Must-Watch Sci Fi Movies: Plant of the Apes (1968)

Directed By: Franklin J. Schaffner
Produced By: Arthur P. Jacobs
Written By: Michael Wilson, Rod Serling
Starring: Charlton Heston, Roddy McDowall, Maurice Evans, Kim Hunter, Linda Harrison
Original Release: 1968

Rating: 4 ½ out of 5 Stars

Synopsis: A deep space mission from Earth traveling at near light speed crashes on a distant planet and three of the four crew members manage to escape before the ship sinks into the sea. The survivors, led by George Taylor (Charlton Heston), begin to explore what looks like a barren, desolate planet, but they eventually discover plentiful forests and a lower order of humans who do not have the ability to speak. But then the astronauts find that these are not the dominate species on the planet as they come face to face with intelligent, talking apes. Taylor is captured and at first studied by the chimpanzee Zira (Kim Hunter), but the orangutan Dr. Zaius (Maurice Evans) considers this talking human to be an abomination and wants to have him destroyed. Taylor, on the other hand, has plans to show them who the dominant species should be, but first he must face the truth of an unexpected secret this planet of apes holds.

Why It’s a Must-Watch Movie: This film provided another step in the maturation of science fiction cinema as it offered an engaging tale of evolution apparently gone awry that had high production values and that also offered some biting social commentary.

Review/Commentary: 1968’s Planet of the Apes is an important milestone for science fiction movies for several reasons. For one, the producers (much like Kubrick did with 2001: A Space Odyssey) approached the movie with the intent of making a serious film with broad appeal unlike the exploitive B-Movie cheapies typical of the genre at that time. It also had high production values (for its day) and succeeded in creating believable human-like apes that never looked like just actors in gorilla suits. Because of this, the movie proved a huge success at the Box Office, giving sci fi one of its highest grossing films up to that point. In addition, it laid the groundwork for the blockbuster franchise as it would have four sequels, spin-off two TV series, and go through two reboots in the 21st century.

Jaded movie-goers of today--over-gorged on the CGI-bloated outpouring from the big studios--may find Planet of the Apes a bit quaint, but the fact is that movie was very much the science fiction blockbuster of its time. It may not have relied heavily on sfx scenes, but it’s production values were first rate for the 60’s and it manages to seamlessly bring to life its world run by the apes. That’s partly attributed to the magnificent sets of “ape city” (really more of a village), but mostly to the first class make-up work on the apes. True, the CGI of the recent/y rebooted Planet of the Apes films delivers simians that look more ape-like, but personally I much prefer the ones from the original movie series. They represented more of a cross between humans and apes and a logical next evolutionary step. And the makeup was perfectly executed and has since become iconic among movie creatures. Give me the real thing over CGI any day.

The movie itself has worked its way into our popular culture, and that’s because it managed to hit a nerve at the time it came out, and its message still resonates today. The movie didn’t just give us a simplistic “apes vs. humans” scenario, it used its premise to explore some driving social issues of its day (that still remain relevant today). Not only do we get the fall of humans as another species leap-frogs us on the evolutionary scale, the script uses the conflicts within the ape society to address issues that we ourselves struggle with. It looks at the conflicts between religion and science and the attempts of society’s leaders to manipulate the truth to maintain the status quo. Planet of the Apes does what the best examples of science fiction do by using its fantastic elements to offer a mirror to our own world and struggles. Not surprisingly (especially considered that gut-wrenching twist ending), the original script was penned by Rod Serling. The final version made many changes to what he originally wrote, but mostly to keep costs down (he had the apes living in a technological society similar to Pierre Boulle’s original novel). But most importantly, the ending from Serling’s script (which hearkened back to the Twilight Zone style twist-endings) still survived into the final version that was filmed.

Planet of the Apes also benefitted from outstanding performances from its rather talented cast of actors. Performing through that makeup would be difficult for any actor, but the main ape characters all came alive with first-rate acting from the likes of Roddy McDowell, Kim Hunter, and Maurice Evans. It’s almost as if the makeup liberated them and energized their performances. And then there’s Charlton Heston with the lead delivering his usual bravado. His Taylor displays a palpable arrogance and almost dismissive attitude toward the apes whom he considers an example of evolution gone wrong. But this makes the ending of the film all the more poignant as he is faced with a grim reality that delivers an Earth-shattering wakeup call (literally).

I should note, though, that this movie has one glaring flaw to it that some may not be able to overlook and that could impact how highly they rank it compared to other sci fi films: How is it that Taylor never questions the fact that these apes speak English, even though--from his perspective--they are living on a planet allegedly light years from Earth? The fact that they could speak alone was definitely shock enough, but shouldn’t he have made some connection when they were speaking the same language as him with practically no variation in dialect? Perhaps we can extend some artistic license here and just appreciate that Hollywood produced an otherwise well-made science fiction film at that time. But it would have been nice if they had addressed that better (in the novel, the human character learns the language of the apes), and I’m guessing there are some fans out there that dock this movie one or two stars on that fact alone.

Despite this flaw, Planet of the Apes is an important science fiction movie and one of the absolute best examples of the genre on film. Its production values were top-notch at the time it came out and still stand up pretty well today. And its story is timeless and will continue to resonate with coming generations for its many messages and its shocking ending.

---

25 Must-Watch Science Fiction and Fantasy Movies

So many science fiction and fantasy movies and so little time. Metropolis, King Kong, War of the Worlds, Fantastic Voyage, Star Wars, The Terminator, The Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Inception . . . Plan 9 From Outer Space . . . and so many, many more. Where to start and which ones to watch? Well that's what this book is here to help you with. It may not cover all science fiction movies, and not even all of those mentioned above, but it gives you a heck of a good start starting point. This book begins with 1927’s Metropolis and then treks through 24 more genre films ending with 2009's Moon to give you an extensive look at some of the best of the best of science fiction and fantasy cinema. Each entry includes a synopsis, review/commentary, cast and crew information, as well as a few nuggets of tidbits and trivia relating to the films. Whether you are new to the genre and trying to figure out where to get started or a grizzled veteran who has logged many hours in the cinema watching sci fi, 25 Must Watch Science Fiction and Fantasy Movies is sure to entertain. And even if you have already seen the movies covered in the book, there's a good chance you could walk away knowing a little bit (or maybe even a lot) more about these films than you did previously.

A great primer for science fiction and fantasy cinema and a fun read as well!

Available now on Kindle from Amazon.com. 

The Anti-Blockbusters: Jerome Bixby's The Man From Earth

Rating: 5 out of 5 Stars (Highest Rating)

Would you believe me if I told you there is an excellent science fiction, nay speculative Fiction, movie out there with absolutely no special effects and which involves nothing more than people sitting around and talking? Well I’m telling you it’s true, and The Man from Earth is that movie.

The script for this film came from the late Jerome Bixby who dictated its final pages from his deathbed to his son Emerson Bixby. Some may recognize Jerome Bixby as a science fiction writer who penned many short stories in the genre and who also wrote several Star Trek: TOS episodes ("Requiem for Methuselah", "Day of the Dove", "By Any Other Name", "Mirror, Mirror"), had one of his short stories adapted into the infamous "It's a Good Life" Twilight Zone episode, and who co-wrote the story for The Fantastic Voyage. Thus, this movie has some pedigree from a veteran of the genre who knew how to write Science Fiction in the days when writers could not always rely on special effects to carry the story.

