Event Horizon (sci-fi)
Chris Cathcart
Pitch Black. Okay, not great, won't need to watch again, sci-fi not really
being a big thing for me. Thing is, it gets a 6.8 or so on IMDb, which is
close to the threshold of average. Event Horizon rates close to the top
1000 on YMDb as well, but rates only a 5.8. Ratings aside, is this all that
good? Further probing indicates that this is actually more a horror film
set in space, which makes it even less alluring.
Shit, why can't they just make things easy on us movie searchers and just
resurrect Kubrick or make every movie in the shadow of Barry Lyndon or the
Godfather?
Puppet_Sock
> Is this one worth the time? [snip]
Event Horizon is a stylistic haunted house in space. There is a certain
amount of things popping out at you, a certain amount of unexplained
goings-on, and a fairly ambiguous ending. There's nothing deep or
anything. Some reasonable acting for a movie of its type. And
acceptable
special effects. But essentially, easy to forget. If you generally like
ghost
stories, you will probably have a reasonable viewing experience.
Socks
Bob Vogel
Chris Cathcart wrote:
> Is this one worth the time? By way of comparison: I had an okay time with
> Pitch Black. Okay, not great, won't need to watch again, sci-fi not really
> being a big thing for me. Thing is, it gets a 6.8 or so on IMDb, which is
> close to the threshold of average. Event Horizon rates close to the top
> 1000 on YMDb as well, but rates only a 5.8. Ratings aside, is this all that
> good? Further probing indicates that this is actually more a horror film
> set in space, which makes it even less alluring.
I thought it was better than PB. And it stands up fairly well to
repeated viewings.
One suggestion, re-play the sequence where the crew watched the ship
log one frame at a time, as there's some pretty disturbing shit going
on there.
I've always a fan of Sam Niell, check out "Dead Calm" if you haven't
already.
Atlas Bugged
news:guest.20060625002850$19...@news.killfile.org...
> Is this one worth the time? By way of comparison: I had an okay time with
> Pitch Black. Okay, not great, won't need to watch again, sci-fi not
> really
> being a big thing for me. Thing is, it gets a 6.8 or so on IMDb, which is
> close to the threshold of average. Event Horizon rates close to the top
> 1000 on YMDb as well, but rates only a 5.8. Ratings aside, is this all
> that
> good? Further probing indicates that this is actually more a horror film
> set in space, which makes it even less alluring.
It's unwatchable. I will wager that if you try, you will not make it to the
end. The widely-reviled film version of "Sphere" covers similar territory,
but far better. And it too is indeed bad.
Atlas Bugged
news:1151199798.5...@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> I thought it was better than PB. And it stands up fairly well to
> repeated viewings.
Does it make *any* sense if you re-watch it? Or do you just enjoy the
visual look?
>
> One suggestion, re-play the sequence where the crew watched the ship
> log one frame at a time, as there's some pretty disturbing shit going
> on there.
OK, I may not have caught that. But if it's a frame-by-frame, no wonder.
>
> I've always a fan of Sam Niell, check out "Dead Calm" if you haven't
> already.
Ditto, ditto. But the two films couldn't be more different. "Dead Calm" is
a small but potent film, a taught thriller (featuring extensive footage of
Nicole Kidman's semi-nude and very taught body) with a well-told and
coherent story.
Bob Vogel
Atlas Bugged wrote:
> "Bob Vogel" <bobvog...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:1151199798.5...@c74g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> > I thought it was better than PB. And it stands up fairly well to
> > repeated viewings.
>
> Does it make *any* sense if you re-watch it? Or do you just enjoy the
> visual look?
It made sense the first time I watched it. First of all there's an
obvious take on frankenstein, which I always enjoy, Second, you're
right, I enjoy the visuals. I wouldn't have gone back and re-played the
aforementioned sequnce if I hadn't been so disturbed by it the first
time I saw it, mostly because I couldn't articulate what exactly I had
just seen, but I was certain that it wasn't good.
> Ditto, ditto. But the two films couldn't be more different. "Dead Calm" is
> a small but potent film, a taught thriller (featuring extensive footage of
> Nicole Kidman's semi-nude and very taught body) with a well-told and
> coherent story.
