Masterpiece of Horror Theatre- Earth vs. the Flying Saucers

      In 1947, a businessman and pilot named Kenneth Arnold was flying near Mt. Rainier in Washington state when he came across a bunch of strange lights he compared to "saucers", among other things. The press would come to dub these objects "Flying Saucers". This sighting was one of many during the late 40's and 50's, when people around the world began to report seeing strange objects in the skies, which was soon attributed to beings from the stars. One of the biggest proponents of this was Marine aviator Maj. Donald Keyhoe, who wrote some bestsellers with information from official sources (though with differing interpretations of those sources and the eyewitnesses listed than either the Air Force or scientists probably would've) regarding the phenomenon. Of course, Hollywood smelt an opportunity, and made many alien invasion films during the period.With the (fairly dubious) prestige of Major Keyhoe, a film was made, "suggested" by his book, Flying Saucers from Outer Space. After going through titles like Attack of the Flying Saucers and Invasion of the Flying Saucers, the title Earth vs. the Flying Saucers just felt right, apparently. Ray Harryhausen did the effects for the film, and the producer was his regular one Charles Schneer. To help the film, Harryhausen sought the guidance of George Adamski (known for his... bizarre UFO sightings). The screenplay was written by Bernard Gordon (who had to take the alias Raymond T Marcus, due to being blacklisted), George Worthing Yates, and Curt Siodmak (known for writing The Wolf Man for Universal). Stock footage of the sinking of the HMS Barham and V-2 launches during World War II were among the effects used in the film to describe the alien attacks in the film. The film is regarded as something of a classic, with Tim Burton extensively homaging the film in Mars Attacks, but Harryhausen himself has admitted it was his least favorite of the films he had done.

      Flying saucers are everywhere, being seen by pilots, farmers, and all sorts of people. This includes Dr. Russell Marvin (Hugh Marlowe) and his wife Carol (Joan Taylor), who are driving to Project Skyhook, a military effort to launch satellites as the first shot in space exploration efforts (this was 1956, right before Sputnik). They decide to keep it secret, but is informed by Carol's father, General Hanley (Morris Ankrum) that many of the satellites have been fallen back to Earth, and the current launch goes disastrously. One of the flying saucers lands on Earth, and the occupants, after being attacked by the US military, attack back, and kidnap General Hanley. They subsequently reveal to Hanley (and later Marvin) that, after being encountered with hostility, they have decided to attack the Earth, and have mysterious designs for the sun. Now, it is a race to figure out what the aliens are going to do.

     The effects of the flying saucers are very well-done, while appearing very simply at first. It seems like it's just hung from a string, but if you look closely, you can see them being rotated very quickly. It gives them more of a realistic feeling, especially as they go around the sky, and very much when they land. The scene where the saucer is on the ground before the aliens attack was very tense primarily because of that effect and the weird distortion used for the force field. The alien suits are less than impressive (and phallic), but the make-up once they are unmasked is pretty good. The climax where various landmarks are destroyed with stop motion is practical effects is amazing, some of the best of the period that I've seen, I like the use of stock footage very subtly as an indication, especially the photo-negatives of sun (always good to see astronomical imagery) I also like that there is more of an international presence in the plot of the film (even if it focuses primarily on the US).

    The movie has something of a fast pace. It goes immediately from Dr. Marvin and Carol seeing the UFO to the UFO ruining the launch to the invasion starting. As a result, it gets a bit hard to follow, since you need to keep up with each and every detail in order to follow it. This especially applies to the ending, where the military has to deal with the aliens in Washington, but it doesn't really say how they are dealt with worldwide. I also wish the aliens had a better motivation, than just growing hostile immediately and wanting to rule the Earth. There's apparently a comic series that explores the film from their perspectives, so I might check that out. Also, for a film with this large a scale, it is way too short to really soak in the sheer terror of a menace to the entire planet.

   I kind of agree with Harryhausen that this is his weakest film. However, it's mostly in terms of plot. The effects are still top-notch, and I can see why the film became so iconic. If you like alien invasion film, science fiction films of the 50's, or the work of Ray Harryhausen, definitely give it a watch.

   Tomorrow, we return to Wes Craven with his 1991 cult classic The People Under the Stairs.

Reason for the Season- Twilight Zone (2019)

    A couple years ago, I did a piece on this very blog lamenting that science fiction anthologies were not as common (relegated to season long anthologies at that time). In that piece, I mentioned that they shouldn't do another *Twilight Zone*, because there were at least two others before it. Well, they went and did it anyway, so that's why I decided to review it: to see if this lives up to any of the previous incarnations and to see how the anthology format holds up now. Just a reminder, these are more free-form, stream of consciousness than my typical reviews, and I include spoilers with abandon.  Also, I want to make this an official series, so there's a title. (Get it? Because TV series are organized into seasons and... you get it.)


    Okay, of the three version of this show, this is easily worst. I've said this for weeks as it has been released. For a long time, I regarded the 2002 version as the weakest one. Even that had some highlights and some good episodes (especially the sequel to "It's a Good Life," with Bill Mumy himself). This, however, has the weakest set of episodes so far. And it starts off fine. The Comedian episode with Kumail Nanjiani was pretty good, with a Twilight Zone-esque twist and very universal themes. It goes downhill from that almost immediately with the second episode, a very loose remake of Nightmare at 20,000 Feet called Nightmare at 30,000 Feet, which had... a podcast, I think, and Adam Scott running an airplane. Honestly, I don't remember a lot of it, and that's the problem with a lot of these. They don't really have those clincher moments that the standard Twilight Zone episodes do. Like, take the classic episode *Time Enough at Last*, of course about a dude who just wants to read, but is constantly distracted by the people in his life. At the very end, he has the time to read all the books he wants, since everyone else was wiped out by the apocalypse, but just he is about to, he breaks his glasses. That is a very iconic and very memorable moment. That is largely absent from this new incarnation, and in its place is... attempting to comment on modern social issues. Like, in the least subtle manner possible. The worst offender is "The Wunderkund", about John Cho as a political advisor who gets an 11-year old elected President. It is very clearly about Trump, and it is so painful to watch. Like, imagine all those hacky Trump jokes from like, Jimmy Kimmel and Bill Maher, and make them into a *Twilight Zone* episode and here's what we've got. "Not All Men" could've been interesting exploration of toxic masculinity, but doesn't really demonstrate that and has an ending that just contradicts itself. "Point of Origin" could've been as biting as an episode of the original, with a focus on the current immigration crisis. Again, though, it doesn't really explore these issues or really makes a point about them. It's just "yep. This is happening." People have defended (correctly) that the Twilight Zone from the 60's was political, but it always felt complete, and further more, held up as stories in their own right with universal themes. "The Monsters are Due on Maple Street" could be held as a commentary on McCarthyism and the Red Scare, but could be seen as a simple story about mass hysteria and the dangers of paranoia. Hell, the 2002 one had an update that was pretty good, while also commenting on the hysteria following 9/11. A lot of these, beside being unsubtle, are just not really good or memorable. Okay, there is one, and it's the best one of this season "Replay". There is a strong undercurrent about police brutality and racism, but it never feels too attached to that. Instead, it has more of an overriding theme about changing the past and trying to build a future. That makes it work a lot better, since it combines contemporary themes with more universal ideals. Aside from that, it just isn't very memorable. I've heard "Six Degrees of Freedom," was touted as a highlight, but I didn't care for it, especially the end. I can't tell you anything that happens in "A Traveler" or "Blue Scorpion". The very last episode of the season "Blurryman" is also pretty mediocre for the most part, though its message about how people ought to explore and expand art in all different directions and explore new ideas and worlds, and that something can be both good art and good entertainment was decently handled in the closing narration (the episode leading up to it was decidedly less adept at this message). That narration reminded me a lot of how Rod Serling, a long suffering TV writer who had scripts regularly censored by sponsors for their too-close-for-comfort stories, was able to use SF/Fantasy to explore contemporary themes and new ideas. (They might've also taken influence from the old Tower of Terror ride in Disney California Adventure with their TZ homages) The thing with this is that it has potentially good ideas and has a stellar cast and crew. Thus, none of it is really bad per se, but at that point, it just doesn't reach the level of being good. It's solid mediocrity, and that's probably the worst part. It just doesn't evoke an emotion within you. I'll probably never see any of these episodes again, and I've rewatched plenty of the *Twilight Zone* from all its incarnations. It is revived for a second season, and hopefully, it does get a lot better, because I do see potential in this series, if they can look at what didn't work for people and fix it, this could be a great show. Finally, Jordan Peele does a decent job as narrator. I honestly preferred Forrest Whittaker during his short stint, or even the unseen narrator from the second season of 80's series. 

Well, with that out of the way, join me in a little bit as this year sees the next Summer of Terror with the Nightmare on Elm Street series.

Dailles and Nightlies- Battleship

          This almost sounds like a parody, really. Now 7 years removed from it, it is sort of stunning that this film actually exists, and isn't something in the background of a Hollywood satire. A military sci-fi blockbuster based on the plotless game of Battleship. The one where you yell out a position, and it hits or misses (I'm guessing modern versions are a tie-in to the film? Haven't played it in a while) Someone actually conceived of this, and created the film with high quality effects, name actors, and military support. It is kind of astounding, and with the right combination, it might've actually worked. Unfortunately, for a concept this wonky, it is surprisingly dull and boring.