The premise for The Man from Earth is simple: a university professor, John Oldman, is departing from his job and he gathers several of his most trusted colleagues to tell them that he has lived since the days of Cro-Magnon man, 14,000 years past. Some are intrigued by his claim while others find it ludicrous, and the movie documents their conversations—and knock-down, drag-out arguments—over one night’s time. That’s it. No monsters, aliens, space travel, time machines, explosions, or any of the other standards that you would expect from a Science Fiction movie. Just talking and the back-and-forth exchange of ideas, theories, and speculations.

Sound like a snooze fest? That’s exactly what it’s not. The movie grabs you almost right away with its intriguing premise which you may be skeptical about at first, but that still draws you in. And that’s exactly the way the other characters in the movie feel, and they help propel the action forward as they mirror the viewer’s inner conflicts over John Oldman’s claims that he has lived over fourteen millennia. The top-notch cast aids in keeping the movie lively as well. There are several faces among the actors that should be familiar to science fiction and fantasy fans including William Katt (Ralph Hinkley from The Greatest American Hero), John Billingsley (Dr. Phlox from Star Trek: Enterprise), Tony Todd (a slew of supporting and guest appearances in movies and television, particularly in the Star Trek revivals), and Richard Riehle (also a frequent guest star, especially across several of the Star Trek shows, as well as Tom Smykowski from Office Space). The other characters at first go along with John’s “what-if” scenario because they believe they are indulging him as he works out the concept of a potential novel. As the night progresses, some start to become more invested in his assertion while others get impatient with his line of reasoning. Then, the movie throw’s us a curve (WARNING!!! Spoilers to follow).

After some questioning, John reveals that he was an important person from history, and his revelation and its implications turn this into a completely different movie. The Man from Earth starts out as a “what-if” discourse on the implications of a person who had lived through all of human history. The revelation, however, makes us rethink the past and perhaps even our very core beliefs. This curve ball is a bit jarring and may turn some viewers off from the movie. I have to admit that I had some difficulty digesting it at first. But the more I thought about it, this turn of events really raised the movie to the next level and caused it to resonate with me for several days and ponder its implications. And you can’t ask much more than that from a movie in the science fiction genre, or any genre for that matter.

This movie succeeds primarily with the ideas it puts forth which cause the viewer to think long and hard about their perception of history. And it does this by way of an excellent script and a superb cast, and without a special effects crew in site. Sure, there are plenty of blockbusters that will be assaulting the theaters in the coming months and especially this Summer season, and we will all go and enjoy the escapist entertainment they provide, exploding on the screens with the latest special effects technology. But if you want an excellent science fiction movie that lives and dies by its story, script, and actors then be sure to plop The Man from Earth into your DVD player after you return from the theater.

Buy The Man From Earth on Blu-ray and DVD from Amazon.com:

Movie Review: Mute

Rating: 3 out of 5 Stars

Bottom Line: This movie essentially delivers a crime drama in a futuristic setting, but its visuals and strong performances make it worth a look

Mute is the latest film from Duncan Jones (Moon, Source Code) and debuted exclusively on Netflix on February 23rd. It follows an Amish man named Leo (played by True Blood's Alexander Skarsgard) who lost his ability to speak due to a childhood accident. As an adult, he chooses to move to Berlin where he takes a job as a bartender and meets a waitress named Naadirah (played by newcomer Seyneb Saleh). They develop a relationship, but she mysteriously disappears and Leo finds himself mixed up in the city's underworld trying desperately to find the woman he loves.

The film mixes a Blade Runner-like setting with a crime drama plot and delivers some excellent performances, especially from Alexander Skarsgard who plays against type. It also mixes in plenty of sci fi Easter Eggs and references along with homages to genre and non-genre films (if you get a very Elliot Gould / Donald Sutherland M*A*S*H vibe from Cactus Bill and Duck, that was the intention). But coming from director Duncan Jones, best known for his sci fi films, this movie might be somewhat of a let down to his fans.

It definitely gets the sci fi look and feel right, but it is essentially a crime drama in a futuristic setting. The genre elements are just window dressing and add very little to the story.  It's not a bad film, though, and the performances carry it through its two hour run time. As crime dramas go, I thought it was interesting enough. But for the sci fi audience—who will definitely be attracted to this because of Jones’ involvement—it lacks the punch they will expect from the accomplished director.

Jones actually started working on Mute before he did Moon, and it was originally intended as a British gangster film. It went into development Hell, though, and he turned his attention to Moon which was his directorial debut and is now considered a sci fi classic. He returned to Mute and eventually changed it to its futuristic setting while also calling it a “spiritual successor” to Moon. But apart from a quick Easter Egg and that fact that it is supposed to take place in the same universe, Mute has very little thematic connection to his first film.  It was originally intended for a theatrical release, but instead Netflix picked it up and is streaming it exclusively worldwide.

I found the movie to be entertaining if a bit lacking on the story side. But it offers plenty of reward for those who want to seek out all the references, homages, and quirky inclusions through multiple viewings. I could definitely see giving this one another go to catch some of those details and to see if there might be some substance I missed the first time around. Others may not have the patience for that. It is still worth your time to watch it through one time, especially if you are a fan of Jones, Skarsgard, and/or Paul Rudd. Just be sure to adjust expectations and you should find this to be a decent distraction if not a rather entertaining film.

The Anti-Blockbusters: Hunter Prey

Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars

Hunter Prey is a 2009 independent science fiction film written and directed by Sandy Collora on a very economical budget of $425 thousand. It follows a group of interstellar commandos tracking their alien prisoner on a desert planet. Somehow the prisoner managed to force the prison ship carrying him to crash on this planet and now it is the job of these commandos to take him back into their custody. And they must bring him in alive. This turns out to be a point of contention, seeing as the alien proves more formidable than first thought, but the commander explains that since they have wiped out all but one of this alien’s race, it plans to “return the favor”, and they must find out how.

That’s a very brief introduction to this film, but I want to keep it as spoiler free as possible because Hunter Prey has plenty of surprises. I stumbled across this one because of a recommendation and decided to give it a look. And despite a few flaws here and there, Collora manages to deliver a very good genre entry with this modest film. It definitely has an initial cheesiness about it which may cause some to tune out early on, but I recommend that you stick with the film and give it the chance it deserves. The armored uniforms that the commandos wear are definitely an early weak point, looking not unlike discarded Power Rangers gear dragged through the dirt several times. But remember that this is no big budget affair, and pretty quickly you don’t even notice those uniforms anyway. Also, the acting has lapses from time to time, but for the most part is decent at least.

What sets Hunter Prey apart from the Syfy Saturday night cheese-fests that it resembles at first blush is that it takes a familiar story and builds on it and develops it organically instead of through contrivance. We have seen this sort of tale before, done well in the Star Trek TOS episode “Arena” and not so well in the feature film Enemy Mine, but Hunter Prey quickly establishes itself as more than just a knockoff of genre formulas. The film could have easily descended into a predicament-oriented affair where the commandos and their prey find themselves in a never-ending succession of precarious situations, but it avoids that pitfall (pun unintended but accepted). It follows a rather straightforward plot of hunters pursuing a dangerous prey, though it throws in a nice helping of twists as well. And it advances the story through character development and mostly avoids the contrivances you expect from a low budget sci fi film. The ending is a bit confusing (more on that below in the SPOILERS section), and maybe somewhat unsatisfying, but it does not completely derail the film. And the movie is relatively brisk at about 90 minutes running time which works in its favor. It’s definitely worth checking out, even if it won’t quite overshadow too many of the bigger budget CGI-fests that have hit theaters the last couple of years.