I wasn't really comparing the films, just holding Dead Calm up as an
example of what I think was his best film. Even in fluff films like
Jurassic Park he brings a lot of what Stone Phillips would call
"gravitas". ;-)
Atlas Bugged
news:e7kqtf$3si$1...@victor.killfile.org...
>"Dead Calm" is a small but potent film, a taught thriller (featuring
>extensive footage of Nicole Kidman's semi-nude and very taught body) with a
>well-told and coherent story.
Uh, that's "taut." It's late, what can I say?
Acar
>
> It's unwatchable. I will wager that if you try, you will not make it to
> the end. The widely-reviled film version of "Sphere" covers similar
> territory, but far better. And it too is indeed bad.
Both of them are terrible IMHO. People having visions in outer space or in
the deep as the case may be. Give me a break. I need a better excuse like -
the Devil in The Exorcist. "Demi, Demi, why you do this to me?"
==================
OT:
What is funnier than a concerned look on the face of Harrison Ford?
Answer: A concerned look on the face of Nicholas Cage.
David Buchner
> >extensive footage of Nicole Kidman's semi-nude and very taught body) with a
>
> Uh, that's "taut." It's late, what can I say?
Perhaps "taught" too? I'm sure you have thoughts along those lines,
anyway.
About EVENT HORIZON: Isn't that the one where a couple of the crew are
Doing It in zero gee near the beginning? That's about all I remember --
other than that Sam Neil must have as flexible standards as Patrick
Stewart.
Bob Vogel
David Buchner wrote:
> Atlas Bugged <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >extensive footage of Nicole Kidman's semi-nude and very taught body) w
> > >ith a
> >
> > Uh, that's "taut." It's late, what can I say?
>
> Perhaps "taught" too? I'm sure you have thoughts along those lines,
> anyway.
>
> About EVENT HORIZON: Isn't that the one where a couple of the crew are
> Doing It in zero gee near the beginning?
I missed that part, Beavis, but hehe, that would be cool. Then they
could re-name the movie to "Doin' It With Hot Babes in Space", hehe.
That would be cool.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
David Buchner
> I missed that part, Beavis, but hehe, that would be cool. Then they
> could re-name the movie to "Doin' It With Hot Babes in Space", hehe.
> That would be cool.
Nice. But really: I think they also had a fairly realistic spacecraft --
at least for a movie -- in which there was a spun part and a non-spun
part in freefall. If I'm remembering the right throw-away,
allegedly-sci-fi movie.
So (if I am) -- it was okay for like, ten minutes into it.
Atlas Bugged
news:1hhnznl.et1ml5mspkt3N%buc...@wcta.net...
> Nice. But really: I think they also had a fairly realistic spacecraft --
> at least for a movie -- in which there was a spun part and a non-spun
> part in freefall. If I'm remembering the right throw-away,
> allegedly-sci-fi movie.
>
> So (if I am) -- it was okay for like, ten minutes into it.
Exactly. The film annoyed me in extra innings because it had a very nice
look to it, but was substantively terrible. If you turn the sound off, my
evaluation of EVENT HORIZON goes up several notches. Very much like a
brainless, but stunning, young woman. And in each case, I surely concede,
there is value. But you definitely don't get laid in the case of the movie,
and I Want My Two Hours Back.
For everyone's quick reference, I list my fave sci-fi's here:
http://snipurl.com/mz03
And it should be noted that they are not just my faves, they also comprise a
large percentage of anything that's any good in sci-fi. When sci-fi is good
or great, it's more important and better than other-type films, because the
real theme is the crucial thing that makes us human - tool-making, or
technology. However, when sci-fi misses - which is most of the time - it is
far worse than most other films. A bad drama may invoke derision, but bad
sci-fi literally makes you laugh out loud. The last half of EVENT HORIZON
could have been written by someone in elementary school, and looks like it
was.
Bob Vogel
Atlas Bugged wrote:
>
> For everyone's quick reference, I list my fave sci-fi's here:
> http://snipurl.com/mz03
Pretty good list, especially Forbidden Planet, King Kong and The Thing.
But what I'm most intrigued by is your footnote on American Beauty.
It's easily in my top five, although I've never been one to "rank"
things.
