless.)

I felt as though I was watching a weird combination of “Dances with Wolves,” “Medicine Man,” and “Attack of the Clones.” All in all the movie is definitely worth seeing however. I’m tired of being made to feel as though I’m one of the bad guys though as I’m sitting there to be entertained, having paid the price of an IMAX ticket no less for the thrill of being impugned.

By John J. Joex

Even though wowed by amazing visuals, many viewers probably felt a sense of déjà vu while watching James Cameron’s newest movie Avatar as it freely lifted from sources like the Pocahontas story and the Kevin Costner film Dances with Wolves. But if you want to find a more recent film that followed a similar storyline, look no further than last Summer’s Battle for Terra. This film, also a CGI-animated entry, had a brief run in the theaters last May as it was quickly pushed out by juggernauts like Wolverine and Star Trek. But like Avatar, it gave us a film about humans invading an alien planet for their own purpose. Story-wise, though, Battle for Terra provided a more satisfying tale than the James Cameron affair.

While Avatar may have taken movie-making to the next level with its next-gen CGI effects, it gave us nothing new in the way of story-telling. The idea of a greedy corporation uprooting an indigenous population in order to strip the land of its natural resources has worked its way through any of a number of movies, television shows, books and even Dr. Seuss stories (The Lorax). And Avatar gives no fresh spin on the idea, it just makes it a whole lot cooler to look at (and one could argue that the message quickly gets lost in the visuals, or that people can more easily ignore it). The movie very quickly descends into a cliché-ridden story about an evil corporation backed by gung-ho jarheads versus the technically inferior noble savages whose purity of spirit eventually overcomes the specter of greed.

In Battle for Terra, we have a bit of a different spin on this well-worn story. In that movie, the last remnants of the human race are looking for a planet to settle on before their decaying starship gives out on them. They find a planet with a peaceful, indigenous population who lives at harmony with their land. The planet will suit the humans, but they must terraform it first, which will make the atmosphere poisonous for the natives. The humans do not necessarily want to harm the aliens, but they are desperate for their own survival. And while the leaders want to first consider other options, the nefarious General Hemmer prefers the more direct approach and forces the matter leading to an all-out conflict between the two races.

Battle for Terra had its fair share of clichés and copy-and-paste dialogue, but it also seemed to have more of a heart at its core. Coming to us from indy director Aristomenis Tsirbas, this movie, while still having a familiar feel to it, opened up a whole new fantastic world and avoided giving us a simple by-the-numbers good vs. evil plot. It actually presented some interesting moral dilemmas, and during the final battle the audience finds themselves torn over whether to route for the humans or the natives from Terra. Quite a contrast from Avatar where we all knew that the muscle-headed marines attacking the Pandorans at the end were the bad guys and needed to go down.

Battle for Terra delivered a time-worn message of the need to understand other people and their cultures and the need to find a peaceful way to coexist, but it did it without feeling to preachy or redundant from what we have heard before. Avatar, on the other hand, verges on the self righteous, which makes it that much worse. It seems somewhat ingenuine to try and deliver a message about the evils of corporate greed by way of a mega-blockbuster designed with the purpose of propping up a franchise intended to rake in the profits for its studio and creators for years to come. It’s almost like they just added the message just to give some validity and relevance to the product. Sort of like a “Go Green” Barbie doll, or a “Peace First” G.I. Joe. Not that I am necessarily saying that James Cameron does not believe the message of his movie, he has done an excellent job of infusing relevant themes in his movies in the past (most notably The Abyss). But this time around, it just does not hold the same weight.

Don’t get me wrong, I still liked Avatar and I recommend seeing it just for the cinematic spectacle it delivers (I rate it 3 out of 5 stars, mostly based on its technical accomplishments). It just seemed much less inspired and more calculated and I just do not feel that it lived up to the hype, nor do I agree that it has changed film-making on anything other than a technical level. And I do highly recommend that you check out the underrated and almost ignored Battle for Terra (which I rated 4 out of 5 stars) for a film that also delivered spectacular visuals along with a more genuine message.

Read Sam Christopher’s Review of Avatar

Read Johnny Jay’s Review of Battle for Terra

Buy Battle for Terra on DVD from Amazon.com:

Highlights of News, Updates, Reviews, Previews, Articles, and Commentaries from around the Internet on the subject of Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror.  Check for the latest listings from The Sci Fi Scroll at our reddit.com page.