WARNING: SPOILERS TO FOLLOW (Skip this paragraph to avoid). As mentioned above, the ending to Hunter Prey is a rather vague and may turn off more than a few viewers to this film. I have actually watched it a couple of times and have picked up a few more clues each time, but still can’t claim that I fully understand it or feel like it delivers a satisfying resolution. I think a lot of the understanding revolves around the comment that Centauri makes to Jericho, “Is that what you want the legacy of your kind to be?”, referring to that latter’s plan to destroy the Sedonian homeworld. I believe that Centauri infects himself with a degree of self-doubt at that point, and we had already seen that he had his own previous disagreements with Sedonian authorities. But would that be enough for him to allow Jericho to escape and potentially carry out his plan of retribution. And what did Centauri mean when he said that he and Jericho would meet again? Was that setting up a sequel? If so, it seemed to be at the expense of a more satisfying resolution. But again, as I said above, that doesn’t completely kill the movie, which is mostly excellent up to the end, just docks it a bit in my final rating.

A note for sci fi trivia buffs, this film seems to have all sorts of obscure references to other science fiction properties. The names of Karza and Croyer seem like a reference to the Micronauts comic book series (Baron Karza and Acroyear). Centauri could be a reference to the like-named race from Babylon 5 or any of umpteen other sci fi uses of the term. Orin Jericho comes straight from Starchaser: The Legend of Orin and perhaps the Jericho TV series as well. And it seems like there were a few others that I noticed that have since slipped my mind. Also, Erin Gray, ex-spandex wearing hottie from TV’s Buck Rogers in the 25th Century, provides the voice for the computer Clea.

Director Sandy Collora had previously worked with effects and makeup expert Stan Winston (Aliens, Predator, The Terminator) and has spent most of his career behind the scenes. But in 2004, he directed the well-received fan film Batman: Dead End which Kevin Smith has referred to as “possibly the truest, best Batman movie ever made” (you can download the eight minute film at this link). Hunter Prey is Collora’s first feature-length film and he definitely shows promise with this one. Science fiction fans should check it out and keep an eye on future developments from this director.

Buy Hunter Prey and Other Anti-Blockbusters from Amazon.com:

Must-Watch Sci Fi Movies: Destination Moon

Directed by: Irving Pichel
Produced by: George Pal
Written by: James O'Hanlon, Robert A. Heinlein, Rip Van Ronkel
Starring: John Archer, Warner Anderson, Tom Powers, Dick Wesson
Original Release: 1950

Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars

Synopsis:  The movie begins as an attempt to launch a satellite into orbit fails, possibly as the result of sabotage by foreign interests wanting to beat the United States into space.  Because of the failure, government funding is withdrawn, but rocket scientist Dr. Charles Cargraves (Warner Anderson) along with his collaborator General Thayer (Tom Powers) approach aircraft builder Jim Barnes (John Archer) about continuing the project with corporate sponsorship and possibly expanding its scope to send men to the Moon.  Barnes is reluctant at first, but Thayer sways him to their cause and then this group manages to convince the leaders of several large U.S. corporations to help fund the project.  A rocket is built, but its fate is in jeopardy by a court order that could cancel the launch because of the threat of potential radiation from the rocket’s atomic engine.   To avoid getting shut down, they decide to launch early with Barnes, Thayer, Cargraves, and radio operator Joe Sweeny (Dick Wesson) as the crew.  The rocket has a successful takeoff, but faces several challenges in its quest to get to the moon and back.

Why It’s a Must-Watch Movie:  Though somewhat dated now, Destination Moon delivered an engaging and scientifically accurate (for its time) film about near-space travel, and it’s still great fun to watch over sixty years after it was originally made.

Produced by George Pal who would become the George Lucas/Steven Spielberg of his day, this movie was his first foray into science fiction and it was very much a landmark for its time.  The genre had mostly been relegated horror films, B-Movies, or Saturday afternoon serials, with few attempts at serious science fiction during the first twenty years or so of talking films.  Movies like Frankenstein, King Kong, and Things to Come all make it to that short list, but the first two are more heavily associated with the horror genre and only the latter entry stands out as true science fiction.  After that film, Destination Moon would be the next major science fiction entry and it was actually a pretty big deal when it came out. 

It was produced on a pretty big budget for its day ($500k!) and George Pal had enough film-savvy to turn it into a crowd-pleaser that made it very much an early precursor to the mega-dollar blockbusters that would become the norm thirty or so years later.  Pal and his writers (which included Robert A. Heinlein whose novel Rocket Ship Galileo the movie was loosely based on) approached the material with a serious intent, planning on producing a film that would accurately portray travel to the moon based on the scientific knowledge of the time.  But they did not turn out a stolid, tedious movie nor an exploitive film full of bug-eyed monsters and helpless heroines fleeing in distress.  Destination Moon follows a rather matter-of-fact presentation of its concept, but it still manages to liven it up with things like a Woody Woodpecker cartoon to explain the science and the Joe Sweeny character added for comic relief (though he avoids turning into a buffoon).  And of course the special effects were first rate for the time and many of them still hold up today in a retro-movie sense (with the possible exception of the spacewalk scenes).

And the science is quite solid, especially for a 1950’s science fiction film.  Rocket scientists would later decide that multi-stage ships would be the better way to go for near space travel, but at that time it was believed that a V-2 style rocket (which the ship in the film closely resembles) would be capable of carrying explorers to our nearest cosmic neighbor.  And while the moonscapes are inaccurate, they’re really not that far off and they look really cool and add a bit of visual flair to the film.  The movie does have a some of the cowboy ethic to it as the maverick space travelers jump on their rocketship and take a daring trip into the frontiers of space, but that’s part of what lends to the broad appeal of the film and it doesn’t detract too much from its more serious tone.

The acting is decent enough for a movie of this genre and this period, with Dick Wesson as Joe Sweeny stealing most of the scenes he is in.  There is a dearth of female characters, though, as space travel is portrayed as man’s work with the women left to worry about their husbands from Earth.  But then that’s not too much different than how the U.S. space program unfolded a decade later, so you can’t fault them too much for that.

And interestingly enough, Destination Moon suggests that private industry would be the one to lead the charge on space travel because of a lack of interest on the part of government.  That’s not how the space program actually got started, but that is where it has ended up today.  In that sense, the time is probably ripe for a retro-remake of this film that could act as a call to action on the part of the corporate world to step up and keep space exploration alive (which we are already seeing on a somewhat limited basis).

While the 1950 Destination Moon may look a bit dated to the jaded modern-day audiences expecting an onslaught of eye-popping CGI effects from their sci fi blockbusters, the more discerning fan will be able to look past that and see this for the classic it is.  The movie treated space travel intelligently and managed to deliver a story that is both engaging and scientifically sound (again, for its day).  It’s great fun to watch, and much easier to sit through than many of the B-Movie cheapies that came out around that time or even the more serious genre efforts like Rocketship X-M, This Island Earth, or Pal’s later Conquest of Space.  And Destination Moon only runs about ninety minutes, so it’s a quick watch and well worth the time.

Buy Destination Moon and Other Science Fiction Movies from that Era on DVD from Amazon.com:

The Anti-Blockbusters: Moon

Rating: 4 ½ out of 5 Stars

2009's Moon is a rarity in modern-day cinema. It is a Science Fiction movie, yet it has little action, no explosions, no space battles, no guns, no nail-biting down-to-the-wire endings, and a cast that you can count on one hand. What it does have, though, is a strong story bolstered by magnificent performances from its sparse set of performers. In that respect, it harkens back to classic examples of hard science fiction in the cinema like 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Andromeda Strain, and Silent Running. And that is exactly what director and co-writer Duncan Jones wanted.