Don't get me wrong, I like sci-fi, and can appreciate how sci-fi
actually goes beyond what it's famous for, which is the eye candy and
novelty premises, but when you take that away, sci-fi doesn't strike me
as being as relevant as a movie such as American Beauty, which is at
once a very approachable yet invitingly subtle film. (Judging by your
list, the exception may be psychological relevance, and perhaps sci-fi
is well suited for this, although I find AB just as potent in its
psychological relevancy as any sci-fi flick I've seen.)
So, my sentiments surrounding sci-fi revolve around either fond boyhood
memories or early adult saturday night "guy's night" get-togethers.
> And it should be noted that they are not just my faves, they also comprise a
> large percentage of anything that's any good in sci-fi. When sci-fi is good
> or great, it's more important and better than other-type films, because the
> real theme is the crucial thing that makes us human - tool-making, or
> technology.
Well, I think that tool-making and technology-using is not what makes
us human, but follows from that thing which makes us human, which is
consciousness and its implications (self-interest, a need for control
to actualize self-interests, etc.).
Atlas Bugged
> But what I'm most intrigued by is your footnote on American Beauty.
> It's easily in my top five, although I've never been one to "rank"
> things.
My opinion of American Beauty is this: Although it won the Oscar for Best
Picture, had you combined all the movies in several years before and several
years after for consideration, it still would have deserved the Oscar. It
is, as you suggest, in the elite of all films ever made.
>
> Don't get me wrong, I like sci-fi, and can appreciate how sci-fi
> actually goes beyond what it's famous for, which is the eye candy and
> novelty premises, but when you take that away, sci-fi doesn't strike me
> as being as relevant as a movie such as American Beauty, which is at
> once a very approachable yet invitingly subtle film. (Judging by your
> list, the exception may be psychological relevance, and perhaps sci-fi
> is well suited for this, although I find AB just as potent in its
> psychological relevancy as any sci-fi flick I've seen.)
It's not just AB. If I made an all-inclusive list of great films, there are
so many great non-sci-fis that only one or two sci-fis would make the top
hundred (can you spell S-t-a-n-l-e-y?)
>
> So, my sentiments surrounding sci-fi revolve around either fond boyhood
> memories or early adult saturday night "guy's night" get-togethers.
Doesn't matter. When the art and science of filmmaking advances
sufficiently, you will see a majority of sci-fi films dominating the
best-of-all-ever category. Not anytime soon, of course.
>
>> And it should be noted that they are not just my faves, they also
>> comprise a
>> large percentage of anything that's any good in sci-fi. When sci-fi is
>> good
>> or great, it's more important and better than other-type films, because
>> the
>> real theme is the crucial thing that makes us human - tool-making, or
>> technology.
>
> Well, I think that tool-making and technology-using is not what makes
> us human, but follows from that thing which makes us human, which is
> consciousness and its implications (self-interest, a need for control
> to actualize self-interests, etc.).
Well, I don't disagree vastly, but the tool-making sort-of precedes the
civilized interests you describe because everyone's fighting just to get fed
where it's pre-tech. So it's a bit of both.
David Buchner
> .... If you turn the sound off, my evaluation of EVENT HORIZON goes up
> several notches. Very much like a brainless, but stunning, young woman
....
Ouch. :-)
....
> When sci-fi is good or great, it's more important and better than
> other-type films, because the real theme is the crucial thing that makes
> us human
....
Definitely, absolutely, and you betcha.
> .... However, when sci-fi misses - which is most of the time - it is far
> worse than most other films ....
I'd say that, at least most of the time, when sci-fi misses it wasn't
really sci-fi in the first place. In the example at hand -- just because
they're in a spaceship doesn't make it more than another "demons from
beyond" flick right in there with HELLRAISER or POLTERGEIST.
David Buchner
> American Beauty is .... in the elite of all films ever made.
Please elaborate on what it is makes it so good.
I'm not arguing, mind you -- it's just been a long time since I saw it,
and I have only a fuzzy recollection.
Atlas Bugged
It's somewhat hard to put my finger on it. In the first instance (but not
an essential,) it is expertly crafted in almost every technical sense.
Cinematography, pacing, direction, lighting, costuming, editing - all of the
crafts involved in film making seem to have been executed by the top people
available.