The 2009 Science Fiction Power List
io9.com 12/23/24
It’s io9.com’s second annual science fiction power list, featuring the 20 most powerful people and teams in the world of science fiction. Yes, science fiction can wield great power. These are the people who take responsibility for that. (Read the Full Article)

5 Entertainment Lessons We Hope 2009 Has Taught The Future
io9.com 12/27/24
With the year almost over, it’s time to look back and wonder if 2009 actually left any wisdom for future generations behind in its whirlwind of franchise-maintenance, Obama-adoration and dream-crushing. Here are some potential morals from the last 12 months. (Read the Full Article)

How Heath Ledger’s last film Parnassus nearly died with him
Sci Fi Wire 12/25/24
Director Terry Gilliam nearly threw in the towel on his fantasy film The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus when its star, Heath Ledger, died unexpectedly in January 2008. But friends and family convinced Gilliam to complete the movie. (Read the Full Article)

Fringe: Is the Post-House Episode Its Last Chance?
TV by the Numbers 12/22/24
Fringe will air a new episode after the “return” episode of House on January 11. That sounds a lot to me like a last chance to prove its got the potential for better ratings somewhere else in the schedule besides Thursday at 9pm. Fans should keep their fingers crossed for a big ratings night. (Read the Full Article)

7 ways Dollhouse could have been great
Sci Fi Wire 12/23/24
Sci Fi Wire has compiled their reactions with ours to come up with seven things that could have made Dollhouse great, along with one extra bonus thing. (Read the Full Article)

Star Trek Most Pirated Movie Of 2009 – Paramount Not Happy
TrekMovie.com 12/21/24
JJ Abrams Star Trek did well at theaters and is selling strong on home video, but it appears that it is even more popular with online pirates. (Read the Full Article)

Avatar is visually spectacular, but its “give peace a chance” storyline and two-dimensional characters drag it down.

By Sam Christopher

Rating: 2 ½ out of 5 Stars

Having read all the hype and listened to interviews with director James Cameron over the past month or so—things I don’t usually take much notice of but for this film they’ve been everywhere—I went into this picture expecting to be awed. And I was. The CGI is amazingly incredible. I can’t make it plainer than that. When you see the Na’vi, who are the nine foot tall long-tailed aliens in the film, they look real; even when the Na’vi are shown next to actors, the humans and aliens look natural, solid. The animals of Pandora—the alien planet—along with the plants, and even the “floating mountains”, all look natural and real, as if the film crew had just went into a jungle and filmed the whole thing as it happened. That, along with the scope of the setting and the way the film was shot all add up to a technically brilliant film that really should be seen on a large screen to be properly appreciated. But coming from a master of epic films such as Cameron, who wrote and directed, that only makes sense.

Unfortunately, it’s also saddled with a pretty predictable plot and two-dimensional characters all around. Fairly early it’s made clear to the viewer that the corporation is evil, the military is evil, and the chain-smoking scientist is good. Our protagonist is asked to do something that is meant to avoid hurt on both sides, all because “Evilco” wants to get its hands on the rich deposits of—get this—“unobtainium” on the planet. No, I am not making that name up. What’s it for, you ask? I think it’s what they sent Duck Dodgers to Planet X to acquire—you know, the active ingredient in shaving cream? (Seriously, if they ever said why we need this mineral or why it is so improbably named I missed it.) Anyway, our hero is sent to learn about the native culture and perhaps get them to leave their ancestral home because that’s where the largest deposit in however-many-clicks is located but he falls in love with… peaceful culture… corporate greed… all we are say-ing, is give peace a chance… superstitious and cowardly lot… Sorry, almost got lost in that thicket of clichés. The point to the film seems to be mostly that anyone with a level of technology higher than bows and arrows… other than chain-smoking hippie scientists… is bad. Unless he renounces his evil ways and “goes native”. Oh, and maybe that one should never allow a military operation to be headed by Michael Myers’ great-great-grandson (he… just… wouldn’t… DIE). Over time, the viewer is worn down by all this stuff we’ve seen over and over again, all these “twists” and “turns” in storytelling that would be right at home in a Billy Jack flick, and he begins to just wait… and long for… the ending. As the credits were rolling we stood up and started to head down toward the exit. I asked if anyone thought there might be something after the credits and was met with a resounding, “I doubt it, but who cares?” (There wasn’t anything after the credits, BTW, for those interested.)

Now, despite the plotholes and hackneyed script I encourage everyone to see this film on the big screen, preferably in 3-D and IMAX (I unfortunately saw it flat), as it is a tremendous spectacle, and a magnificent technological achievement in filmmaking. I read that it cost $300 Million to make and then they spent another $200 Million on the advertising. After seeing it I can believe it cost that much to make, but I still have trouble believing that anyone would foot that bill. I know Cameron made Titanic but having to be one of the two or three biggest moneymakers of all time just to break even is asking a lot. The good thing here, of course, is that now that the tech has been accomplished the price will fall over time, which means that we can look forward to all this magnificent artifice perhaps tied to a better story at some point.

Highlights of News, Updates, Reviews, Previews, Articles, and Commentaries from around the Internet on the subject of Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror.  Check for the latest listings from The Sci Fi Scroll at our reddit.com page.