The entire movie takes place on the Moon as we follow Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell) who is the sole human in charge of running a mining operation that extracts helium-3 from the lunar surface and sends it back to Earth where it provides the primary fuel source for the planet. His only companion is the robotic GERTY 3000 (voiced by Kevin Spacey) which has a voice similar to HAL 9000 and displays emoticons on its monitor to reflect its expressions. Sam is coming to the end of his three year contract on the Moon and eagerly awaits his return home. However, he starts to hallucinate and see people and transmissions that he knows cannot be real and this eventually causes him to have a life-threatening accident on the surface of the Moon.

Early on, you may start to question several aspects of the movie’s basic set-up. Why would the company send only one person at a time to spend a rather daunting three years in isolation? Why would they not fix the malfunctioning satellite that provides Sam’s only chance to have real time transmissions from home? After the accident, how did Sam get back to the base? But everything falls into place as the tight, focused script unfolds before us.

I’ll give no more information about the movie than that, because “that would be telling”, and it’s best to go into this one without any pre-conceived notions. What I will do is complement the cast and crew on pulling off what could have turned into a very dreary, plodding film in the wrong hands. Mind you, Moon does have a very slow pace, but it never drags or meanders because of its excellent script, spot-on performances by Rockwell and Spacey, and steady direction from Jones (who, by the way, is the son of the late David Bowie).

Visually, Moon succeeds as well, as it gives us a respite from the CGI-overload that Hollywood so often throws at us. Jones relies on old-school model-work to depict the Moonbase and the vehicles that interact with it. And despite the limited budget of the film (around $5 million) his special effects team delivers a realistic, almost flawless, depiction of Moon colonization that makes viewers like myself long for the lost art of model-derived special effects. This practice of course would not work as well in a more action-oriented film, but in this setting it provides the perfect visual realization to complement the story.

Moon compares quiet well to some of the classics of Science Fiction cinema that it invokes and deserves to stand right next to them when listing accomplished movies from the genre. While it lacks the grander statements of movies like 2001: A Space Odyssey and Silent Running, it does give us a more modest, personal statement about what it means to be human and to be in control of your own destiny. Also, it avoids some of the inconsistencies and leaps of logic of the two previously mentioned movies (i.e, you have to read the book to understand exactly why HAL goes berserk, and just why exactly did they put the forest domes out in deep space instead of orbiting the Sun?). Most importantly, the movie places story above spectacle and also manages to maneuver past the conceits that often afflict films of this ilk.

Moon did not do big Box Office business in its theatrical run, in part because of its limited distribution and in part because of its lack of promotion. But it did gain immediate attention from critics and fans of the genre and quickly got pegged as an “instant classic”. Those who missed it in its truncated theatrical run should definitely check it out on DVD, and those that did catch it should watch it again because like most classics it stands up to multiple viewings.

The Anti-Blockbusters: Battle for Terra

Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars

As blockbusters like Star Trek, Transformers, and Harry Potter were preparing to assault the theaters at the beginning of the 2009 Summer season, a rather unassuming little animated movie appeared and disappeared within about two weeks time. This movie, Battle for Terra, had been made back in 2007 at a very economical price for a CGI film (around $4 million originally though increased to $8 million with 3-D effects added), and had received some acclaim as it toured the film festival circuit and won the Grand Prize for Best Animated Feature at the 2008 Ottawa International Animation Festival.

The movie opens on a distant planet where a race of peaceful beings, who have the ability to fly, live an idyllic existence mostly at harmony with their world. However, an enormous space ship arrives carrying the last inhabitants of a destroyed Earth who plan to settle on this planet. The humans must terraform the planet to make the atmosphere breathable which in turn will make it poisonous to the natives. An initial confrontation with the humans and natives leads to one of the humans crashing on the planet and coming face to face with the people he would help destroy. This plants the seeds which eventually lead to the beginning of a mutual understanding between the two races.

Battle for Terra is a beautifully illustrated CGI-animated movie that mixes science fiction with fantasy (though still sufficiently rooted in science) and even throws in a bit of steam-punk tech. And while the substance does not always match up to the style, Battle for Terra still delivers a more satisfying tale than the similarly themed Avatar from James Cameron which would follow this one at the Box Office with much more fanfare (and BoT had a much lower price tag than Avatar’s $240 million budget) . But while Terra’s story verges into the derivative at times with a hodgepodge of genre elements and some copy-and-paste dialogue, it presents a more genuine take on its subject matter than the much more calculated Avatar. And while it may not fully develop its characters and ideas, in part because of its rather brief 85 minute run-time, in the end the movie manages to overcome most of its deficiencies and stand out as a notable genre entry.

And sparse though the plot may be, the writers resist the temptation to give us a simple tale of idealistic, pacifist aliens vs. imperialist, invading humans. Sure, it ventures in that direction with the central villain General Hemmer, but we see that the humans are primarily driven more by their desperation than anything else and we also see that the natives of Terra have the ability to defend themselves if necessary. This is where the movie diverges from the Disney-style kids-fare as it chooses not to present a conflict followed by a tidy wrap-up and happy ending. And this is probably what doomed the movie in the theaters.

Battle for Terra has the look of a fantasy movie aimed at the younger crowd, much like the Star Wars: The Clone Wars film and subsequent TV series. In fact, it seems quite merchandise friendly, with its cute aliens, adorable robots, sleek space ships and steam-punk alien airships. But the movie does not give us the simple tale of good vs. evil that you would expect from a film of this type. In fact, the apparent youthful target audience may have difficulty figuring out who are the good guys and who are the bad guys. The movie delivers more mature themes wrapped up in moral dilemmas, and in the final battle children may struggle with who exactly to route for and the film ends with the heart-rending sacrifice of one of the lead characters. For me, that makes for great story-telling. But since they decided to market the movie mostly toward children (surely as an afterthought, though), that may have severely hampered its Box Office viability. Ultimately, it’s hard to really pin down this movie as it presents an exercise in contrast with its cute aliens and invading humans facing some very difficult moral decisions. But science fiction and fantasy fans should appreciate it as a well done movie that rises above the expected family-friendly animated flick and delivers a superior genre tale.  If you missed this one in the theaters, do yourself a favor and seek it out on DVD.  You should be pleasantly surprised by what you find there.

The Anti-Blockbusters: Primer

Rating: 4 ½ out of 5 Stars

Time Travel presents many problems when used as a story device in science fiction and fantasy tales. The implications of the impact that a time traveler could have on past, present, and future events are potentially earth-shattering, yet this is often poorly handling by television shows, movies, and sometimes even books dealing with the subject. Too often, writers use time travel simply as a contrivance to carry the story forward and rarely care about establishing rules or logic involving temporal activities, or if they do, rarely follow them. Primer, an independent film that came out in 2004, bucked this trend, though, and presented a well thought out story addressing the possibility and moral implications of time travel.

It starts with two inventors tinkering around in the evenings in their garage with various ideas they hope to patent and sell. They accidentally stumble upon a process that appears to bend time and they start to investigate it further which leads to their successful attempts to travel back in time. At first, their time travel excursions are mostly harmless, traveling back a few hours and buying stocks that they know will rise in price later in the day. But then they start using their time travel apparatus to try and go back and change events that have already occurred. When things do not turn out the way they planned, they try again and eventually find themselves caught in a seemingly endless cycle of struggling to correct their own mishaps. Eventually the two friends find themselves at odds with one another with one wanting to bow out of the endeavor while the other wants to take it to even greater levels.