Then there is the substance of the presentation. It might be best described
as an existential drama, but while true, that doesn't tell you much and is a
cliched comment by now. It just manages this sort of hat-trick openly
better than other similarly-described films.
Our Hero essentially drops out of the 'rat race" and we see his world
through his eyes, which pierce the various veneers behind which so many
people and events hide. This clarity of vision is effectively transmitted
to the moviegoer, and I would say that this clarity is so breathtaking that
the film leaps to a level that is more than the sum of its already-excellent
parts.
Apart from the awe you feel from the film's clarity, it also works on all
the sub-levels. When it's funny, it's *really* funny. When it's sexy, it's
*really* sexy. When it's dramatic...well, you get the idea. An extremely
intense and satisfying film.
David Buchner
> >> American Beauty is .... in the elite of all films ever made.
[snip explanation for space]
So, it's my guess that you're not necessarily so taken with it because
of what it's *about* then? At least, not so much?
Atlas Bugged
It is not a film that demonstrates Objectivist values, except implicitly by
its excellent craftsmanship. It is probably more realism than romanticism,
and illustrates a degree of depravity as a part of its presentation.
But the story is very compelling and it is most certainly "art" in the sense
Ayn Rand preferred - it is a very selective re-creation of suburban reality
which is so perceptive and dead-on, you feel as if you have a more
enlightened view of the entire world. Individualism is also illustrated -
the independent mind clashing with the collective force.
Ken Gardner
"Atlas Bugged" <atlasbug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >> American Beauty is .... in the elite of all films ever made.
>> [snip explanation for space]
>>
>> So, it's my guess that you're not necessarily so taken with it because
>> of what it's *about* then? At least, not so much?
> It is not a film that demonstrates Objectivist values, except implicitly by
> its excellent craftsmanship. It is probably more realism than romanticism,
> and illustrates a degree of depravity as a part of its presentation.
I hated that movie. Now, I hate most movies, but I REALLY hated this one.
> But the story is very compelling and it is most certainly "art" in the sense
> Ayn Rand preferred - it is a very selective re-creation of suburban reality
> which is so perceptive and dead-on, you feel as if you have a more
> enlightened view of the entire world. Individualism is also illustrated -
> the independent mind clashing with the collective force.
I hate to use a cliché like "it had a profoundly malevolent sense of life."
But here, I don't know what words describe it more exactly than that. Why on
earth would anyone want to invest 2 hours of his life to see that? Doesn't he
have a sock drawer to organize, or smoke alarm batteries to change?
Ken
Bob Vogel
Ken Gardner wrote:
>
> I hate to use a cliché like "it had a profoundly malevolent sense of life."
> But here, I don't know what words describe it more exactly than that.
**** SPOILER ALERT *****
"Malevolent" is too strong a word -- "Mixed" is more appropriate, as
the young lovers escape their dreary suburbanite world, even though
Burnham, the central protagonist, is killed (there's the fatalistic
aspect you find repugnant), he, in the end, realized what it was that
made him happy, as an *adult*, not just an older adult trying to
recapture his lost youth.
AB is a masterful critique of the pretentions and trappings of american
suburban life -- in the context of "keeping up with the "Jones' "
versus "what I want to do", "keeping up appearances versus "being
myself" or, as bugged said, collective versus independence. And it's
funny as hell the way the issues are juxtaposed ("Today Janie, I quit
my job. Then I told my boss to go fuck himself, and blackmailed him for
almost $60,000. Pass the asparagus.")
Consider Ricky, (the son of the homophobic Nazi sympathizing neighbor)
who manages to still find beauty in the world despite being victimized
himself. So much beauty, in fact that he feels his "heart might
explode". Ricky is actually the hero of the film, because it's
Burnham's initial brush with him that inspires him to greater heights
of rebellion. And it's Ricky who is alone in really knowing what he
wants and comes across as person who will always know what he wants and
not lose sight of it, so it's fitting that he and Burnham's daughter
find a new life together.
If AB is "malevolent" it's certainly no more malevolent that "We The
Living", where the central characters dies and there are NO silver
linings anywhere.
Atlas Bugged
>> I hate to use a cliché like "it had a profoundly malevolent sense of
>> life."
>> But here, I don't know what words describe it more exactly than that.
"Bob Vogel" <bobvog...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1151939542....@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com...