Syfy renews Stargate: Universe and Sanctuary
The Hollywood Reporter 12/13/2009
Syfy is expanding its commitments to Stargate: Universe and Sanctuary, granting both series another season.  Universe recently aired its freshman midseason finale. The show’s hiatus will extend until April, and Season 2 will debut in the fall along with a third season of Sanctuary. (Read the Full Article)

Review: Avatar
The Hollywood Reporter 12/10/2009
A dozen years later, James Cameron has proven his point: He is king of the world.  As commander-in-chief of an army of visual-effects technicians, creature designers, motion-capture mavens, stunt performers, dancers, actors and music and sound magicians, he brings science-fiction movies into the 21st century with the jaw-dropping wonder that is Avatar.  (Read the Full Article)

Heroes Actress Says Show Makes Too Much Money To Cancel
Tv By the Numbers 12/12/2009
Everybody talks about it losing momentum and not being so great in the ratings, but honestly, this show makes so much money for NBC that I don’t see it gong anywhere. (Read the Full Article)

Dollhouse Is Worth Watching Again
Tv.com 12/11/2009
Isn’t it always like this? I guess that’s why people always say, “You don’t know what you got ’til it’s gone.” Dollhouse is almost gone, never to return once it runs through its remaining episodes, and we almost know what we’ve got. (Read the Full Article)

Time-travel movie next for Moon director Duncan Jones?
Sci Fi Wire 12/11/2009
Fresh off his British Independent Film Award wins for Best Film and Best Debut Director this week for his low-budget mini-masterpiece Moon, Duncan Jones (formerly known as Zowie Bowie, son of rocker David Bowie) is gearing up to tackle the SF thriller Source Code. According to a Tweet from Production Weekly, Jones will start pre-production in a few weeks and will film this spring in Montreal. (Read the Full Article)

Smallville, Heroes and Fringe? They just might survive
Sci Fi Wire 12/11/2009
Just after the fall television season started, we begin agonizing over the fates some of our favorite shows. Considering that at one time NBC’s Heroes garnered more than 16 million viewers, the CW’s Smallville more than 8 million, and Fox’s Fringe more than 13 million, this year’s numbers were startling and terrible, not to mention being at an all-time low! (Read the Full Article)

James Cameron’s Next Big Science Fiction Movie Is Fantastic Voyage
io9.com 12/11/2009
MTV managed to ask Cameron about reports that he and veteran screenwriter Salermo were collaborating on a new film, and he explained that it’s not Salermo’s Kurosawa-themed unproduced screenplay Doomsday Protocol. Rather, Cameron is producing a Salermo-scripted remake of Fantastic Voyage (Read the Full Article)

Lost: What Two Timelines Are We (Still) Playing With?
BuddyTV.com 12/07/2009
Judging from what Rebecca Mader just said, it seems there’s a clearer idea of how we’ll kick off Lost’s sixth (and final, I have to insist) season.  (Read the Full Article)

Highlights of News, Updates, Reviews, Previews, Articles, and Commentaries from around the Internet on the subject of Science Fiction, Fantasy, and Horror.  Check for the latest listings from The Sci Fi Scroll at our reddit.com page.

JMS Talks About Silver Surfer Movie That Could Have Been
Slice of SciFi 11/25/2009
Writer J. Michael Straczynski says that his script for a potential Silver Surfer movie is complete, but that development on the film has stalled. (Read the Full Article)

The six greatest fantasy books of all time
TheWeek 11/30/2009
Lev Grossman, Time magazine’s book critic and the author of The Magicians, lists his choices for the six greatest fantasy books of all time. (Read the Full Article)

Movie Review: Why The Road’s post-apocalyptic struggles make us happy
Sci Fi Wire 11/25/2009
There’s something you should know about me before reading this review. I love post-apocalyptic survival. Just give me a wanderer traversing the wasteland looking for supplies and I’m happy. I Am Legend was the ultimate to me, just Will Smith by himself pillaging the apartments for cans of salmon. So The Road is my dream movie. (Read the Full Article)

FOX Announces Mid-Season Schedule, Premiere Dates for Past Life and Human Target
TV By the Numbers 11/24/2009
FOX is announcing premiere dates of new and returning series as well as revisions to its 2009-2010 midseason schedule. (Read the Full Article)

Forbidden Planet Reboot Could Become a Franchise
io9.com 11/23/2009
J. Michael Straczynski is revealing more details about his remake of Forbidden Planet. Not only does the script call for more action than the original scifi classic, there may be plans in the works for more Forbidden Planet movies. (Read the Full Article)

Read The Star Trek 2009 Scene Written For William Shatner
TrekMovie.com 11/23/2009
Most fans can remember that one of the biggest debates around JJ Abrams Star Trek movie was about if it would (or should) include William Shatner. The film makers spoke of how they tried to find a way, but in the end felt it wouldn’t work. However, JJ Abrams revealed that Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman did write a scene for Shatner. (Read the Full Article)

Joshua Jackson’s captain of ‘UFO’ – ‘Fringe’ actor set for adaptation of Brit TV series
Variety 11/22/2009
“Fringe” star Joshua Jackson will topline “UFO,” the feature film version of the British TV series that will be directed by visual effects wiz Matthew Gratzner. (Read the Full Article)