This movie was written by first-time filmmaker Shane Carruth who is a mathematician and an engineer. He gives us a plausible, scientific explanation for time travel which the two inventors (one played by himself) discovered by accident as a by-product of a completely separate experiment. He also presents some of the moral quandaries associated with time travel, but he does it in a very subtle way. At first the two inventors just want to use it make money in the stock market which they will then put back into their after-hours business ventures. A morally questionable action, but one with limited impact. However, when they start trying to change the past, they find themselves unable to deal with the grander consequences of their actions and also find themselves dragged into a seemingly endless downward spiral.

Unfortunately, the movie does become a bit muddled toward the end, but at least it does not completely derail or descend into Heroes-style silliness with its time travel antics. Carruth made this film on a microscopic budget of $7,000, but it does not show. It has almost no special effects, but neither does it need them. It draws in the viewer with its sense of invention and discovery at first and then with the time travel quandaries that start to develop as the two inventors find their reality spinning out of control . The script is definitely dense and a times tedious, perhaps even obtuse. But rather than losing the viewer because of this, it produces a desire to re-watch the film to see what you went over your head the previous time. And this one definitely stands up to multiple viewings (though I would advise not committing too much brain matter because I am not quite certain Carruth fully resolved all of the threads). Still, for an intelligent, well made science fiction movie dealing with time travel (and there are very few of those) this one definitely stands the test of time (sorry couldn’t resist). It may have been made by a first-time filmmaker on a micro budget, but the film holds its own when placed next to many of the better science fiction movies from the major studios

Read more about the intricacies of Primer at its Wikipedia page

Read John Kenneth Muir’s indepth analysis of Primer at his blog

---

Must-Watch Sci Fi Movies: Quatermass and the Pit (aka 5 Million Years to Earth)

Directed By: Roy Ward Baker
Produced By: Anthony Nelson Keys
Written By: Nigel Kneale
Starring: Andrew Keir, James Donald, Barbara Shelley
Original Release: 1967

Rating: 4 ½ out of 5 Stars

Synopsis: Based on the six-part BBC television serial from the 50’s by the same name, this movie follows Professor Quatermass of the British Experimental Rocket Group who investigates a strange missile-like object found deep beneath London by a construction crew. At first the professor and his colleagues theorize that this might be an experimental, undetonated German weapon from World War 2, but fossilized remains of primates are found very close to it and Quatermass ultimately surmises that it may have alien (and very ancient) origins. Continued investigation of the object unleashes dormant forces that take control of those nearby, sending them on violent rampages. When Quartermass discovers the carcasses of horned, insect-like creatures inside the missile, he theorizes that these may have been beings that came to Earth from a dying Mars millions of years ago and that they must have implanted memories of their civilization (including a final racial purge) in the minds of the early primates that provide the origins for much of the superstition surrounding devils and demons in human culture. And as the latent force in the spaceship becomes more powerful, it begins to affect all of the inhabitants of London as they begin to reenact the slaughter of the racial purge from the dying days of Mars.

Review/Commentary: This was the third movie (all from Hammer Films) to bring the Quatermass character to the big screen and it adapted the third of the BBC serials. The story it was based on was also by far the best of both the television series and the movies (though the other two are still quite excellent). Quatermass and the Pit (more commonly known as 5 Million Years to Earth in the States) mixes supernatural elements with science fiction and does it by presenting a plausible scientific explanation for the paranormal events it observes as well as for the latent superstitions that recur across many cultures. But it doesn’t go that route by giving a talky psycho-anthropological dissertation, it does it by delivering a film that stirs up the very fears it speculates upon. It should come as no surprise to those familiar with the output from Hammer, but this one delivers a truly scary film that that still stirs up chills when viewed today. And even though it runs half as long as the television serial that it was based on, it stays true to its source (with series creator Nigel Kneale penning the script) and perhaps even improves upon that by delivering a tighter, more focused story than the somewhat slow-paced (though never boring) television version.

The only real knock on this film is that it has not aged well from a technical standpoint. The special effects showing the flashbacks to the aliens on Mars are crude at best and laughable at worst. Modern-day audiences may have some difficulty sitting through those scenes without roaring aloud. But then other scenes, especially when the invisible force starts to sweep through the city and make the ground tremble, still hit the mark and help make this into a chilling and at times unsettling film. Part of me would like to see this one remade with a budget that could more adequately bring to life its ambitious script, but then I fear that the Hollywood machine would quickly lose touch with the primal terror that this film evoked and bury its genre-bending, penetrating story beneath CGI smoke and mirrors.

Those who have never seen this film should definitely give it a look, just understand going in that visually it falls short at times. But the overall story is strong enough and the dedication of the cast and crew is quite apparent throughout the film. This is an old-style Science Fiction film that manages to stir up our emotions while also making us think. Something that has become all too rare in a time that we now have the technical prowess to create films that deliver on this promise.

Unfortunately, this one is currently unavailable on DVD, though you can see out a used copy of the previously released disc (at somewhat of a premium).  It is definitely worth seeing if you have never encountered it before and also worth revisiting for those who have not seen it in years.  You will cringe at a few of the sfx scenes, but overall the film balances out and delivers some first-rate sci fi / horror that just may make you think a bit.

---

25 Must-Watch Science Fiction and Fantasy Movies

So many science fiction and fantasy movies and so little time. Metropolis, King Kong, War of the Worlds, Fantastic Voyage, Star Wars, The Terminator, The Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Inception . . . Plan 9 From Outer Space . . . and so many, many more. Where to start and which ones to watch? Well that's what this book is here to help you with. It may not cover all science fiction movies, and not even all of those mentioned above, but it gives you a heck of a good start starting point. This book begins with 1927’s Metropolis and then treks through 24 more genre films ending with 2009's Moon to give you an extensive look at some of the best of the best of science fiction and fantasy cinema. Each entry includes a synopsis, review/commentary, cast and crew information, as well as a few nuggets of tidbits and trivia relating to the films. Whether you are new to the genre and trying to figure out where to get started or a grizzled veteran who has logged many hours in the cinema watching sci fi, 25 Must Watch Science Fiction and Fantasy Movies is sure to entertain. And even if you have already seen the movies covered in the book, there's a good chance you could walk away knowing a little bit (or maybe even a lot) more about these films than you did previously.

A great primer for science fiction and fantasy cinema and a fun read as well!

Available now on Kindle from Amazon.com. 

Sci Fi Genre Gems: It! The Terror from Beyond Space (1958 Movie)

What Is It? This little B-Movie gem came out in 1958 and takes a somewhat realistic look at space travel as it chronicles the consequences of a failed mission to Mars. The first manned rocket crash-landed there, and only the commander survived, claiming that he and his crew were attacked by some sort of creature. A second ship arrives and takes the commander back with them, where Earth authorities plan to Court Martial him.  But the creature boards the ship before it leaves Mars and begins to kill off the ship’s crew members one by one.

Why It Stands Out: This one is a better than average B-Movie and provides us the basic template for movies like Alien and other films where some sort of creature runs amok on a ship picking off the crew.

I rediscovered this movie a few years ago on Netflix, and it's one that all fans of classic sci fi movies  should check out. I’m sure I saw this as a kid because I devoured this sort of thing in my younger years, but it did not stick in my brain so it must not have been part of the regular rotation on the old UHF channels like Them! and The Thing and The Day the Earth Stood Still. Despite its superficial similarities to Alien, Dan O’Bannon denies that It! provided any inspiration for his film (he claimed he wanted to do a darker version of the alien beach ball sequence from his own Dark Star), but it undeniably foreshadows that 1979 movie and you can see where it has been imitated (unintentionally or not) many times since in other genre films.

