Search
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Surrogates (2009) in Movies
Aug 9, 2019
Imagine if “IRobot”, “Die Hard”, and Joss Whedon’s television show “Dollhouse” had a child, the result would be akin to “Surrogates”. In the not to distant future technology is developed which gives us the ability to control customizable robots, called surrogates, with our minds. As a result, people rarely leave the house and interact directly with each other as surrogates. This robot filled thriller tells the story of FBI agent, Tom Greer (Bruce Willis), sent to investigate sudden deaths occurring when people are operating their surrogates.
In addition to Willis’s captivating acting, the film shines in part due to well-executed details, from the surrogate’s not quite human enough demeanor, to the underlying bias against people who don’t use the technology. “Surrogates” is a film that will make you reconsider the issue of advancing technology from both sides.
The least impressive aspect of this scifi/thriller based on a popular graphic novel is the fundamentally preposterous premise. One of the film’s main assumptions is that the use of surrogates has eliminated violence and racism. Believing that people, who are in essence operating a real world version of Second Life, would spend no time committing crimes, seems more than a little irrational.
Still, the film is engaging and much more thought provoking than I had expected. “Surrogates” fulfills both sci-fi and Bruce Willis fan requirements and is a visually enticing film. You will see a variety of locations common to a robot filled world, from a surrogate beauty salon complete with drills to the inner sanctum of the robot production line.
Touching on human, technological, and futuristic themes “Surrogates” is a fun film filled with visual effects and a truly engaging plot that is if you can overcome the plot holes that fracture the initial premise.
In addition to Willis’s captivating acting, the film shines in part due to well-executed details, from the surrogate’s not quite human enough demeanor, to the underlying bias against people who don’t use the technology. “Surrogates” is a film that will make you reconsider the issue of advancing technology from both sides.
The least impressive aspect of this scifi/thriller based on a popular graphic novel is the fundamentally preposterous premise. One of the film’s main assumptions is that the use of surrogates has eliminated violence and racism. Believing that people, who are in essence operating a real world version of Second Life, would spend no time committing crimes, seems more than a little irrational.
Still, the film is engaging and much more thought provoking than I had expected. “Surrogates” fulfills both sci-fi and Bruce Willis fan requirements and is a visually enticing film. You will see a variety of locations common to a robot filled world, from a surrogate beauty salon complete with drills to the inner sanctum of the robot production line.
Touching on human, technological, and futuristic themes “Surrogates” is a fun film filled with visual effects and a truly engaging plot that is if you can overcome the plot holes that fracture the initial premise.
Charlie Cobra Reviews (1840 KP) rated Captive State (2019) in Movies
Jul 6, 2020
Not Captivating Enough - 6/10
Captive State is a 2019 sci-fi/thriller movie directed by Rupert Wyatt and co-written by Rupert Wyatt and Erica Beeney. It was produced by Amblin Partners and Participant Media with producers Rupert Wyatt and David Crockett. The film stars John Goodman, Ashton Sanders, Jonathan Majors, and Vera Farmiga.
In 2019, Chicago is placed under Martial Law as extraterrestrials invade Earth. Attempting to flee the city, the Drummond family, breaks through a barricade to a tunnel exit. Before they can back up and reverse, the aliens attack, vaporizing both parents, with the children having survived in the backseat. Nine years later, 2028, the world has surrendered to the conquering alien forces, who have now become the governing authority. They are called "The Legislators" because all rules of governance and subsequent laws come from them. Walled off from the rest of the city and deep beneath the ground, they've had conscripted humans build them suitable habitats called "Closed Zones" where only high government officials are granted access. Gabriel Drummond (Ashton Sanders), the younger son of the Drummond family is confronted by Chicago Police Commander William Mulligan (John Goodman) who believes he is a part of the resistance. Gabriel's brother Rafe Drummond (Jonathan Majors) was part of the resistance but died on a mission and murals are painted of him in Pilsen, the poor part of town, where Gabriel lives. Mulligan however is not convinced the resistance group, called Phoenix has been neutralized as believed and continues to work towards bringing them down.
This movie was not at all what I expected. I thought it was going to be better than what it was and that's because I didn't even have high expectations going into it. So from the previews/trailers it looked like it was going to be a bigger scale resistance. When I hear resistance fighting, I guess I picture more like fighting like Fallen Skies or like the resistance fighters in Star Wars. This was more of a political/spy thriller going back and forth between the point of view from members of the resistance and those tasked with bringing them down. It had sprinkling of sci-fi and aliens but was too grounded in reality to make it entertaining. It seemed very "done before" and lacked originality. John Goodman did a good job and so did Ashton Sanders but I feel this movie suffered from a bad plot to begin with. Or maybe it sounds good on paper but the delivery failed. Visually it was appealing, the aliens and ships and things looked wonderful but after watching seemed like it wasn't enough to leave the audience satisfied. I give it a 6/10.