      NASA has managed to locate an exoplanet with the potential for life, and sends a signal to any potential life. But, this interesting development is sidetracked by the story of Alex Hopper (Taylor Kitsch), who, as brother Stone (Alexander Skarsgard, and yes, his name really is "Stone") helpfully exposits to the audience, is an unemployed slacker celebrating his birthday at a bar, where he attempts to impress Samantha (Brooklyn Decker), by stealing a chicken burrito from a nearby convenience store. He's tased pretty badly by the police, and while he is recovering, Stone once again helpfully explains that he wants Alex to join the Navy and that Samantha is the daughter of the Commander of the US Pacific Fleet Terrance Shane (Liam Neeson). Cut to 7 years later, and Alex is now a Tactical Action Officer on the USS John Paul Jones, and is preparing to ask Admiral Shane for his daughter's hand in marriage (why this is still a thing, I'm not sure. Seems terribly antiquated). However, he is on the verge of a discharge (for some reason that's never explicitly explained as far as I could discern). Samantha, meanwhile revealed to be a physical therapist is helping a double amputee, Lt. Col Mick Canales (Gregory D. Gadson, a real life Iraq veteran and double amputee, which is very cool) recover by taking a walk in the beautiful Hawaiian wilderness.  If you're wondering where the aliens come in, well, they land during a Navy game between the RIMPAC nations, and create a force field around the Hawaiian islands. Now, after Stone is killed, Alex, along with Petty Officer Cora Raikes (Rihanna. Yes, that one) and the commander of the Jones' sister ship Yugi Nagata (Tadanobu Asano) must fight the aliens from within, while Samantha, Mick, and a SETI scientist named Cal Zapata (Hamish Linklater) try to destroy the shields.

      There are a couple things that are competent about this film. It has two kind of interesting subplots that are more interesting than the main plot. One is the aforementioned story of real life double amputee Gregory Gadson fighting off aliens, which was generally very awesome whenever we got to see it. The other involves a group of veterans actually refurbishing the USS Missouri with the main characters to fight the aliens. Both of these could've made entertaining films in and of themselves, and didn't deserve to be attached to Battleship the movie. The acting was alright, with a surprising standout being Rihanna. (I want to see her in more films, she has only been in 6 films since this one). It is mildly entertaining how they shoehorn aspects of the game into the film, like the pegs and when they try to fire on the aliens using a grid.

     It is surprising how boring this film is. Battleship the movie should be some weird, glorious mess. This is just another blockbuster, with a few tangential connections to its origin. It's not fun, it's not really that absurd. If you've seen any alien invasion film with clear support from the United States armed forces, you've seen this. I really can't say much other than that. Beyond that, it's also clear that it is trying to take elements from the then-hottest blockbusters, especially the Transformers films from Michael Bay. Director Peter Berg (known for the original Friday Night Lights, which is likely why Taylor Kitsch is in this) is clearly attempting to ape Michael Bay's style , from the panning shots to the slow motion action. However, while Bay has turned this into something of a vulgar artform using his own openly iconoclastic mannerisms, Berg's imitation makes the film look even cheaper and more mundane by comparison (though at least Berg doesn't imitate Bay's political incorrectness, in the former's defense). It really says something that I was more confused here than by the Transformers films I've seen directed by Bay. Along with failing to get Bay, Berg also uses a lot of Spielbergian music cues and especially, JJ Abrams-esque lens flares, which make the film even harder to see. I'm probably making this Frankenstein's monster combination out to be interesting, but really, the combination of these elements make the film generic, and not terribly interesting in its own right.

     It took four goddamn days to write this. Battleship the movie should not be this hard to write about, but the film is that uninteresting. I had a hard time describing the synopsis, because literally very little of note actually happens. I really don't recommend this to anyone, except maybe battleship enthusiasts with its accuracy and how it uses military strategies from what I've read, though maybe there are errors. I don't know. This was a lot tougher than I originally imagined.
        

Dailles and Nightlies- 2010: The Year We Make Contact

   2001: A Space Odyssey is my all-time favorite film. I've said this on this site multiple times, and will probably bring it up whenever it feels appropriate. I see the film at least once every year, I've read the book, I've read the sequel books, and I've read everything I could on the production of this film and its novel. So, it was a pretty good year for me when it became its 50th anniversary. With the attention given to the film due to this, I decided, with the inauguration of this new series, to spotlight its lesser known sequel. Arthur C. Clarke (co-writer of the original film, and the author of the book) wrote 2010:Odyssey Two specifically as a sequel to the film's continuity (i.e. changing Saturn in the book to Jupiter in the film). Stanley Kubrick declined directing, so Peter Hyams (known for Capricorn One and Outland) took over those duties, (having to start over with effects due to Kubrick destroying the original props), and was released to mixed critical and financial success in 1984. So, yeah, in honor of its 50th anniversary, we take a look at its underappreciated sequel.

     In 2010, 9 years after the Discovery shut down in Jupiter's orbit, Heywood Floyd (Roy Scheider, taking over the role William Sylvester played in the first one) took the fall for the events, and is mostly working in the Very Large Array. He is approached by Dimitri Moiseyevitch (Dana Elcar), a representative of the Soviet space program (remember, this was made in 1984), who hopes to recruit him for a Jupiter mission they're planning with their ship  Alexei Leonov (named for the first human to conduct a spacewalk). They hope to investigate the events that lead to the shutdown of the Discovery , the malfunction of its computer HAL-9000 (Douglas Rain), and the disappearance of Dave Bowman (Keir Dullea). Most significantly, they hope to examine the large monolith the Discovery was sent to investigate (as revealed in the climax of the first film). Despite rising tensions between the US and USSR under a conservative president (who cut funding to Floyd's agency while they were planning their own Discovery Two to investigate) and an incident in Central America, Floyd agrees, and manages to get approval for him, Walter Curnow (John Lithgow), the designer of the Discovery and Dr. Chandra (Bob Balaban), HAL's creator, to travel with the Leonov. They find themselves with already tense relations with the crew, including Captain Tanya Kirbuk (Helen Mirren), who is concurrently a major with the Soviet Air Force; Dr. Vladimir Rudenko (Saveliy Kramarov), the ship's doctor; and Irina Yakunina( Natasha Schneider), the ship's nutritionist. As they enter Jupiter orbit, they find strange signals coming from Jupiter's moon Europa. After prodding from Floyd, they investigate further, only for a strange light to emerge. This only harkens the strange events that may or may not explain what happened to the Discovery, Dave Bowman, and HAL-9000.

      This could've easily just been a Kubrick knock-off, a way to just imitate his style without any sort of consideration as to why that style is effective or making it work in its own way. While there are a couple Kubrick style shots and homages in the film (including an amusing one where he and Arthur C. Clarke are the US President and Soviet Premier on a Time magazine cover), Hyams largely does his own style, making it very distinct from the original and not overly reliant on it. I do like the more modern, 80's feel to the film, which, while unable to top the timeless period-ness of the original, is an interesting enough in its own right. The effects are superb, especially considering that they had to largely remake a lot of them from the originals. It keeps up with the original in those terms. It largely keeps to the events of the book (though my favorite scene in the book, where Dave Bowman is shown the floating gasbags of Jupiter, and oceanic creatures of Europa by the monolith beings, isn't in the film).

     Which probably leads me to my first problem with the film (and the book): the ending, where it is revealed the monolith beings want to create a new sun using the monoliths to create enough mass. It makes sense, given what has been stated in the plot and gives a good climax. However, it stretches belief and feels a bit odd in an otherwise realistic film. Another book-related problem was the explanation of HAL's malfunction. It is revealed that he was torn between the original mission orders and orders given to keep the Monolith secret. It feels like a disappointment given the scale of his malfunction, and felt like something else was missing from this, but the film decides to just leave it there.

      This is definitely not as good as the original, but most films in general aren't. However, I do think it is a good sequel in spite of that, and just a good standalone film, and does improve on the book by adding the Cold War tension to it. If you like the original, you'll like this, or appreciate it. Even if you don't like it, this is distinct enough from it that you might enjoy it. Definitely see 2001 first, though, if you haven't already. It is a far better film, for sure. However, this is a nice underappreciated film, and especially a study of Cold War tensions in film.   

Masterpiece of Horror Theatre's Summer of Terror- Jason X

      While the upcoming crossover with the Nightmare on Elm Street was still in development hell, Cunningham decided to produce another film to keep people interested in the franchise. After shooting around several idea of Jason in a new setting (including one where he fights LA street gangs), screenwriter Todd Farmer eventually came up with the idea of "Jason IN SPACE!". Farmer was very influenced by Alien and wrote several homages to that film within the script. Director James Isaac had been a visual effects director, with films like Return of the Jedi and The Fly (even getting Fly director David Cronenberg to cameo in the film). The film was mostly shot in Canada, with the help of Cronenberg's Canadian crew. It was a minor success, though not a massive one, and savaged by critics, though is beloved by fans.

       In the year 2010, Jason (Kane Hodder) has found himself stuck in the Crystal Lake Research Facility. Dr. Wimmer (David Cronenberg) and Sergeant Marcus (Markus (?) Parilo) decide that his cell regeneration ability is simply too valuable, and decide to transfer him, over the objections of lead scientist Rowan LaFountaine (Lexa Doig), who had hoped to put him into cryogenic storage. To prove her point, Jason breaks out, and kills Wimmer, Marcus, and the group of soldiers accompanying them. Rowan is able to lead him to the cryogenic chamber, but is stabbed at the last minute, and frozen with him. 445 years later, a group from "Earth 2", lead by Professor Braithwaite Lowe (Jonathan Potts), and crew, including Tsunaron (Chuck Campbell), Janessa (Melyssa Ade), Azrael (Dov Tiefenbach), Adrienne Thomas (Kristi Angus), Stoney (Yani Gellman), and Sergeant Brodski (Peter Mensah) are doing a survey of the old Earth, long destroyed by an unspecified incident. They find the capsule, and take both bodies back on board to revive them. They learn of Jason, and Lowe's backer Dieter Perez (Robert Silverman) notes his value. However, Rowan (revived and healed) warns them of his true nature. Sure enough, he gets back to his old business.

        This film was occasionally creative, particularly in using its futuristic space setting. For instance, an early kill uses liquid nitrogen to freeze a body and break it. Another had someone die when pushed through a ventilation system. I liked that they tricked Jason by creating a simulation of Crystal Lake and two teenagers. There is one really good sequence which uses a similar conceit to Alien, where Jason is in the shadows, fighting off soldiers. Surprisingly good acting from most involved.