Apart from its influence and significance in film history, It! is a good, if not spectacular, piece of science fiction film-making. As with many genre films from that time, especially those featuring a monster of some sort, it is a B-Movie through and through. The special effects are rather cheesy, though judiciously used, and the monster himself probably ranks as one of the worst among the more important early genre films, giving us one of the least memorable of the rubber-costume, Halloween-mask baddies of that era (quick check: can you even picture this monster in your head if you have not seen the movie in the past year or so?). But surprisingly, despite its production limitations, It! delivers a halfway decent science fiction tale. The script came from Jerome Bixby who penned many science fiction short stories and also contributed several episodes to The Twilight Zone, Star Trek and several other genre TV shows (and he also wrote the script to one of my all-time favorite science fiction movies The Man from Earth). The movie handles space travel rather intelligently for the time and also gives a plausible explanation for the monster and why it’s such a vicious killer (though not necessarily for why it is so indestructible). On the down side, the acting is nominal, though not bad for a 50’s B-Movie, and the directing and pacing is plodding and slow. But for those like me who love cheesy old sci fi films like this, it’s worth catching. And as B-Movies go, I would rank this rather highly compared to its ilk, maybe 4 or 4 ½ out of 5 stars. But on the larger scale I would give it more like a 3 ½ score.

Don’t go into It! expecting top notch science fiction, and you won’t be disappointed. Just look at it as a decent enough early sci fi cheapie and you will better appreciate its merits. And it only runs 69 minutes, so it won’t take too much of your time to watch. If you already have Netflix streaming, then get it in your queue for when you have an hour to spare and want to revisit an enjoyable little genre film from an age past.

Interesting Facts: The monster was played by Ray "Crash" Corrigan, a frequent western actor who also appeared in many movies dressed in an ape costume including The Ape and Bela Lugosi Meets a Brooklyn Gorilla. It! was Corrigan's last film before he retired. The promo poster for the movie that showed up in many theaters when It! came out (click on image above for larger view) guaranteed $50,000 to the first person who could prove that "It was not on Mars now". Word is that NASA may be trying to claim that prize (that $50k from 1958 is worth about $400k today) to help fund the next Mars mission . . .

Buy It! The Terror from Beyond Space on Blu-ray and DVD from Amazon.com:

The Anti-Blockbusters: Carriers

Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars

I stumbled upon this movie a few years back by accident and found it to be a welcome surprise of a film giving a sci fi spin on some of post-apocalyptic themes typically reserved to the zombie-pocalypse genre. Carriers was made back in 2007 but then sat on the shelf for a couple of years before it finally got a limited release in the theaters in 2009. A pre-Star Trek Chris Pine heads up the cast as one of four plague survivors on a trek through the back roads of a ravaged America. Their goal is to try and avoid those affected with the virus that has wiped out most of humanity while heading to a location that they believe will act as a safe spot where they can ride out the holocaust. They do however encounter other survivors along the way and find themselves faced with dubious moral choices, weighing their own survival against helping those in need.

Carriers delivers a very straightforward, linear film that does not rely on twists and turns nor placing the leads in one predicament after the next to build its story and conflicts. Instead, it essays the breakdown of society as it follows these four travelers on their journey to a coastal hotel that the two brothers know from their childhood and that they believe will provide safe ground. Along the way, they must make decisions based primarily on their need to survive in this post-apocalyptic setting and in so doing they must distance themselves from the dictates of a more civilized world. And we see a definite contrast between the older brother Brian (Pine) and the younger brother Danny (Lou Taylor Pucci) as Brian has more quickly dispensed with the mores of polite society in his bid to survive in the world that remains. He makes some very harsh--and at times amoral--decisions that Danny and their two female companions don’t always agree upon, but he is driven by necessity. This ultimately pushes him over the edge, though, putting his brother in the position of dealing with an equally harsh decision. And you can argue about the morality of their actions all you want, but you also have to place yourself in the same circumstance and answer honestly how you would act.

And ultimately, this is what a good science (nay speculative) fiction tale does. It takes us just far enough away from our own world while at the same time using this possible reality to allow us to look at ourselves in the mirror and consider the implications and morality of our actions. Carriers may be slight on plot, but it still manages to make us think and it succeeds in getting us to identify with the characters and put ourselves in their shoes. That leads to some uncomfortable moments at times throughout the film, but that appears to be what the movie wants and first-time director Alex Pastor (who also co-wrote the script) pulls it off masterfully without descending into melodrama or relying on excessive gore or violence. The actors playing the four central characters also deliver excellent performances that help keep the film moving along at its brisk pace. Some of the ancillary actors are not always up to the task, though, and the middle section where they encounter a group of makeshift containment-suit-clad survivors nearly bogs the film down. But Pastor ushers the movie past that and it resumes its pace for a poignant yet bleak ending.

For some reason, this movie was pushed as a horror film which seems like a poor fit for its more sci fi oriented subject matter. It may be that the studio did not quite know how to market this somewhat sparse film made on what must have been a small purse (though it never really looks low-budget). Because of its horror label, it does throw in a few cheesy jump-out-and-scare-you moments, though that never really detracts from the film. It also has very much the feel of a zombie-pocalypse tale even though it lacks the walking dead (the plague apparently does zombify its victims to some extent, though that is never really explored). Chris Pine has since hit the big time, and you would have thought that would draw more attention to this film, but I rarely hear it mentioned.  It is definitely worth checking out, though, and I would call this the best zombie-pocalypse movie without zombies that I have ever seen!

Must-Watch Sci Fi Movies: The Day the Earth Stood Still

Directed By: Robert Wise
Produced By: Julian Blaustein
Written By: Edmund H. North (Screenplay), Harry Bates (Short Story)
Starring: Michael Rennie, Patricia Neal, Billy Gray, Hugh Marlowe
Original Release: 1951

Rating: 5 out of 5 Stars (Highest Rating)

Synopsis: An object appears on radar moving at incredible speeds and setting all the countries of Earth on alert. It turns out that the bogie is a spacecraft (assuming the expected flying saucer shape that aliens in the 50’s preferred) and it lands in Washington DC near the Washington monument. The military surrounds the ship, and soon after a humanlike creature emerges wearing a spacesuit. He carries a gift that he plans to offer to the President that will allow humans to study the stars, but one of the soldiers mistakes it for a weapon and shoots the visitor. A large robot (Gort) emerges from the ship in response to this action and begins to destroy all the weapons of the military personnel. The wounded alien calls the robot off, though, and then he is rushed to a nearby hospital where it is discovered that he appears very human under his suit and that his name is Klaatu. He explains that his mission is to deliver a message to Earth and that he must speak directly with the leaders of all of the countries. He is told this would be difficult to do because the countries do not trust each other, and he is also told that he must remain in confinement for the present time. He takes little head of this, though, as he easily escapes from his detainment then decides to go among the people of Earth to better understand them. He also makes contact with a well-known scientist and through him tries to bring together all of the greatest minds of the planet for a meeting. But is the message Klaatu will deliver one of peace or destruction?

Why Is It a Must-Watch Movie?  The Day the Earth Stood Still gave us one of the first alien encounter movies and it would set the standard for the genre as it rose above its B-Movie expectations and delivered an excellent science fiction film with an important message that still resonates up today.