In 2019, Chicago is placed under Martial Law as extraterrestrials invade Earth. Attempting to flee the city, the Drummond family, breaks through a barricade to a tunnel exit. Before they can back up and reverse, the aliens attack, vaporizing both parents, with the children having survived in the backseat. Nine years later, 2028, the world has surrendered to the conquering alien forces, who have now become the governing authority. They are called "The Legislators" because all rules of governance and subsequent laws come from them. Walled off from the rest of the city and deep beneath the ground, they've had conscripted humans build them suitable habitats called "Closed Zones" where only high government officials are granted access. Gabriel Drummond (Ashton Sanders), the younger son of the Drummond family is confronted by Chicago Police Commander William Mulligan (John Goodman) who believes he is a part of the resistance. Gabriel's brother Rafe Drummond (Jonathan Majors) was part of the resistance but died on a mission and murals are painted of him in Pilsen, the poor part of town, where Gabriel lives. Mulligan however is not convinced the resistance group, called Phoenix has been neutralized as believed and continues to work towards bringing them down.
This movie was not at all what I expected. I thought it was going to be better than what it was and that's because I didn't even have high expectations going into it. So from the previews/trailers it looked like it was going to be a bigger scale resistance. When I hear resistance fighting, I guess I picture more like fighting like Fallen Skies or like the resistance fighters in Star Wars. This was more of a political/spy thriller going back and forth between the point of view from members of the resistance and those tasked with bringing them down. It had sprinkling of sci-fi and aliens but was too grounded in reality to make it entertaining. It seemed very "done before" and lacked originality. John Goodman did a good job and so did Ashton Sanders but I feel this movie suffered from a bad plot to begin with. Or maybe it sounds good on paper but the delivery failed. Visually it was appealing, the aliens and ships and things looked wonderful but after watching seemed like it wasn't enough to leave the audience satisfied. I give it a 6/10.
Future Crimes: A Journey to the Dark Side of Technology - and How to Survive it
Book
This is The New York Times Bestseller. Technological advances have benefited our world in...
Future Crimes: Inside the Digital Underground and the Battle for Our Connected World
Book
This is the New York Times Bestseller. Technological advances have benefited our world in...
Bluescreen
7.0
Rate It
Book
Los Angeles in 2050 is a city of open doors, as long as you have the right connections. That...
Sci-fi dystopian privacy trust friendship
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Videodrome (1983) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019
Max Renn is the president of Civic TV channel 83, a channel known for showcasing the most erotic and violent programming that anyone has ever come across. As you can imagine, the channel has a specific audience and Max takes it upon himself to find the next big thing for the network. Everything he comes across is too tame until Max gets ahold of Harlan. Harlan is an employee who specializes in pirate video broadcasts. It's through Harlan that Max is first exposed to Videodrome, an hour program that centralizes on torture and murder. Max becomes obsessed with Videodrome and realizes it may be the next step for channel 83. He does everything within his power to find out more about Videodrome ranging from where it's originally broadcast to tracking down the original supplier and even watching countless hours of bootleg videotapes. In addition to his obsession, Max begins hallucinating. Through his investigations, he finds out Videodrome transmissions cause tumors in the brain of whoever is able to actually watch it and therefore alter reality through hallucination. As Max begins to lose touch with reality, the people behind Videodrome have bigger plans for Max. Much bigger.
Videodrome is an interesting sci-fi horror film. It's the type of film that gets better with each viewing. It's also got some pretty amazing make-up effects by the incredible Rick Baker (An American Werewolf in London, The Frighteners). So while the film does show its age at times (mainly during the segment where Max is having his hallucination recorded by Spectacular Optacle owner, Barry Convex), the majority of the special effects hold up incredibly well after 26 years. It also boasts one of the most original and intriguing death scenes (Barry Convex's) of any horror film.
The David Cronenberg helmed psycological thriller is more than just great special effects. In all honesty, it's spectacularly odd. The hallucinations alone will leave some viewers scratching their heads, but there is a clever and intelligent story beneath all the weirdness. The story focuses on TV, which is a source of entertainment that everyone relies on and it takes aim at sex and violence. The two themes people are attracted to the most, but the consequences the film comes up with for watching a program that uses these themes to the extreme is truly one of its defining moments. So while whipping a TV set may seem like an illogical idea to most, Videodrome's superb writing makes it seem almost logical. The fact that the film concentrates on something like television that everyone can relate to while creating an intelligent reasoning for it makes the entire experience more believable.