      This film looks like a TV show, and not in a good way. Everything looks cheap, from the interior of the labs or the ship. It looks like a UPN space series from the late 90's, like Jason jumped into Star Trek: Enterprise. It isn't helped by the CGI augmentation, which makes it look even worse and more dated. It is also incredibly boring, with even the signature chase sequences being really dull and uninteresting. This isn't really a bad idea, but this feels too serious and ponderous to reach this full potential. It seems convinced that it is Alien and not a Friday the 13th film. Oh, and the Jason X costume looks terrible. Looks more like a villain from a really bad mid-90's Image Comic.

    Okay, so another dud, and another definite skip. That said, this was explicitly a filler movie, meant to maintain interest as they went into Freddy v. Jason. It feels like a swan song for the franchise, an penultimate entry meant as a final farwell to the character (in a solo film) in the changing horror landscape. New slashers like Scream (which satirized the very genre tropes Friday the 13th helped promulgate) and I Know What You Did Last Summer were becoming big, and the genre was moving further from the formulas of the previous franchises. More importantly, in 1999, a $60000 budget film called The Blair Witch Project became the 10th highest grossing film of that year, ushering a new form of horror in the "found footage genre". In a sense, this was Jason's last stand, in the new millennium.

     Well, that, and his upcoming fight with Freddy Krueger, which will be covered tomorrow.

Current Film Review: A Wrinkle in Time

         It's rare I'm blindsided by something like this. Sure, I read and watched the reviews, which said that this ranged from disappointed to terrible. However, this truly was... I don't know how to describe it. I could not have imagined something like this. It was not good, but it was not good in a very interesting, creative way. It was fascinating in its weirdness and, perhaps because of that, I was invested in it. It is still severely flawed, but it's interesting. A lot of reviews say that this will probably become a classic for kids today, the same way something like Neverending Story or Hook was for my generation. I tend to agree. I bet that in 10-20 years, this film will be regarded by some as a classic.

        Based on the seminal young adult novel by Madeleine d'Engle, the film follows Meg Murry (Storm Reid), a young woman in Los Angeles, who lives with her mother, Dr. Kate Murry (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) and younger brother Charles Wallace (Deric McCabe) (who is constantly referred to by his full title for whatever reason). She has become more temperamental and rebellious after the disappearance of her father, astrophysicist Dr. Alex Murry (Chris Pine). One night, Meg and her mother find Charles Wallace playing with a strange woman, who introduces herself as Mrs. Whatsit (Reese Witherspoon), who foreshadows events to come. After another encounter with Mrs. Who (Mindy Kaling), Meg and her new companion Calvin (Levi Miller) note the strange behavior of Charles Wallace. Finally, Mrs. Whatsit and Mrs. Who unite with their leader, Mrs. Which (Oprah Winfrey), who explain their appearance: They want to help find where Meg's father is. Soon, Meg, Calvin and Charles Wallace are brought on a literal intergalactic journey, where they confront their inadequacies and the power of love (I think, something like that)

       This was creative and interesting to look at. It has a wide color palette, and utilizes a diverse range of settings and backdrops to give a more whimsical atmosphere. It has a number of interesting (if underexplained; I'll get to that) ideas, and visuals to convey these ideas.  It's very nice to look at, and very unusual for a blockbuster. The performances mostly work, and the actors appear very invested in the material. It has some emotional scenes and some occasionally funny moments. Like I said, a kid now might be very charmed and enchanted by the scenes in this, even if I was mostly uninvested in them.

    The biggest problem with this is that it is underexplained. So many confusing things happen in this. Some ideas are brought up, and never mentioned again. Some ideas just come out of nowhere, and you're left confused as to how the sequence of events eventually led to this moment. I certainly was left at times wondering why things happened, and how things were resolved. It feels like stuff was cut from this that would've clarified and fully explained the events that occurred. That hypothesis is supported by the fact that a prominent part of trailer is not in the film, suggesting scenes were cut from this. The characters also feel underdeveloped and react to things in a manner normal people don't. Mrs. Whatsit's first appearance in their home is mostly shown as if a nosy neighbor had stopped by, and not a mysterious woman had just broken into their house. At no point do the characters ever question what's happening or think that they are dreaming. Finally, the villain of the story is underdeveloped. Once again, probably something that was cut, since there is a scene at the end that suggests that the villain's defeat was part of a larger philosophical battle, or something. This film left me baffled as to what it was trying to do.

       Once again, I feel that this might become a sort of classic when elementary and middle school teachers put it on during  recess or breaks, or if they are studying the book itself in school.  And, honestly, while I didn't like per se, I don't hate either. It is far too interesting and creative for me to really dislike. While it is very flawed, as I have detailed, I recommend this, especially if you are young and interested in seeing this.  Probably as a matinee, though, there are probably better movies out now.

      Next time, I will be tackling the nostalgia fest of Ready Player One. 

Masterpiece of Horror Theatre- Invaders from Mars

      Invaders from Mars was an independent colored (as in, not black and white) science-fiction film released in 1953. It was inspired by a dream recounted to writer John Tucker Battle, by his wife. Directed by William Cameron Menzies (who coined the term "production designer", while working on the film Gone With the Wind), the film fits neatly into 50's science fiction filmmaking, an exploration of Martians invading the Earth using proxies and internal subversion, and one boy seeing it unfold before him. That sort of commentary on the 50's Red Scare would be explored further in films like Invasion of the Body Snatchers. The film today is largely regarded an underrated classic in the genre, with some filmmakers citing it as a childhood favorite. In 1978, the rights for the film were purchased by Wade Williams, millionaire science fiction fan. Eventually, he decided to commission a remake, with Cannon buying the rights for 50x the price that he had bought the rights for. Tobe Hopper, in the middle of his three picture deal with Cannon, signed on to direct, having been one of those influenced by the film in his youth. Dan O'Bannon and Don Jakoby once again wrote the screenplay. The effects for the film were done by special effects legends Stan Winston and John Dykstra. When producers Menachem Golan and Yoram Globus saw the finished product, they (after confusing it with their adaptation of King Solomon's Mines) hated the picture. Critics and audiences sympathized. It received overall negative reviews and $4.9 million on a $7 million budget. I did watch the 1953 film in preparation for this film, so I could how this version compares.

       One night, David Gardner (Hunter Carson) sees a UFO land in the small hill outside his house. His parents Ellen and George (Laraine Newman, Timothy Bottoms) are too late to it, but George promises to search the Hill when he wakes up. The next morning, David notices George acting strangely, and having a strange scar on the back of his neck. He also fails to come home the next night from his job as a military scientist. Ellen calls the Police Chief (Jimmy Hunt, who played the David role in the 1953 original) to investigate. When the Chief and another Policemen head over the hill, George suddenly reappears with neighbor Ed (William Frankfather). The policemen return, reporting nothing wrong, but acting strangely. Sure enough, the next day at school, he finds teacher Mrs. McKeltch (Louise Fletcher), with a bandage on her neck, eating a frog. Classmate Heather (Virginya Keehne) seems non-plussed at this. David confides in the school nurse, Linda (Karen Black, Carson's real-life mother). While initially not believing him, Linda becomes suspicious, and sees the bandage on McKeltch's back. She helps David escape. He accidentally sneaks into McKeltch's van, and she drives to an isolated location. David follows her into a cave, where he sees the truth: the UFO was indeed real, and the aliens are now kidnapping people and implanting them with strange devices to control them. While initially skeptical, Linda and David witness two investigators fall into the pit. Now, the two must find General Wilson (James Karen) at the base George worked at, and convince him to "send in the Marines", and stop this invasion from expanding.

    First, the aliens and their ship are incredibly well-done in terms of design and effects. Like I said in the introduction, the effects were done by two legends in the field (Stan Winston worked on works like Terminator, Jurassic Park, and Iron Man, John Dystra on Star Wars and Spider-Man), so the Martians are very distinct and memorable, as is their ship. The Master Intelligence in particular looks and moves very realistically (even if it looks like Krang). It's certainly a step up from the somewhat mundane Martians and the incredibly silly looking Intelligence from the original (the latter makes a brief cameo). The acting is good, if a bit over-the-top. Hunter Carson is good for what he has to do. Karen Black does well, if somewhat straining for horror (I get the feeling she was meant to be the mother, but, given that her son might be disturbed by the practical special effects, she decided to take the Nurse role, as she spends more of the film with him). The film improves some of the narrative from the original, which helps raise the tension and suspicion that David and the audience experiences. David also sees the Aliens earlier, which helps cement the conflict. Spoiler for both films, but when the Marines come in in this version, it feels less incongruous with the rest of the film. Finally, Hopper directs with a sort of innocent gloss that, even though it feels like a discount Spielberg riff, sort of feels appropriate for the film, capturing the terror this invokes for a child like David.

   Like Lifeforce, it definitely feels heavily edited. Certain scenes are definitely missing. While this works in some cases, like not seeing George investigate and fall into the pit, sometimes, it leaves out important details. The scene with the Marines is less incongruous than the 1953 film, but it still feels like a different film. There is also some scenes that feel entirely there for the weirdness factor than actually serve any purpose, like the frog-eating scene. A reviewer also pointed out to me that there seemed to be only two aliens made, so each shot only has one or two aliens.

   I  sort of see what Hopper was trying to do. He wanted to recreate in this remake, the feelings of terror he had watching the original. He wanted the children of that era to have that same experience watching this new version. He even said as much in an interview. It very much is a children's horror film, and I mean that in the best way. It is a movie that invokes the fear and powerlessness one feels as a child, much in the way the original did. It's a film that deserves at least one viewing. I think it deserves a little more attention than it gets. So, I'd recommend it. It wasn't particularly scary, but it definitely has some technical skill behind it.

    Next time, I end the Tobe Hopper retrospective full circle, with Texas Chainsaw Massacre II. 