Review/Commentary: Despite its trappings, The Day the Earth Stood Still is anything but the typical cheesy 50’s alien invasion B-Movie. It plays around with that formulas a bit (in fact, it helped establish it) with the flying saucer shaped spaceship landing in Washington followed by a spaceman emerging, and then there’s the poster-friendly shots of the massive alien robot carrying off the film’s attractive leading lady. But this is no simple exploitation film designed to fill up the drive-in and deliver cheap thrills. In fact, producer Julian Blaustein wanted to make a movie that tapped into the anxiety and paranoia of that era dominated by the Cold War and the proliferation of atomic weapons. And he succeeded masterfully at that, delivering a film that utilizes genre elements to convey a message that transcends its B-Movie roots. The film taps into the prejudices, short-sightedness, and petty squabbles of the human race and shows how it is ourselves, and not a supposed alien threat, that can act as our own worst enemy. And The Day the Earth Stood Still plays its story straight and shoots for broader appeal than the typical Saturday matinee creature film, something rare for a genre film at that time. It’s spaceships and robots surely appealed to the younger movie goers, but its more involved plot would draw in the mature viewers as well. And even though it throws in the expected cute kid, it successfully maneuvers past cliché by using that character to give Klaatu a perspective on Earth from the innocent eyes of a child.

Since its first appearance at the theaters back in 1951, The Day the Earth Stood Still has worked its way into our culture with such things as the image of infamous giant robot Gort (and his Bruce Campbell chin) as well as the phrase “Klaatu barada nikto” (which, speaking of Campbell, he used to great effect in The Army of Darkness). But the movie has also endured because of the accomplishments of its filmcraft. It had excellent production values with special effects that were first rate and nearly flawless for the time (and actually still hold up pretty well today). This movie also gives us an intelligent, well-made film as well as a strong science fiction tale (based on the short story “Farewell to the Master” by Harry Bates), albeit one of the more slow, thoughtful ones of the medium. In this sense, The Day the Earth Stood Still can be considered a precursor to films like 2001: A Space Odyssey, The Andromeda Strain, and Contact, and it stands up quite well in that company. It’s slow, but not plodding, a bit distant, but never aloof. And Klaatu’s final speech to Earth stirs up a nerve with the audience and gives us one of the all-time great monologues in film (though some might find it a bit heavy handed).

The performances help the film excel as well as we get several notches above the typical wooden acting and cardboard stereotypes quite common in early genre films (and still today for that matter). Michael Rennie stands out as Klaatu, manifesting curiosity and at times compassion towards the people of Earth while never losing sight of his mission to deliver a stern message to the human race. And Patricia Neal managed to steer clear of the expected subordinate female role so common in genre films of that time and even demonstrates her willingness to stand up to her would-be fiancé when she questions his motives. Billy Gray takes on the cute kid role yet never annoys or overstays his welcome. And several other familiar faces flesh out the cast and deliver strong performances in smaller roles including Hugh Marlowe (Earth vs. the Flying Saucers), Sam Jaffe (Ben Hur and a gazillion movie and television supporting/guest roles) and Frances Bavier (forever identified as Aunt Bee from The Andy Griffith Show).

Plenty of alien invasion films would follow The Day the Earth Stood Still in the decade or more after its release, many giving us examples of B-Movies at their worst (I Marred a Monster from Outer Space, Cat-Women of the Moon) while some managed to stand out as better examples of filmcraft or tap into the underlying Id of the era (The Invasion of the Body Snatchers, The Invaders from Mars). But The Day the Earth Stood Still represented one of the first and best examples of this formula, giving us a complete movie that transcended (while fully commanding) its exploitive elements and at the same time delivering succinctly that grand message that great films aspire to. (And director Robert Wise would go on to helm Star Trek: The Motion Picture 38 years later.)

---

25 Must-Watch Science Fiction and Fantasy Movies

So many science fiction and fantasy movies and so little time. Metropolis, King Kong, War of the Worlds, Fantastic Voyage, Star Wars, The Terminator, The Matrix, Lord of the Rings, Inception . . . Plan 9 From Outer Space . . . and so many, many more. Where to start and which ones to watch? Well that's what this book is here to help you with. It may not cover all science fiction movies, and not even all of those mentioned above, but it gives you a heck of a good start starting point. This book begins with 1927’s Metropolis and then treks through 24 more genre films ending with 2009's Moon to give you an extensive look at some of the best of the best of science fiction and fantasy cinema. Each entry includes a synopsis, review/commentary, cast and crew information, as well as a few nuggets of tidbits and trivia relating to the films. Whether you are new to the genre and trying to figure out where to get started or a grizzled veteran who has logged many hours in the cinema watching sci fi, 25 Must Watch Science Fiction and Fantasy Movies is sure to entertain. And even if you have already seen the movies covered in the book, there's a good chance you could walk away knowing a little bit (or maybe even a lot) more about these films than you did previously.

A great primer for science fiction and fantasy cinema and a fun read as well!

Available now on Kindle from Amazon.com. 

The Anti-Blockbusters: Beowulf and Grendel

Rating: 4 out of 5 Stars

Anybody who has had a class or two in Western Literature will know Beowulf as the aged (some might say musty) epic poem about the titular hero who defeats the wicked monster Grendel and his mother as well as a menacing dragon. This work has made it to the big screen several times including the 1999 film starring ex-Highlander Christopher Lambert as well as the big-budget motion-capture adaptation from Robert Zemeckis in 2007. In 2005, another spin on the classic tale came out from Canadian director Sturla Gunnarsson which, unlike the more Hollywood-ized versions, presented an introspective, somber approach to the story.

In this movie, King of the Danes Hrothgar lives in despair as the monstrous Grendel wages war against his people and has slain many of his warriors. He sends for the aid of the legendary Beowulf who arrives at Daneland accompanied by his troop of warriors. They face off with Grendel, but the monster will not fight them and instead flees which prompts Beowulf to wonder about the claims Hrothgar has made against the creature. Beowulf eventually finds that, when Grendel was a child, the Danish king killed his father for stealing a fish, though he spared the youth out of pity. However, after Grendel matured, he waged a war of vengeance against Hrothgar and his men. The beast would not attack Beowulf and his men, though, because they had done him no wrong. In searching for the creature, they come across his cave and one of Beowulf’s warriors desecrates it. Grendel seeks revenge for this act and Beowulf eventually captures him leading to the beast’s death after he escapes by hacking off his own arm (okay, delayed spoiler warning for those who failed English Lit). This leads to Grendel’s mother arriving to avenge the death of her son and Beowulf then has do battle with her as well.

Beowulf and Grendel was produced on a much more modest budget than the Robert Zemeckis version that hit the theaters two years later and it also steered clear of the typical Hollywood style pumped-up action-hero story. Instead, the creative team for the movie used the tale as a parable of sorts for modern times. Beowulf is far from the blood-thirsty stereotype typically associated with the character — though he is surrounded by plenty of others that fit this mold. Instead, we see him as a warrior with an introspective side that questions whether force is always the correct first option in dealing with a potential threat. Now you could quite rightly argue that this gives as a very historically inaccurate view of people living during the Anglo-Saxon age, but then let’s spend a few hours reviewing the historical gaffs in a film like, say, Braveheart. Beowulf and Grendel does not pretend to offer a history lesson or a faithful adaptation of the original poem. Instead, it uses that familiar tale as a common reference point which acts as a mirror on our own world.

The movie can easily be seen as a reactionary response to the interventionist policies of the United States during the 00’s, but not to the point that it delivers little more than a Liberal diatribe. Instead, it questions the blind reliance on force through the irony of historical figures heavily associated with the warrior culture. And the Beowulf of this film gives us less of the dashing, violent hero type and more of a thinker and strategist with a conscience who understands, maybe even fears, the consequences of violence of the world he lives in.