Videodrome is a cult classic for a good reason. While it may seem odd at first, it's actually an intelligent and well-made sci-fi horror film. That old layer of skin may look and feel like a film that is too weird for most audiences that's outdated and doesn't make any sense, but beneath that old flesh is the new flesh. In this case, the new flesh is actually a superb film with a quick witted script, a terrific story, special effects that hold up to this day, and just a worthwhile experience overall. It's a cult classic that's worthy of being added to any horror or sci-fi fan's collection. Long live the new flesh.
Videodrome is an interesting sci-fi horror film. It's the type of film that gets better with each viewing. It's also got some pretty amazing make-up effects by the incredible Rick Baker (An American Werewolf in London, The Frighteners). So while the film does show its age at times (mainly during the segment where Max is having his hallucination recorded by Spectacular Optacle owner, Barry Convex), the majority of the special effects hold up incredibly well after 26 years. It also boasts one of the most original and intriguing death scenes (Barry Convex's) of any horror film.
The David Cronenberg helmed psycological thriller is more than just great special effects. In all honesty, it's spectacularly odd. The hallucinations alone will leave some viewers scratching their heads, but there is a clever and intelligent story beneath all the weirdness. The story focuses on TV, which is a source of entertainment that everyone relies on and it takes aim at sex and violence. The two themes people are attracted to the most, but the consequences the film comes up with for watching a program that uses these themes to the extreme is truly one of its defining moments. So while whipping a TV set may seem like an illogical idea to most, Videodrome's superb writing makes it seem almost logical. The fact that the film concentrates on something like television that everyone can relate to while creating an intelligent reasoning for it makes the entire experience more believable.
Videodrome is a cult classic for a good reason. While it may seem odd at first, it's actually an intelligent and well-made sci-fi horror film. That old layer of skin may look and feel like a film that is too weird for most audiences that's outdated and doesn't make any sense, but beneath that old flesh is the new flesh. In this case, the new flesh is actually a superb film with a quick witted script, a terrific story, special effects that hold up to this day, and just a worthwhile experience overall. It's a cult classic that's worthy of being added to any horror or sci-fi fan's collection. Long live the new flesh.
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated The Cloverfield Paradox (2018) in Movies
Oct 7, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
The Cloverfield Paradox is the third and (at time of writing) the last Cloverfield film and it's main purpose is to explain where Clover and his friends come from. Does it do this in an easy to follow, straight forward way that fits easily into the already established Cloverfield universe? Hell no.
The first film was a found footage monster movie and the second film was a psychological thriller that was loosely linked to the first so naturally the third film is a hard Sci-Fi set in the near future. The earth has used up most of it's resources and everyone is nearly at war, the last hope is the Cloverfield space-station which has the 'Shepard' beam, an experimental particle beam that, if it works, will produce an endless supply of energy. The lack of resources and looming war are the only problems, there are no monsters and there never were.
The Cloverfield Paradox mainly follows the crew of the space station and quickly turns into a Sci-Fi horror in a similar vain to 'Event Horizon'. Basically the crew activate the Shepard Beam, it works then crashes and the earth disappears. Then strange things start to happen. At the same time something happens on earth, there is an attack on America and a few people run around trying to find out what happens and one hides in a bunker similar to the one in 10 Cloverfield Lane. Meanwhile the crew of the Cloverfield try to find out where the earth is.
As a Sci-Fi, the Cloverfield Paradox works well, it uses just enough jargon and theoretical physics and as a horror it works well, killing off the cast in weird and wonderful ways. And as an explanation for Clover well SPOILER that's what attacked Earth, of course this is only reviled right at the end and there is no explanation to how they got to the past in the other film's. Except there is, about twenty minuets into the film, after everything has been set up but before everything goes wrong there is a news program shown on a monitor whilst the crew begin to start their experiments. The news show is interviewing the author of a book called 'The Cloverfield Paradox' and, in the interview the author explains everything from what is going to happen to how Clover and the other monsters appear on earth even though know one in the future knows anything about them, so pay attention.
One thing the all three Cloverfield films did well was all of the extra stuff. The original film started with tease trailers, infomercial's form company's seen in the film and fake news reels. This kind of marketing continued for all three films and other information was made available including one big link between Cloverfield and the Cloverfield Paradox. The last scene of the first film, the scene that was set before everything that happened with the couple by the beach shows something falling from the sky in the background, this is part of the Cloverfield space station.
With the revelation that the creatures now exist all through time a fourth film was rumoured - Overlord- however, even though the film was made by the same company and the same people it was never part of the Cloverfield universe and is/was meant to be the start of it's own franchise. Even though it could easily fit even as a ret con.