Masterpiece of Horror Theatre- Lifeforce

    Before I talk about this film, I need to discuss the production company behind it, Cannon Films. Founded as a studio for low-budget independent films in 1967 (note that term carried a lot less prestige to it back then), it was bought by Israeli cousins Menachem Golan and Yeram Globus in 1979, who expanded the company's purview, churning low-budget blockbusters at a very fast rate during the 80's (some good, some successful, most neither). They are notable for the Death Wish series starring Charles Bronson,for introducing Chuck Norris as an action star, and for producing the fourth Superman film (the one with Nuclear Man). There is a fascinating documentary, Electric Boogalo (named for one of its most famous features, Breakin' II: Electric Boogalo), that details the insanity produced at Cannon, both on and off screen, that is, as of this writing, available on Netflix. In 1980, they managed to obtain the rights to Colin Wilson's 1976 novel The Space Vampires. The book was one of Wilson's riffs on Lovecraftian horror, one of a trilogy of sorts on the topic after Lovecraft's de facto estate executor August Derelith challenged Wilson (who had been critical of the late writer) to write a Lovecraftian novel. After years of trying to get the film made, they finally found a director when they signed Tobe Hopper on for three pictures in 1984. Hopper had recently come off  directing Poltergeist with producer Stephen Spielberg, but there was a massive controversy over who actually directed most of the film (most observers said that Spielberg had taken over directing duties from Hopper). Having little interest in Hollywood, Hopper signed on with Cannon, who, at least with big name directors, allowed them a degree of leeway with their works (hence, why John Cassavetes and Norman Mailer were among the directors who did films for them). Cannon had hoped this would be their breakout hit, pouring $25 million, higher than their usual. They also had the name changed to Lifeforce , as Space Vampires was too similar to the low-budget fare they normally produced. The screenplay was written by Dan O'Bannon, co-writer of Alien, and Don Jakoby who wrote... uh, Blue Thunder, the story to the Philadelphia Experiment, Death Wish 3, Double Team (that 90's movie with Dennis Rodman and Jean-Claude Van Damme.), and a bunch of other films you've never heard of. Though, theirs was the last of 8 drafts, and Hopper changed elements of it, including adding Halley's Comet (which was about to make its appearance on Earth in 1986), and moving the time setting accordingly (from the late 21st Century to the present). Hopper's 128 minute final cut was shopped down to 116 minutes for international audiences and 108 minutes for US audiences. The film opened to negative reviews and disappointing box office, but had a minor cult following, and a 67% on Rotten Tomatoes.

       The international shuttle Churchill (powered by a NERVA engine, which, as a space nerd, was a nice detail) is exploring Halley's Comet during its sojourn towards Earth, when it comes across a strange object that is 2 miles in length, that is orbiting the comet. The crew go inside the object, where they find thousands of strange bat-like creatures seemingly dead, before heading to a crystal room, where three humanoid creatures (Matilda May, Chris Jagger, and Bill Malin) are seeming in stasis. However, when they return, mission control is unable to make contact with the crew. The Columbia (which may or may not be the real life space shuttle) is sent to intercept the ship, and find the three humanoid creatures intact, but the crew seemingly dead. They are transferred to the European Space Research Center in London, where they are kept under the supervision of Dr. Hans Fallada (Frank Finlay) and Col. Colin Caine (Peter Firth). However, during the examination, the female humanoid comes to life, and escapes, sucking a strange substance (which Dr. Fallada calls the Lifeforce) from some of the guards. During the autopsy of one of those guards, he briefly comes back to life, and sucks the lifeforce from one of the morticians. When isolated, the guard disintegrates, showing that the vampires need a steady stream of this to stay alive. At the same time, the survivor of the Churchill mission , American Col. Tom Carlsen (Steve Railsback) lands in Texas in an escape pod, and is brought to London to brief on the situation. We learn that the crew gradually died as they transported the humanoids back, leaving him, and forcing him to flee. With the female vampire on the loose, Caine and Carlsen must find the vampire, and prevent them from killing more people.

     The first thing that popped out about this film was the score. Henry Mancini (famous for composing the score for Breakfast at Tiffany's and the theme to The Pink Panther) managed to create a score that evokes the mood for every scene. It helps set the mood for the film, and gives more emotion to it. Plus, it works in its own right. Look up the trailer for this film, and you get the idea for how intense this score is. The production design is also well-done. The alien ship around Halley is distinct and memorable in appearance. Some of the visuals and scares are very evocative. The plot has that sort of urgency that makes sci-fi B-Movies very enjoyable. Hopper said that he had wanted to make a "70 mm Hammer Film", and the largest influence I can see is the Quatermass series. As a fan of that series (Quatermass and the Pit is one of my favorite horror films), I appreciated how much this movie set out to emulate it, not only in the more methodical way the protagonists approach the problem, but the large scale disaster event which feels big and dangerous, even to the viewer at home. It also has the Gothic feel of many of Hammer's other films, which sets it apart from other science fiction horror films. It feels like a large-scale science fiction film, that just happens to have vampires in it.

     Like I said, this film was cut down, and it shows. There are plot holes on occasion, and it gets confusing, with characters occasionally appearing or disappearing from the film. The Lifeforce and space vampire also feel underexplained as concepts. There is enough there that the plot could be understood, but I felt a little more could've clarified certain scenes (including the ending). It also suffers from "middle syndrome", where it drags a little towards the middle of the film. Granted, not that much, but enough that it felt a little boring.

     Earlier this year, I watched a film called Life. It was a simple creature feature, but seemed to think itself as more thoughtful explorative film about extraterrestrial life. I felt then and now that film could've done what this film had done. This is a B-movie, and it knows that it's a B-Movie. Instead of running away from that, however, it embraces that label, and takes full advantage of its wonky premise. That's what makes it such an enjoyable film. It is campy enough that you are aware of its absurdity, but not so campy that you can't take it seriously. Thus, I highly recommend it to anyone wanting an enjoyable experience. It is also a legitimately good science fiction film, so if you like science fiction (and it's not really that scary, so you don't need to be a horror fan), this would be an interesting (if not good) watch.

   Next time, I continue with Hopper's three movie deal with Cannon with his remake of Invaders from Mars.

Current Movie Reviews- Arrival

        The genre of science fiction runs on a spectrum. There are two major subgenres, "hard" and "soft" science fiction. Hard science fiction generally centers around what are known as the "hard" sciences, that being the sciences which have a heavy emphasis on mathematics, and is thus adhere closely the laws of the physical world. Soft science fiction tends to focus on culture and society, and deemphasizes the hard science, in favor of more, shall we say, fantastic speculation. Now, these are very nebulous, and there are elements of both in some works. However, these tend to be the two sides of science fiction. Arrival appears to be one of those exception, which generally takes elements from both. It is a hard science fiction film, about linguistics, a field which doesn't tend to focus on mathematics. Yeah, as a feature film, it doesn't dwell too much on linguistics, but it is a major element, and its application to the translation of an literal alien certainly does raise implication, on how we could possibly interact with aliens in the future. This was definitely a fascinating film.

       Based on the short story "Story of Your Life" by Ted Chiang, Arrival follows the, well, arrival of twelve alien ships across several locations on the Earth, which causes widespread fear and panic across the world. Colonel Weber (Forrest Whittaker) hires linguist Louise Banks (Amy Adams) to be part of an exploration group into one of the ships in Montana. Along the way is theoretical physicist Ian Donnelly (Jeremy Renner). Banks seems to be haunted by flashbacks of her deceased daughter. She manages to determine that the aliens writing and speech are separate, and uses a single word of their language (human) to break down the language barrier. Thus, they are able to decode the language, and begins a communication with the aliens. However, around the world, militaries begin to take premature precautions. In particular, People's Liberation Army Commander Shang (Tzi Ma) is prepared to declare war. Matters are not helped, when the aliens claim to bring a weapon to the humans. As the international chaos continues, Banks and Donnelly unravel the mystery behind their intentions. And even the supposed flashbacks Banks is having....

      Certainly, the "First Contact" trope is nothing new fiction. People going back centuries have written about encounters between aliens and humans. This film decides to focus on one of the major elements of the trope, decoding the language, and starting it off from there. It properly shows how an alien language, which comes from the ink out of an alien's hands, can actually be decoded, if the humans and extraterrestrial reach an understanding. The fact that their words are not representations of speech, but rather entire concepts cements how alien they truly are. Time is also a major subtext, with the various flashbacks and mentions of time. There is an ingenious twist at the end, which I will not spoil, but it builds off the rest of the movie, and makes you reconsider the rest of the film in that context. The fact the film seems to flash back actually underscores the twist even more. I also liked how rather than tell you the effects immediately, hint at them, and use them to resolve the conflict. The alien design, while nothing special, does serve a narrative purpose, in terms of how they communicate.

      I would've liked to have seen a bit more of the international crises going on in the background, especially with General Shang and the People's Republic. He barely appears, and as the antagonist, he deserved more characterization. A little bit more explanation on the aliens would've been nice, particularly what sort of atmosphere they came from, since they are able to walk, but also "swim" in this fog like atmosphere. It bothered me. At first, I thought they might have evolved on a gas giant, but 1.) How could they have constructed a metallic ship, and 2.) How would they be able to walk. It bothered me through the movie.

     Yeah, I might be biased, since I enjoy movies like this, but I think this is one of the best pictures of the year. A nice exploration into language, and how we communicate, and how we might communicate with extraterrestrials. If you're interested in such topics, I highly recommend this movie. It really adds a new spin on the subject of "First Contact", that many works haven't explored. And I certainly wish this movie produces discussion on such topics in the near future. 

Masterpiece of Horror Theatre- 20 Million Miles to Earth

            At the beginning of this month, I discussed famed special effects director Ray Harryhausen. I mentioned that Harryhausen got his start making b-movie monsters. After becoming an assistant to his ideal Willis O'Brien (who did the effects for The Lost World and King Kong, and doing the legwork on the O'Brien film Mighty Joe Young, Harryhausen made his debut with the film The Beast from 20,000 Fathoms. This cemented him as O'Brien's successor as Hollywood's premier stop-motion creator. This film was originally The Great Ymir, before it was changed (possibly to prevent the confusion between "Ymir" and the Arabic word "Emir", which is also why the creature's name is never said in the actual film). Harryhausen and actress Charlotte Knight wrote the main story, which was adapted to screenplay by Bob Williams and Christopher Knopf. Academy Award winning director (well, technically he won it as an art director, but still) Nathan Juran directed, and longtime Harryhausen collaborator Charles Schneer produced. Originally set in Chicago, Harryhausen decided he always wanted to visit Italy, so he changed the script accordingly. Filmed in the US and Italy, it was filmed in black and white due to budget. Harryhausen had wanted to film in color, and after Juran's death in 2002, worked to have it colorized (this is the version I saw.)  This was his last monster movie before he transitioned towards fantasy fare, and also his last black and white film.

    The film opens in a fishing village in Sicily, where several fisherman witness a rocket crashing into the ocean.  Mondello (Don Orlando) and Verrico (George Khoury), two of the fisherman, with young Pepe (Bart Braverman) in tow, investigate, finding two of the crew members, Calder (William Hopper) and Sherman (Arthur Space), unconscious. They bring them back ashore. Meanwhile, the Pentagon receives word that the ship had landed near Sicily, so General McIntosh (Thomas Browne Henry) goes to investigate. While on the beach, Pepe finds a strange metal capsule, with some strange green object inside. Mondello heads to the trailer of Dr. Leonardo (Frank Puglia), a zoologist, to help heal the men. While he can't help, his granddaughter Marisa (Joan Taylor, who inexplicably speaks with an American accent, despite being in Italy) goes, because she is a medical student. Pepe meanwhile, sells Dr. Leonardo the green object. Marisa comes in time to see Calder wake up, and try to wake up Sherman, who has some strange infection. Sherman says that the whole crew had been wiped out by this infection, before succumbing to it. Marisa returns to the trailer to find a strange creature, who had emerged from the green object. Leonardo and Marisa trap it in a cage they have, and plan to study it later. Meanwhile, McIntosh meets with Calder and the local police commissioner (Tito Vuolo), and an Italian government official (Jan Arvan) Calder and McIntosh inform them that the mission was actually to the planet Venus (which technically should make the title "24 million miles to Earth"), and the strange capsule was actually holding a creature they found on the surface. The spacecraft was pelted by meteors, which broke the capsule, and caused the infection. Pepe (after a strange hangup about keeping his cowboy hat), shows them the capsule, and tells them where Dr. Leonardo lives. Meanwhile, Leonardo and Marisa wake up to find the creature much larger than it previously was, and travel with it briefly, while Calder, McIntosh and the Commissioner follow them. Eventually, the creature escapes, and rampages through the Italian countryside, and may end up in a certain "Eternal City".

        Okay, the effects to create the Ymir was good, of course. I really hate to repeat myself on that matter. The actors seem to do fine interacting with it, even though during filming, there was likely nothing there. I like that the Ymir was not a vicious, bloodthirsty creature, but more a confused animal, increasingly scared at its new surroundings, and growing at an unnatural rate on this planet (as opposed to suffocating) There is also the fact the Ymir is not carnivorous. It actually consumes sulfur, which usually comes from volcanism (volcanism being a prominent feature on the Venusian surface), which actually plays into the story. The Italian setting is not cosmetic, it actually does serve some purpose in the story, with the different strategies of the American and Italian officials actually being a point of tension at one point.

    That said, it was really easy to tell who was an American playing an Italian, and an actual Italian. Some of them had really fake sounding accent. (the actual Italians were really apparent). This was somewhat distracting. Okay, at least they attempt the I don't think some things were ever explained. Like the infection. I think it was implied the Ymir brought it on board from Venus, but that was never really explicitly stated. Also, obviously there is a romance between Calder and Marisa, and it is basically slows the film, and is completely pointless.

       Honestly, I wasn't expecting much from this. The only reason I did it was because it was set in Italy. It was actually quite a surprise, in how good it turned out to be. This is the better version of the film The Thing from Another World, and is a much better execution of that idea. It's also a good monster movie, with plenty of rampages and large sets. And if you enjoy monster movies, this is a pretty good example of the genre.

      Next time, we take a look at a most recent critically acclaimed horror film, Occulus.

           

Masterpiece of Horror Theatre- Quartermass II

     (I'm sorry for the lateness of this. I had other matters to pertain to)

      Last year, I discussed the Quartermass franchise, and the third film in the franchise from Hammer (If you want the full history, go read the Quatermass and the Pit review from last year). Anyway, Nigel Kneale, the creator of the character, really disliked the first film, and when Hammer Films adapted the second serial (having gotten the rights before it was broadcast), he opted to write this sequel himself, albeit only the first draft. Subsequent draft were rewritten by director Val Guest, who directed the first film, and returned to direct this film. Unfortunately for Kneale, Brian Donlevy, one of his most hated aspects of the first film also returned. During filming, Kneale claimed Donlevy was intoxicated, and could barely read through his lines (a claim denied by the director). The budget of the film, at around  £92,000 (around 70% of which was contributed by American studio United Artists), was higher than the first one. It was originally filmed in Ansco Color, but the finished film is in black and white. Released in the UK on May 24th, 1957, and later in the US under the title Enemy from Space, it received mixed reviews and moderate commercial success. However, the larger success of Castle of Frankenstein caused Hammer to shift its focus towards Gothic Horror, and the third serial (which was released about a year later,) would not get adapted for another 10 years. Notably, it is one of the first films to use "2" in its title to indicate that it's a sequel to a previous film.

         The film opens with a couple franatically driving through the countryside. The man had apparently been struck by a mysterious object. They literally run into Professor Quatermass (Brian Donlevy), who retrieves the meteorite from the couple. He heads to Winnerden Flats, where he is examining a recent downpour of meteors. In his downtime, he is also detailing his plans for moon colonization, which hasn't had much support from the government. When he and one of his colleagues Marsh (Bryan Forbes), locate one region of high meteor activity, they run into a complex much like the one Quatermass had conceived of for the moon. Forbes picks up a rock, and is knocked out by a gas. Guards arrive, and Quatermass is kicked out. Quatermass then goes to his old friend Inspector Lomax (John Longden) (he played a supporting role in the first film), who gets him in contact with MP Vincent Broadbent (Tom Chatto), who arranges a tour of the complex. However, when Broadbent tries to investigate further, he disappears. Quatermass attempts to find him, only to see him tarred in a strange black substance. Quatermass also learns that people are being infected with a certain V, leading him to a terrifying conspiracy, involving beings not of this Earth.

        This is better than the first Quatermass movie, which could be chalked up to Kneale actually writing this film. The mystery is handled in a far more interesting manner, and the problems have more intellectual solutions than the first film. The conspiracy is actually reminiscent of Invasion of the Body Snatchers from several years earlier, and this handles that theme well. The cerebral science fiction elements are usually very good in these, and this is no exception, with the concept of aliens trying to survive on Earth, much as humans might survive on the moon, is an interesting parallel.

     Brian Donlevy was ill-suited for this role. Granted, he wasn't terrible in the first movie, or in this one for that matter. It's just his gruff, American action man demeanor is very out-of-place in the English countryside setting. An English actor would've probably been better for the role, as he would've fit. Donlevy's American accent is never commented on in the film, which is bizarre. Maybe he's doing a British accent and I didn't notice. Also, it had some pacing issues, like the other two films did, though this one is a bit faster. Finally, the special effects are not great, but given the era, they are serviceable.

     I've seen all three movies now, as well as the final Quatermass TV serial from 1974 (I need to watch the other three serials. I think Quatermass II and Quatermass and the Pit are mostly intact from their original runs, and they remade The Quatermass Experiment a few years ago). In that context, it isn't as good as Quatermass and the Pit or the 1974 serial, but it is a significant improvement on the first film. Really, none of these are "scary" per se by today's standards. They work better as good science fiction mysteries, and intellectual musings. If you want something like that, I highly recommend checking this film (and really the other two as well) out.

   Next week, we return to the films of Ray Harryhausen with a more appropriate feature: 20 Million Miles to Earth

Film review- Star Wars: The Force Awakens

   You know what, I don't need to write an introduction. You all know about this, or have at least heard of it. So, yeah, let's jump right in.

     7th in the film series created by George Lucas, The Force Awakens is set long ago in a galaxy far, far away.( To be exact, 30 years following the end of Return of the Jedi). However, things are far from great. After the fall of the Empire, a new government, the First Order, has essentially taken its place. It is lead by Supreme Leader Snoke (Andy Serkis), who uses Kylo Ren (Adam Driver) and General Hux (Domhnall Gleeson ) as enforcers. Princess (or General) Leia Organa (Carrie Fisher) now leads the resistance against the First Order, backed by the now restored Republic. However, they are losing. Not helping is the absence of Luke Skywalker (Mark Hamill), the last Jedi, who has now disappeared, and no one knows where he is. However, a daring pilot named Poe Dameron (Oscar Isaac) is able to gain a map to his location through a village elder (Max von Syndow) on the planet Jakku, which he entrusts to his loyal robot BB-8. When Dameron is captured, BB-8 rolls around the desert, until he encounters a scavanger named Rey (Daisy Ridley), who takes it under her care. Meanwhile, after Ren interrogates Dameron, the latter is rescued by Stormtrooper FN8.... You know what, I can't remember the exact numbering, so I'll just call him what the film calls him, Fin ( John Boyega), who has decided to escape the First Order. Together, Poe and Fin escape using a TIE fighter, but crash land on Jakku. There, Poe is presumably killed, and Fin is forced to look for BB-8, who has the map with him. He eventually finds the Droid he was looking for, along with Rey. However, the First Order seizes upon the Jakku junk yard, and they are forced to flee into space on an oddly familiar craft, where they plan to meet up with the resistence to get the map to find Luke Skywalker. Along the way, they meet old friends, new enemies, and a new look into the mysterious energy called "The Force"....
   
       This struck a perfect balance, between being a homage to the original trilogy and being its own original product. While it derives most of its tone spirit from the original, it still has an original story, and it does not rely heavily on the continuity of the previous films, nor is it a rehash of A New Hope.  Okay, Rey's story is somewhat reminiscent of Luke's, but she has a different personality and backstory, and her journey is far different in terms of obstacles and what she learns about the Force. The idea of a nameless Stormtrooper going rogue and becoming a hero was especially well done, and is by far the most interesting part of the film. The classic hero journey narrative that made the original such a classic is very much present, but it is very distinct. You don't have to watch the original 6 films to appreciate this. JJ Abrams also knows how to emulate Lucas' directing style, while still having a little bit of his own in the film, which illustrates the balance this film achieves, and mitigates the worst qualities of boths directing.  The acting is also well done, especially from the returning cast of Carrie Fisher and Harrison Ford (Spoiler: Mark Hamill, despite starring credit, is barely in the movie itself.) The special effects were good. As with Jurassic World, I did appreciate the use of animatronics and puppetry, as a nod to the original. In a world, where overuse of CGI is prevalent in action-adventure films, old fashioned effects always get a plus from me. The wide backgrounds constrasting with the smallness of the protagonists is a nice metaphor for the small people in big galaxy, that Star Wars was always about.

       The First Order is so similar to the Empire, when I was writing the synopsis, I accidentally put "Empire" sometimes. It is basically the Empire with a new name. It even uses the same techniques! I understand that the previous Empire was destroyed in Jedi, but this skewers way too close to the original for comfort. I heard that Abrams was going for a "Nazis in Argentina" feel, but those were refugees. It would have been more interesting had they been a small remnant of the Empire, which was still taunting the Republic. Also, the fanservice moments could get a bit cringeworthy sometimes. They don't happen very often to become a major problem, but it really took me out of the film going experience sometimes. Once again, not a major problem.

        You probably saw this film already, or had plans to see it. Just know that, like I said before, you don't really need to watch the original films to appreciate this film. It stands up on its own merits, and  is an worthy addition to the long running franchise. Whether you like or dislike Star Wars, you should definitely check this out, if only to see what the hype is all about.

   May the Force be with You.

      

Mr. Lowell and his Amazing Canals

        So, here is the more appropriate update for the recent Mars discovery. The discovery of perochloridate salts in the seasonal flows on Mars, hence indicating the presence of ( briny) liquid water on the planet, is a tremendous discovery. However, it confirms previous observations that water was present on Mars, in one form or another. Not on the surface, obviously. It is too cold on the surface for liquid water to exist as a liquid. However, it likely existed billions of years ago, and it might exist subsurface, where the seasonal flows likely come from. And if water, however salty, exists, the chances of life of some form existing on Mars does increase. Of course, this mode of thinking is only around 50 years old. From the time of William Herschel (who was the first to demonstrate that the white parts of Mars were ice sheets), it was believed that water, and presumably life, was abundant on Mars. Especially with the presence of the icy poles. In fact, a dark shadow that would go from the pole to the Equator was considered to be a seasonal plant growth in the late 19th and early 20th century (Astronomer Gerard Kuiper would say that the dark spot was windblown dust, and this hypothesis was later confirmed by Carl Sagan, and his student James Pollock). And the idea of life on Mars was ingrained, actually still ingrained, in our fiction. The aliens that invaded late Victorian England in H. G. Wells' War of the Worlds were Martian in origin.  In Edgar Rice Burrough's Barsoom series (which you may know from that overall descent, but disappointing film John Carter a few years ago), was full of various races and creatures roaming the planet Mars. And there are many other examples, from Tweel in the 1934 short story Martian Odyssey (it's in public domain, so you might be able to find it) to Looney Tunes' Marvin the Martian.  The biggest influence on all of these ideas was a man named Percival Lowell, and his ideas about Martians using canals to transport water.

          Well, I call them in the title "his canals", but Lowell didn't actually discover them. They were first described by an Italian astronomer named Giovanni Schiaparelli, during the Opposition of 1877. Basically, when Mars is on the opposite side of the sky from Earth. He had drawn several extensive straight lines on Mars, which he described as canali. Before I go any further, I would like to put that particular term into context. Apparently, while it is spelled like canal, the word "canali" actually roughly translates to channel, as in a natural channel. Schiaparelli also never hypothesized that they were artificial in origin, though he didn't oppose the notion. However, in the Anglosphere, the term canali became canal, and soon, it became a very popular idea that canals existed on Mars. Then came Percival Lowell, whose name would come to be associated with the canals. Lowell was not a professional astronomer. He was a business man and diplomat by training, and Harvard educated to boot. After hearing about Schiaparelli's discovery in 1893, he set out to discover see them himself. He built his own observatory in Flagstaff, Arizona, and looked at Mars, and drew the canals that he found.  Using these, he concocted an entire story, (based in part on William Pickering's speculation on the canals) about a civilization which was dying due to a lack of water. They needed to transport the water via canals to keep them alive. He popularized this particular story in a large variety of books and articles on the topic, where the idea of Martian canals was disseminated into the general culture. He would promote these ideas until his 1916 death. Note that this was the time that technological progress of all kinds, particularly transportation, were being celebrated, so the public was ripe for this idea, much as ancient aliens appeal to modern audiences.
       Despite the popularity of the canal hypothesis, professional astronomers were skeptical. Why? They couldn't see them! No professional astronomer could actually see or describe the canals. Astronomers like Asaph Hall (who discovered the Martian moons), and Edward Bernard (who discovered Amalthea, one of Jupiter's moons.) viewed the Planet and couldn't find any of the canals Lowell described.  Other, non-astronomers also criticized Lowell. In particular, was biologist Alfred Russel Wallace, who was notable in formulating the theory of evolution independently of Charles Darwin, and influencing him to some extent. In 1907, Wallace wrote a rebuttal against Lowell, and his theories, noting that the so-called “canals” are likely just cracks in the Martian crust, where volcanic carbon dioxide rises from the mantle of the planet, and into the plants on the surface. Even if this explanation wasn’t true (its validity based on the idea that Mars had non-contracting core inside a contracting crust),  Mars  also had a mean temperature of -35 F, far too cold for any life to exist.  And in In 1909, during  an observation in a thirty-three telescope in Meudon, France, astronomer Eugene Antoniadi proposed that the canals were optical illusion, based off the fact that the surface of the planet were naturalistic. Despite the rejection of the mainstream astronomy community, the canals of Mars persisted into the 1950's. Werhner von Braun mentioned them in his Mars work, and Ray Bradbury was influenced to some extent by Lowell, when he was writing the Martian Chronicles. However, it was the arrival of Mariner 4 to the Red Planet in 1964 that finally killed off the idea of Martian canals. It not only showed that Mars was virtually dead, but there were no canals at all, confirming the observations of the astronomers of Lowell's time.
     So, what were some good things to come out of this? Well, towards the end of his life, Lowell would turn his attention towards a ninth planet, which he called "Planet X", which he and the observatory at Flagstaff would try to find. Eventually, in 1930, an astronomer working at the Flagstaff observatory (at this point named the Lowell Observatory) named Clyde Tombaugh discovered Pluto, and the initials PL (as in Percival Lowell) was chosen as its sign. Also, it did popularize the idea of water on Mars. Further, Schiaparelli's initial idea of "canalis" as natural features have been shown in the form of various channels and canyons, which were more than likely formed from the erosion of liquid water in the distant past. While there were no dying civilizations or large artificial canals, this weeks discovery does demonstrate that water does exist on Mars, and with water, there is the possibility of life on Mars...

Sources:

The Scientific Exploration of Mars / Fredric W. Taylor.

Cambridge, UK; New York : Cambridge University Press, 2010.

The Exploration of Mars/ Wernher Von Braun, Willey Ley, with illustrations by Chesley Bonestall

New York; Viking Press, 1960

Canals of Mars- The Worlds of David Darling:

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/M/Marscanals.html 

The Canals of Mars- ScienceBlogs

http://scienceblogs.com/universe/2012/09/28/the-canals-of-mars/ 

Tracing the Canals of Mars: An Astronomer's Obsession by Richard Milner, Astrobiology Magazine- Space.org: 

http://www.space.com/13197-mars-canals-water-history-lowell.html 

Is Mars Habitable? by Alfred Russel Wallace:

http://people.wku.edu/charles.smith/wallace/S730.htm 

Moon Mission in the 30's

    Howdy everybody. Though I was gone? Nope! It's been a somewhat hectic two months for me. I enter college at CU Boulder, so I've been focusing on adjusting to this new climate. Now that I'm more or less adjusted, I can now resume with writing these entries. I'm back, and  in honor of the recent Mars discovery, I am going to talk about... the Moon. What? I begin this entry months ago, it's not like I could change the subject to Mars, given I had already done the research for this. Anyway, remember my Daedalus overlook? Well, in that, you probably remember me talking a little bit about the British Interplanetary Society's proposal about a moon mission in the 1930's. Well, I'm going to write about it. Enjoy
       In 1938, the BIS commissioned a study about a vehicle that would carry a crew of three onto the Moon, as well as a ton of payload, and safely bring them back to the Earth, with only half a ton of final payload. It was meant to show that a mission to the Moon was both physically and economically viable at the time. The moon rocket would have been using powder as a fuel, as was common in model rockets at the time. However, there was a major problem. The velocity required to actually reach the Moon would be in excess of 16 km/s. If it would be built in a single rocket, 90 % of the mass of the rocket would be propellant. To solve this, they decided to create a step rocket, with multiple boosters. Basically, since the booster would have a very low yield, there would be approximately  2,490 mini honeycomb based boosters, which would be immediately discarded. (Such an idea can be traced back to the multiple stage rockets proposed by Kostatin Tsiolkovsky in the late 19th Century.) It would be launched from a high altitude lake near the Equator (possibly Lake Titicaca). It would be about one metric ton, and could send a crew of three to the Moon. There was shielding for the descent to the Moon, though no shield for the descent back to Earth. Also strange was the use of solid fuel, since liquid fuel was considered impractical, due to the power of pumps needed to actually produce the force to push each booster. (Of course, this problem was eventually solved, by a German rocketeer named Werhner von Braun).  The lunar lander itself looked like a gun shell, about 11 ft tall, and 13.5 ft in diameter. The landing would bear some resemblence to the eventual landing of Apollo 11 in 1969.  The hull would be a glass like aluminum oxide, but the cabin would be plastic, with a ceramic covering. The cabin is also attached to boosters, which would create a spin for artificial gravity. The rocket, despite being the center piece of the mission, was actually not the only part of the mission studied. They also studied how the Astronauts could survive the mission. Along with the aforementioned heat shielding, the food was supposed to be high in calories (such as bread, butter, cheese, honey, etc.). The crew would carry an assortment of scientific equipment and protection, to study the Moon, including sunburn lotion (apparently, spacesuits weren't conceived of yet), a telescope and microscope, and geological hammers. Air and water for the mission would be extracted from a single tank of  To communicate, they would use "flashes of light." (Presumably using it for morse code), which would be broadcast by the BBC (ironic, given their coverage of Apollo 11 30 years later.)
    The design, led by J. Happian Edwards, and including Arthur C. Clarke as the astronomy consultant, was published in January of 1939 in the Society's journal. Even then, they noted that they didn't actually have the resources to actually go through with this mission at the moment (given that even experimenting with rockets was illegal in Britain at the time.) However, they hoped to send out a survey to gather public support, to actually begin with this mission. This attracted a lot of attention to the Society, both positive and negative. It had gotten attention in Time Magazine, and publications as far away as India. Despite this, most modern analyses of the mission do deem it ultimately implausible, due to the large number of boosters, and the lack of heat and radiation shielding. After World War II, the Society turned to lesser targets, such as organizing the first conference on planning the first orbiting artificial satellite. However, it is still held as a seminial study, as the first serious attempt to plan a mission to the Moon, using (then) modern technology, and some of it would later recall the later Apollo missions.
  So, thanks for reading. A shame I couldn't do something Mars related. Maybe the BIS did something with Mars...

Sources:

The Union Jack on the Moon, by Ron Miller- io9.com
http://io9.com/the-union-jack-on-the-moon-1262867212

The BIS Lunar Spaceship- The British Interplanetary Society official website:
http://www.bis-space.com/what-we-do/projects/bis-lunar-spaceship

HMS Moon Rocket, by Tony Reichhardt- The Air and Space Magazine, March 1997:
http://www.airspacemag.com/space/hms-moon-rocket-3143/?all

BIS Lunar Lander- Encyclopedia Aeronautica
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/bisander.htm

Book Review: Voyage by Stephen Baxter

        Often, I.... You know what, long intros are somewhat hard to write. Largely because I really want to get into the meat of a piece, but you get bogged down by writing a captivating opening. So, here's the jist: I have a vested interest in Alternate history and in Space and Space exploration, and this book combines them. Alright, got that? Great: let's begin.
        The year is 1985. The Ares I is launching from Cape Canaveral, towards its ultimate destination. As you could probably tell by the name of the craft, it is heading towards the Red Planet itself, Mars. They plan to reach Mars, by first doing  Venus fly-by, which would give a gravitational assist to slingshot themselves to the Red Planet. Then, reminiscent of Apollo, they will detatch a manned capsule down into the Mangala Valles. The mission would proceed from March, 1985, and will arrive on the Mangala Valles on March, 22nd, 1986. So, how did such a mission occur? Kennedy was not killed in Dallas, but rather crippled. Hence, he lives to see the Apollo 11 landings. Following Nixon's call to the astronauts, Kennedy also calls, and proceeds to dedicate the US to a Mars mission. Nixon, browbeaten into accepting this, decides to make that the agenda for the post-Apollo space program, as opposed to Skylab or the Shuttles. The book alternates between the mission and the events leading up to it. The main astronauts are Phil Stone, a former X-15 test pilot; Ralph Gershon, an African American Air Force pilot who had flown missions in Cambodia in the early 70's; and our protagonist, Natalie York, a geologist who is the first female astronaut in the program (remember, there is no shuttle here.) These characters gain the primary focus through the mission portions. However, there is also the preceding part before the mission, which takes up a majority of the book. Whilst the three astronauts are given focus at this point, particularly how they became the astronauts, it has a larger cast of characters. There is Joe Muldoon, a Buzz Aldrin analog (actually replacing Aldrin as the second man on the Moon), who is a major figure in the mission, and eventually its head. Gregory Dana, a mission specialist who tries to propose a radical, somewhat infeasible plan to reach Mars, going against what is considered the main and most viable option of a NERVA  nuclear rocket. This puts Dana in conflict with NASA mission architect Hans Udet, who, incidently, had run the Nazi prison camp that Dana was imprisoned in during World War II (Udet is a parallel to Werhner von Braun and Arthur Rudolf) There is his son Jim, who is an astronaut himself, and eventually tests the NERVA rocket, Apollo-N (with disastrous consequence ). There is Bert Seger, a senior manager at NASA, who manages the political side of the mission, meeting and planning the mission. There is JK Lee, an engineer who works at struggling contractor Columbia, who was give the responsibility to build the Mars Excursion Module, or MEM for the mission. Finally, there are the three astronauts. In particular, it deals with Natalie York, her conflicting attitudes towards Mars, her struggles to become an astronaut, and her frustrated love life with both Mike Conlig, dedicated NERVA engineer, and married astronaut Ben Priest.  All of these characters work to make the manned Mars mission a viable and safe opportunity. However, there will be triumphs and tragedies on the road to Mars.
   First and foremost, this books was very well-researched. It has little nods to various other Mars missions, but also gives its own interpretation of what a Mars mission in the 80's would be like, and how it would play out. There is a lot of details about how the mission would work, what the craft would look like, what are its perimeters, what the astronauts do, how they deal with failures, what they will do when they reach Venus, and how they will actually land on Mars. It also has engineering specs on every aspect of the mission, which makes sense, given that Baxter is a trained engineer.I can't tell you how much of it is accurate, but it seems plausible to a layman like me.  It also looks at the ramifications of this. For instance, whilst we get a Mars mission, many of the unmanned programs of the 1970's, like Viking, Voyager, and Pioneer, were canned to save money. We know less about the solar system in 1986, than we did in real life. In fact, we know less about Mars, as neither the later Mariners nor Viking missions were able to reach it and study it. It also has a (superficial) effect on politics. Ted Kennedy takes Walter Mondale's place in politics (both as Carter's vice president and as the failed 1984 candidate). There is also the implications of NERVA, and how characters interact with that. In particular, there is the upmost confidence in NERVA as the method to Mars, and Gregory Dana trying to change that. There is also the 70's anti-nuclear hysteria, which targets NERVA. (I think Three Mile Island was mentioned once in reference to this.) The latter proves prophetic, as the first NERVA test, Apollo-N, ends up failing, with the astronauts and even some of the engineers (including Mike Conlig) dying of radiation poisoning. They end up using Dana's plan (both as a viable alternative, and respect to Gregory, as Jim was one of the astronauts on Apollo-N) of a Venus flyby to send the craft to Mars. Besides that, the characters are well done (in particular is York's conflict on whether she should abandon a solid academic career to become an astronaut), it is very captivating to read, particularly the mission segments, and it is not just a wish fullfillment piece. It actually deals with the good and the bad of a Mars mission after Apollo, and how it might have turned out if Nixon had decided to go to Mars. It is great that we reached Mars earlier, but was it really worth losing the knowledge of Voyager and Viking?
     A few minor gripes with the book can be considered nitpicks. There is a lot of swearing in this. Most sentence seems to have "Goddamn" or a "Jesus Christ" I know it is supposed to be realistic, but I don't think people swear that much in real life. The engineering details, whilst consistent and precise, tends to get rather dense at times, and occasionally interrupts the story. The story also drags occasionally, especially towards the end. Once again, these are nitpicks.
      Overall, I rather liked the book, and I hope to read more of Stephen Baxter in the future. In particular, Proxima sounds interesting. I'd recommend it to those who like Kim Stanley Robinson/ Robert L. Forward style hard sci-fi, or Apollo history buffs, who would like to see what the Apollo Application Program would have brought. If you are a more casual reader, it works as a interesting piece on an alternate space program, but it has a lot  of engineering packed inside. If you can handle that, I think you could enjoy it. Thanks for reading.

von Braun's Mission to Mars

  ( I promised myself that I wouldn't do this particular topic until I finished my extended essay, which was all about Mars. Incidentally, von Braun gets a single sentence mention in the final version, so I suppose it wouldn't have had such an effect, but I still made sure I finished it.)
         The man known as Wernher Magnus Maximilian, Freiherr von Braun has a polarizing reaction amongst people. Some see him as a visionary whose innovative rocket, the Saturn family, helped put a human on moon, an achievement that has essentially suppressed any other in human history. Others see him as a Nazi ideologue, whose V-2 rockets killed thousands of slaves making it, and whose crimes were covered up by the US to allow him to work on the rockets. I myself have a mixed opinion on him. On the one hand, he did meet higher ups in the Nazi government, and despite his claim, he probably did know about the horrid conditions at Mettelwerk (the factory where the V-2 was made). Isaac Asimov once expressed horror that he had shaken a hand that shook Adolph Hitler's hand, and I sympathize. On the other hand, could he actually have done anything about it? Remember that the Nazi government was ruthless, and von Braun's job could be held by anyone else, so he couldn't complain, or he might be killed, at best. If you were in that position, would you ever complain?  Further, I don't think he worked for the government willingly. If the communist won in Germany during the early 1930's, rather than the Nazis , he'd likely work for them to get funding for rocketry.
       If you don't know, Werhner von Braun was a German rocket scientist who created the V-2 rocket in 1942, and then, was brought to the US at the end of World War II, to work on their missile program. After the 1957 launch of Sputnik, and the failure of the Navy's attempted space program, von Braun and his fellow rocket engineers were recruited to work for NASA. There, he built the Jupiter and Saturn family of rockets, the latter of which was used in the Apollo program, However, I'm here to talk about something a little more fanciful. Between his arrival in the United States, and the 1958 founding of NASA, von Braun, and several other German expatriate scientists tried to promote the idea of Space exploration to the American populace. Their first attempt was in the magazine Collier's, in the popular column "MAN WILL CONQUER SPACE SOON." These ideas were also translated into three episodes of Disney's "Tomorrowland" in 1955-1957. This proposed an optimistic view of a future, where man has managed to have a strong Space based infrastructure. This vision of the future had influenced many future visions of Space exploration, and even a school of space advocacy has been named"von Braunist" if it supports a government funded missions available to few at first (the other two are the "O'Neill" after Princeton experimental physicist Gerard K. O'Neill, and the "Sagan" after science popularizer Carl Sagan.). One of many concepts for the exploration of Space was a manned Mars mission. von Braun first detailed his plans in a 1948 science fiction novel (later published as Project Mars: a Technical Tale. When that was rejected, he instead posted a more straight-forward speculation in Das Marsprojkect (The Mars Project) in 1953. Later, he worked with science writer Wily Ley and illustrator Chesley Bonestall to write an even more refined version in 1956, under the name The Exploration of Mars. This mission is fascinating, to say the very least.

     Von Braun's primary objectives was to create a mission using the technology at the time.  Despite this, there was also a small number of objectives that needed to be achieved. A manned space station was established. After that event happened, a circumnavigation of the moon would occur, and a manned mission would occur.  There was also the assumption that nuclear powered rockets were to be available for the Mars mission. That said, they also noted that chemical rockets would still be in use.  The mission to Mars itself  included 70 men and ten ships. These ships would be assembled in Earth’s orbit. A fleet of 46 reusable vehicles would bring 25 tons of cargo (plus 14.5 tons of propellant for the Mars mission) to assemble these ships. 950 launches were needed to assemble this flotilla. Once completed in orbit, each of the ten ship would weigh 3720 tons. ) This fleet would have seven passenger ships, and 3 cargo ships. In the cargo ship, there is a 250 ton lander and supplies for the Mars missions. They would launch from Earth orbit, use the “minimum-energy transfer between circular orbits is an elliptical trajectory called the Hohmann trajectory” begin a 260 day journey to Mars. They would use a propellant of nitric acid and hydrazine. Once they arrive, they ease themselves into orbit, and begin to survey for a landing spot. Once they find one, they send their first glider to the surface. The glider heads to the poles, and deploys skis to land. After landing, the crew on that lander would proceed to travel to the equator, where they would set up a base and landing strip for two other landers. Two landers with the remaining crew would arrive, and the reunited crew would set up living quarters, and beginning a 400 day stay on the planet. After that, the crew will leave on two ascent vehicles, where they will return to the seven passenger ships. The ships will return to Earth orbit, and crash back to the planet. The mission would 963 days (260 days for going to and returning from Mars, and staying 400 days on the planet.) The Launch date was in 1965, though after a space station and a moon base were established. In Exploration, the mission was scaled down slightly to two ships with twelve men. 963 days were required for the trip in the original plan, 969 in the later version. A variation on aspects of the plan appeared in Conquest of Space. 

           Could any of this actually work? (snorts) It is greatly grandiose in both scale and cost. This plan will definitely not work in any sort of capacity today. However, one must admire the engineering demonstrated. Von Braun was able to create the first detailed exploration of a manned Mars mission using only modern technology. It was also the first study into what a Mars mission would require, later becoming the prototype to many Mars missions to come. The idea that modern technology could allow for a Martian mission would be used in many other mission concepts, such as Mars Direct.

     Sources:

 Wernher von Braun’s Martian Chronicles
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/wernher-von-brauns-martian-chronicles-9845747/

 Encyclopedia Astronautica- Entry: Von Braun Mars Project:
http://www.astronautix.com/craft/vonn1952.htm

3The Exploration of Mars/ Wernher Von Braun, Willey Ley, with illustrations by Chesley Bonestall
New York; Viking Press, 1960

3Horizons: The Newsletter of AIAA Houston Section: The American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, September/October 2013 issue
http://www.aiaahouston.org/Horizons/Horizons_2013_09_and_10.pdf

Review: Interstellar

     Here's a funny anecdote from my film-going experience. When I was waiting in line for this film, with my popcorn, and my nuggets.I was about to take out my ticket, to show to get in. However, I found that I didn't have it on me! I was completely stressed that they may not let me in. Luckily, the couple for me vouched that I had been there the entire time, and I was able to get in. My faith in humanity has been restored. And that's really it for the introduction. Okay, let... Alright fine, I'll give you more. Science fiction is my favorite genre, and recently, it has been growing in popularity. Superhero films are being churned out on a regular basis, and films like Avatar, and (much to my dismay) the Transformers films have grossed millions of dollar. However, with the new fame, comes the inevitable realization that perhaps a genre has become overwrought with cliches, and perhaps, it has become too oversaturated in the media. So, when Interstellar was announced, I was really excited. Sure, I'm not a Nolan fan, but I saw as a sort of a 2001 for the modern era. When 2001 came in 1968, science fiction films were largely crude productions, known for their absurdity. 2001, a film which deployed subtlety and imagery, helped influence science fiction pictures which are generally considered better. Now, as science fiction is going through a similar phase (albeit with science fiction becoming little more than "Fast and Furious" style masculine pandering), Interstellar, I assume, would be a return to cerebral, intelligent science fiction. And it is a story promoting Space exploration, which has gone stagnant over the past few years, particularly in the US. Here was a film telling us to explore and seek, which would help the people on Earth. I was very hyped. Then the reviews came in, and said that the film was visually impressive, but lackluster in narrative. And when I saw it, the movie sort of fit that mold, and kinda didn't... Full disclosure, I liked the picture. I didn't love it. I wasn't disappointed with this film the same as Gone Girl, but I didn't get the film I was hoping for several months ago.
     The story is set in the not-too distant future. Cooper (I don't think he was given a first name)(Matthew McConaughy) is a former astronaut test pilot turned farmer living in rural America. The world has been rocked for many years by ecological disaster, which has caused crops to slowly die out, adding to the fact that the large population simply cannot be fed . Cooper lives with his father Donald (John Lithgow, of all people), and his children Tom and Murph. Murph reports having a ghost in her room. After initially dismissing it, Cooper finds that this supposed ghost is actually a gravitational anomaly, which is stating a set of coordinates in binary. The coordinates send him to a secret instellation, which is the remnants of NASA, now forced underground to undertake a secret mission. A wormhole had been discovered near Saturn, leading into another galaxy and several team were sent into it to find habitable worlds (why they didn't send robots first to investigate first is not answered). Some of the teams were to send signals indicating if the planet was habitable. Then, two courses of action were taken. Either they begin colonization with the humans on Earth, or they send in eggs to be fertilized. Professor Brand (Michael Caine) an old teacher of Cooper, encourages Cooper to take up the mission. Cooper reluctantly accepts, forcing him to leave behind his children. Murph, in particular, is great dismayed by this.  Cooper and his crew, including Brand's daughter, Amelia Brand( Anne Hathaway) , launch, and after two years in cryogenic sleep, arrive in Saturn orbit (sound familiar?). The wormhole takes them to several planets orbiting a massive black hole, where the three remaining signals are coming from. After the first signals turns up a dead signal on a water world, Cooper and Brand return to find that, due to the time dilation on the planet, coming from it orbiting a black hole, 23 years have passed on Earth. In those years, Murph (Jessica Chastain) is now a NASA scientist working with the dying Brand on a gravitational equation that would get the entire population off Planet. However, Brand reveals on his deathbed, that his equation revealed that there needed to be the singularity of a black hole to solve it. This meant that he abandoned getting humans off the dying Earth, and was hoping to use the embryos to save humanity. With this knowledge, Cooper and Amelia must find a new home, before they run of time (literally), whilst Murph continues to work on Brand's equation. However, soon, things get complicated.
        There is a lot of very good things in the film. The special effects are magnificent, the best I have seen all year (including Planet of the Apes). The worlds they create just pop into life, and are just so extensive. The black hole they explore is simply gorgeous to look at. Similarly, the world-building is great. The way that they establish that exploration is discouraged by teaching the Apollo hoax was interesting, as was the Dust Bowl-inspired setting. The worlds that they explore are also very interesting. Additionally, as an aficionado of hard science fiction, the technical and scientific jargon was a treat, and gave the world more depth. I particularly liked how, in the scenes actually in space, there is no sound. The acting is good (surprising for a Nolan picture), as is the score by Hans Zimmer. All these elements allow for a good first hour, and a solid last 30 minutes.
         You know, if I wanted to watch 2001, I have it on DVD. I would watch it, if I wanted to. I say this because many of the elements in this film are taken from 2001. From the scenes on the ship, to the views of Space, to the wormhole and black hole sequences (Star-Child, anyone?). Seriously, when the ship is leaving Earth orbit, I started whistling "Blue Danube" Also a ship with cryogenically stored astronauts leaving for Saturn? Haven't seen that before. I only bring this up, because the film obviously seeks to homage that movie. However, when I watch these homages, all I could think about is how much more subtle and interesting 2001 was, and how I wanted to watch that. However, if that were the only flaw, I would forgive it. If only. The second third of this film is terrible. The twist that Brand wasn't going to save the people on Earth is simply stupid, and serves merely to give more drama to a story that should already have drama. It's like Little Shop of Horrors, where they just added needless elements, when a guy buying a man-eating flytrap is a good enough story. The story, as it stands, already has drama, as Cooper is leaving his family, and potentially risking his life, all whilst time moves on Earth. We do not need this twist. And character begin acting irrationally, for no reason other than the plot said so. For instance, the grown Tom is refusing to move his family, even as the dust destroys their lungs, and becomes aggressive, once again, because the plot said so. And the story just grows so convoluted, it gets very hard to follow, what is even going on. I would give more detail, but frankly, I don't want to go into it.

          This is one good opening and ending, with a terrible middle sandwiched in there. Despite that, the opening and ending are good enough for me to recommend this. It might even get nominated for an Oscar. If you like Nolan, you're probably going to watch this, regardless of what I say. If you want a good science fiction film, I say watch this, if only for the world building and the scientific accuracy. If you want to just watch a film out of boredom, well, probably watch it, but you'll have sit in the theater in 3 hours. Overall, the film earns a 60%. Oh, and another thing, if you will watch it, watch it in IMAX. Yes, the sound occasionally makes dialogue unlistenable, but it does pop, and the sound is quite extensive.