Along with the less action-oriented, more contemplative story, the movie gives us strong performances by its very capable cast led by Gerard Butler (who would later do a very different turn with a historical character in 300). Also, the austere landscapes of the on-location shooting in Iceland lend an air of stark beauty and authenticity to the film, enhanced by the striking cinematography that brings the movie to life.

This one may disappoint those looking for the action film that its source material might suggest and it also will not help anybody with their upcoming English Lit test. But for those looking for a well-crafted story that will engage the mind and just might cause you to ponder the consequence of violence, be sure to give this film a look.

The Anti-Blockbusters: Defendor

Rating: 5 out of 5 Stars (Highest Rating)

Superhero movies have been all the rage of late with the Avengers franchise dominating the big screen and the Batman vs. Superman and Justice League films not far off on the horizon.  But while the big budget capers have given us plenty of senses-dazzling, popcorn-munching moments, it’s worth taking the time to recognize a superhero film of sorts from a few of years ago made on a much smaller scale but that delivered a grand, moving story. Defendor (misspelling intentional and explained in the film) comes to us from writer/director Peter Stebbings and stars Woody Harrelson and it flew very much under the radar getting a limited release in theaters in February 2010 and a quiet debut on DVD a few months later. But this is a must-see for genre fans even if it does take a major detour from what you would expect for a superhero film.

The movie focuses on Arthur Poppington (Harrelson), a person with no superpowers who dons a costume and gear to take on the criminals who seem to run unchecked in his city, and he has a particular vendetta against a super villain known as Captain Industry. And that’s about as much as you should know going in. I could provide a bit more detail (and I will to a small extent below), but this movie is best viewed spoiler-free to experience its full impact.

Now many reading that brief synopsis will immediately think of 2009’s Kick-Ass (or 2008’s Special or this 2011’s Super). And it's worth comparing Defendor to Kick-Ass because they definitely have their similarities but the former film takes a very different approach and delivers a far superior film. Both have normal people putting on a superhero disguise and trying to act like the comic book characters that inspired them. But Kick-Ass takes this idea to the extreme if not the absurd whereas Defendor remains grounded in reality. In fact, Defendor really counts more as a drama than a superhero film. Very little that happens in the movie is not plausible, and it has almost nothing in the way of science fiction and/or fantasy elements, whereas Kick-Ass definitely embraces its genre much more heavily. But Defendor still gives plenty of nods to the superhero tropes (though in an angular sense) and should be embraced warmly by genre fans. Kick-Ass also verged on torture-porn at times, though intentionally as it winked to its audience and brought to life elements only implied in the comics that inspired it. Defendor steers in a different direction (though it has plenty of violence), as it delivers more in the way of a dramatic character study. It also has a gut wrenching quality about it, something present in Kick-Ass as well, but the latter film actually makes you feel creepy at times, almost like you need to go take a shower. Defendor has moments that make you cringe and/or feel uncomfortable, but ultimately these help bring out the true pathos in the film’s hero.

And you can’t accuse writer/director Peter Stebbings of stealing the basic premise from the Mark Millar comic book series. Stebbings wrote the screenplay in 2005, three years before the comic hit the stands, and he filmed the movie in 2009 (though it did not get its release until February 19, 2010, one month before Kick-Ass hit the big screen). And if the name Peter Stebbings rings a bell, he is an actor/writer/director who has had frequent guest appearances on genre shows like The X-Files, The Outer Limits (the 90’s remake), and Stargate SG-1. He also played Markus Alexander across the two seasons of J. Michael Straczynski’s excellent but underrated post-apocalyptic series Jeremiah (more on that one at this link).  But with Defendor he has demonstrated that he can do much more than act. He has shown himself to be a highly talented filmmaker, handling a grand story on an intimate scale while expertly working in such nuances as the misspelling of the title character’s moniker and the Captain Industry reference (no explanations, watch the movie).

It’s not like we haven’t seen the idea of normal people dressing up as superheroes played out before in comics, on television, and in the cinema. But Stebbings manages to give the concept a fresh spin and ultimately taps into its full potential to deliver an engrossing and moving film. It’s not too much of a spoiler to tell you that he works in many of the expected standards from the darker, grittier comics that this film draws its influence from. Defendor gives us the troubled, driven central character with a motivation from his past to strike out against crime. And of course, the city is riddled with the criminal element and the people feel helpless and insecure. Then we have the corrupt cop on the take and the jaded hooker with a good side she tries to suppress. Stebbings even throws in the overly melodramatic--even a bit campy--theme music just for good measure.  And all of this could have led to a muddled, contrived affair that felt all too familiar and even descended into bad camp. But Stebbings meshes these elements together masterfully without reverting to cliché so that it feels new and vital instead of tired and stale. Reworking old ideas is not a bad thing in itself. It’s when you regurgitate what has come before that you deliver an ersatz product. Stebbings avoids the latter and instead takes a well-tread idea to new heights (and you can hear him talk more about this in the short film "Origin Stories - The Genesis of Defendor" available for free viewing at Amazon Instant Video). And with this relatively simple, grounded story that he put together on very little money (about $3.5 million) which relies on little in the way of special effects, he succeeds in delivering that grand tale that genre productions often strive for yet often come up lacking. That’s story-telling and that’s filmcraft and that’s what makes this a film fans should seek out.

And of course I would be remiss if I did not mention the outstanding performance delivered by Woody Harrelson. Woody is one of my all-time favorite actors and one of Hollywood’s best character performers. Unfortunately, he has rarely received the material equal to his talent, even though he manages to make almost any role given to him shine. But with Defendor, Harrelson finally gets his Magnus Opus, even if few have recognized it as such. He delivers a career performance and expertly interprets the nuances of the scripts. From the one-liners that aren’t quite as witty as you'd expect (there’s a reason for that, and don’t worry because he does get some zingers in there), to his less than heroic run-ins with bad guys, to the moments when he reveals the inner turmoils that haunt Arthur Poppington, Harrelson is at the top of his game from start to finish. And he gets a pretty impressive supporting cast that includes Sandra Oh (Grey’s Anatomy), Elias Koteas (The Prophecy, Fallen), Michael Kelly (The Sopranos, Fringe), and Kat Dennings (various supporting roles), each of whom fully immerse themselves into their roles and help elevate this movie to that next level.

Defendor unfortunately suffered from little to no marketing, and what did exist misrepresented the film. The movie is played up as a comedy in its promos, and while it does have its humorous elements (a few times it had me rolling on the floor laughing) it’s in truth a drama through and through. And that unfortunately seemed to hamper it in more ways than one. The movie industry, which prefers an easily labeled product, couldn’t quite peg down this drama with genre trappings which ultimately resulted in it falling through the cracks. It got little attention upon its release, and no recognition from the Academy. And while the Oscars often shy away from genre films in the non-technical categories anyway, this indy film definitely deserved at least nominations for Harrelson’s acting as well as Stebbings’ writing and directing. Unfortunately it received no attention from the organization that supposedly recognizes the best examples of filmmaking.

If you missed out on this film, which is quite likely, you need to check it out and soon. And spread the word. I consider this one of the best ever superhero movies even though you could make an argument that it’s not a superhero movie at all. In any case, it’s a must-see for all genre fans as well as anybody who appreciates true filmcraft.

Buy Defendor and Other Superhero Movies on Blu-ray and DVD from Amazon.com: