Because this was uninteresting and boring. I won’t even try to describe the plot, except that it took place on a space station in orbit around the planet Solaris, and that strange things had happened. George Clooney’s character is sent out to investigate, but soon, weird stuff is happening to him, too.
There were some good things about this movie. It was beautifully filmed, exquisitely acted, and the character Snow contributed to some early excitement. Also, the scene where Clooney’s character enters the space station was pretty awesome. But this drowned in all the pretentious, incomprehensible nonsense of the rest of the film. There were obviously some half-hearted attempts at exploring such themes as the relation between creator and creation, and some questipns were raised about what life is. But when you don’t do this thoroughly at all, and all the thrill curve peaks about twelve minutes into a ninety-nine minutes long movie, you’re in deep shit. I can certainly understand why this remake and its original are compared to “2001″, though.
3.5/10. Or maybe I’m just stupid and old fashioned.
Oh well. At least I’m moderately well prepared for “Sunshine” now.
Posts
The premise for Sunshine is So Unbelievably Bad (SUB). And it looks like the movie will be sub-everything, judging from the trailer. Bad acting, pretentious wannabe-horror editing, you name it. I certainly will steer well clear of it.
29. April 2007 @ 14:54 ( Permalink )
It’s not the kind of movie I usually see, either, and the premise is arguably cheesy. But SFX’s been hyping the thing ever since I began subscribing to it, and so I think it might be interesting to see if it’s any good for myself.
I haven’t seen the trailer, but one of my flat mates watched it earlier this week, and he claims it was quite good for the fist 90 minutes, but that the last 30 minutes were utter crap.
As for the premise, sure it sounds ridiculous. (And speaking of ridiculous, Dagbladet constantly refers to this movie as a “frighteningly relevant eco-drama” — which, based on what I’ve read about it, sounds like pure bullshit…) And unless it has a major importance for the content of the plot, beyond providing a reason for the space travelling, they could probably have replaced it with something a bit more credible.
But even what sounds like the most retarded of ideas might be acceptable one you get it properly explained. So if they manage to do that in the movie, it won’t be a problem, really. In other words, I allow them the benefit of doubt.
29. April 2007 @ 17:22 ( Permalink )
I haven’t seen the remake, but the original “Solyaris” directed by favous Russian director Andrei Tarkovsky is a very good movie. It’s 1 hour longer than the remake but it’s worth it. I recommend you watch the original movie, not the crappy Holliwood remake!
8. May 2007 @ 08:41 ( Permalink )
forgot to say that Tarkovsky’s Solyaris is included in IMDB’s top 250 movies of the world (#240)
8. May 2007 @ 08:43 ( Permalink )
If I get the chance, Rat, I will, but thanks to the boredom the remake inflicted on me, I sincerely doubt I will actively seek it out… :\
And thanks for stopping by! I do believe you’re the first (and, thus, only) of my old forum buddies to stop by and post a comment.
8. May 2007 @ 17:33 ( Permalink )
eh, you are welcome! I might visit here more often, because I found many blogs that are interesting to read.
18. May 2007 @ 06:54 ( Permalink )
I hope that you do.
By the way, during which hours are you most likely to be on MSN?
18. May 2007 @ 14:05 ( Permalink )
I’m usually online since 10Am to 7PM Armenian time (GMT+4 +1 hour summer time).
But soon I’ll have internet at home and I’ll be online after 7PM until midnight.
24. May 2007 @ 07:07 ( Permalink )
Damn, I’m hardly even out of bed at those times.
24. May 2007 @ 21:11 ( Permalink )