The first film was a found footage monster movie and the second film was a psychological thriller that was loosely linked to the first so naturally the third film is a hard Sci-Fi set in the near future. The earth has used up most of it's resources and everyone is nearly at war, the last hope is the Cloverfield space-station which has the 'Shepard' beam, an experimental particle beam that, if it works, will produce an endless supply of energy. The lack of resources and looming war are the only problems, there are no monsters and there never were.
The Cloverfield Paradox mainly follows the crew of the space station and quickly turns into a Sci-Fi horror in a similar vain to 'Event Horizon'. Basically the crew activate the Shepard Beam, it works then crashes and the earth disappears. Then strange things start to happen. At the same time something happens on earth, there is an attack on America and a few people run around trying to find out what happens and one hides in a bunker similar to the one in 10 Cloverfield Lane. Meanwhile the crew of the Cloverfield try to find out where the earth is.
As a Sci-Fi, the Cloverfield Paradox works well, it uses just enough jargon and theoretical physics and as a horror it works well, killing off the cast in weird and wonderful ways. And as an explanation for Clover well SPOILER that's what attacked Earth, of course this is only reviled right at the end and there is no explanation to how they got to the past in the other film's. Except there is, about twenty minuets into the film, after everything has been set up but before everything goes wrong there is a news program shown on a monitor whilst the crew begin to start their experiments. The news show is interviewing the author of a book called 'The Cloverfield Paradox' and, in the interview the author explains everything from what is going to happen to how Clover and the other monsters appear on earth even though know one in the future knows anything about them, so pay attention.
One thing the all three Cloverfield films did well was all of the extra stuff. The original film started with tease trailers, infomercial's form company's seen in the film and fake news reels. This kind of marketing continued for all three films and other information was made available including one big link between Cloverfield and the Cloverfield Paradox. The last scene of the first film, the scene that was set before everything that happened with the couple by the beach shows something falling from the sky in the background, this is part of the Cloverfield space station.
With the revelation that the creatures now exist all through time a fourth film was rumoured - Overlord- however, even though the film was made by the same company and the same people it was never part of the Cloverfield universe and is/was meant to be the start of it's own franchise. Even though it could easily fit even as a ret con.
While [a:Michael Crichton|5194|Michael Crichton|https://images.gr-assets.com/authors/1359042651p2/5194.jpg] may be more famous for books-that-became movies blockbuster like [b:Jurassic Park|6424171|Jurassic Park (Jurassic Park, #1)|Michael Crichton|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1344371661s/6424171.jpg|3376836], tha's not the only of his works that have been turned into movies:a longside that, we have the likes of [b:Congo|7672|Congo|Michael Crichton|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1388889401s/7672.jpg|688299], [b:Timeline|7669|Timeline|Michael Crichton|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1405420745s/7669.jpg|1525987], and this.
Largely, however, I've found hose to be pretty forgettable: I know I saw 'Sphere' (the movie) before I first read the book, but (truth be told) I didn't really remember all that much about either.
With that in mind, and with Goodreads at-long-last implementation of the re-read feature (yay!), I decided to re-read the novel recently.
And, unfortunately, I still found it pretty forgettable.
Don't get me wrong: it's a pretty adequate sci-fi thriller (in this case about a mysterious Sphere found at the bottom of the Pacific inside a spacecraft that has lain there for hundreds of years), but it lacked - for me - the connection with the characters (none of whom I found to be all that likeable, or even interesting), the thrill-factor (if you will), or even the implied awe and majesty of the Dinosaurs in [b:Jurassic Park|6424171|Jurassic Park (Jurassic Park, #1)|Michael Crichton|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1344371661s/6424171.jpg|3376836].
In short: it's OK, but not Crichton's best.
Largely, however, I've found hose to be pretty forgettable: I know I saw 'Sphere' (the movie) before I first read the book, but (truth be told) I didn't really remember all that much about either.
With that in mind, and with Goodreads at-long-last implementation of the re-read feature (yay!), I decided to re-read the novel recently.
And, unfortunately, I still found it pretty forgettable.
Don't get me wrong: it's a pretty adequate sci-fi thriller (in this case about a mysterious Sphere found at the bottom of the Pacific inside a spacecraft that has lain there for hundreds of years), but it lacked - for me - the connection with the characters (none of whom I found to be all that likeable, or even interesting), the thrill-factor (if you will), or even the implied awe and majesty of the Dinosaurs in [b:Jurassic Park|6424171|Jurassic Park (Jurassic Park, #1)|Michael Crichton|https://images.gr-assets.com/books/1344371661s/6424171.jpg|3376836].
In short: it's OK, but not Crichton's best.