> **** SPOILER ALERT *****
> "Malevolent" is too strong a word -- "Mixed" is more appropriate, as
> the young lovers escape their dreary suburbanite world, even though
> Burnham, the central protagonist, is killed (there's the fatalistic
> aspect you find repugnant), he, in the end, realized what it was that
> made him happy, as an *adult*, not just an older adult trying to
> recapture his lost youth.
Yes, but I understand where Ken is coming from. It's a dark movie.
>
> And it's
> funny as hell the way the issues are juxtaposed ("Today Janie, I quit
> my job. Then I told my boss to go fuck himself, and blackmailed him for
> almost $60,000. Pass the asparagus.")
It's amazing as perceptive satire. My favorite is when hubby (Spacey) tries
to make love to his wife (Annette Bening) spontaneously in the living room.
He's on a pretty good roll, and then she sees that the drink in her hand
might spill on the couch. She deems this more important, and this disgusts
him and ends the encounter.
>
> Consider Ricky, (the son of the homophobic Nazi sympathizing neighbor)
> who manages to still find beauty in the world despite being victimized
> himself. So much beauty, in fact that he feels his "heart might
> explode".
That's right, he's the light in the darkness.
I thought the "paper bag in the wind" video was a radical and risky move for
the film's creators. I found it spectacular, but it walked a very fine line
in terms of art. It could have been laughable in the hands of a less
accomplished film.
David Buchner
> It is not a film that demonstrates Objectivist values, except implicitly by
> its excellent craftsmanship.
Well, I wasn't particularly driving at *that* exactly. I just meant what
it's about, in general.
> But the story is very compelling and it is most certainly "art" in the sense
> Ayn Rand preferred - it is a very selective re-creation of suburban reality
> which is so perceptive and dead-on, you feel as if you have a more
> enlightened view of the entire world.
Now, *that*, I get.
>Individualism is also illustrated - the independent mind clashing with
>the collective force.
It was one of those ones where I half-liked it, near as I can recall.
The guy woke up and did things *his* way, for a while -- no matter how
much scorn that won him from those around him. That was nice. I liked
that. But then, he sort of also glorified crappy meaningless jobs, seedy
sexual liasons, and getting killed through jealousy, misunderstandings,
and/or eternal inescapable human misery in the end. That part, I liked
not as much.
Sure you're not just looking at it through rose-tinted Naked Girl
glasses?
Maybe this makes me shallow, but I have a hard time enjoying a story if
it ends badly for the character I identify with, or if it doesn't deal
with people or circumstances that appeal to me. Regardless of how well
it's made.
But that's Kevin Spacey, right? He's great. I'd watch him paint his
garage floor.
Bob Vogel
David Buchner wrote:
>
> It was one of those ones where I half-liked it, near as I can recall.
> The guy woke up and did things *his* way, for a while -- no matter how
> much scorn that won him from those around him. That was nice. I liked
> that. But then, he sort of also glorified crappy meaningless jobs, seedy
> sexual liasons,
That part is the tragic result of his mid-life crisis, which is the
result of his pawning off his youthful individuality for the trappings
of a conformist adulthood. But while Burnham has some kind of grasp of
what he's lost, his wife doesn't, which makes her struggle all the more
desperate and sad.
As for Burnham, he has the opportunity to bang his daughter's hot
friend which he's been lusting after for the entire film, but doesn't
when he realized that she's just a child pretending to be sexually in
the know. He does the right thing, and for the first time in a long
time, he feels great, truly great.
> and getting killed through jealousy, misunderstandings,
> and/or eternal inescapable human misery in the end. That part, I liked
> not as much.
But the misery is not unescapable, and that's part of the point -
that there is beauty everywhere, much of it unapparent yet sublime.
Atlas Bugged
> It was one of those ones where I half-liked it, near as I can recall.
> The guy woke up and did things *his* way, for a while -- no matter how
> much scorn that won him from those around him.
In Objectivist terms, he decided to live authentically. This caused all
manner of dislocation, but he decided, fuck it.
>That was nice. I liked
> that. But then, he sort of also glorified crappy meaningless jobs, seedy
> sexual liasons, and getting killed through jealousy, misunderstandings,
> and/or eternal inescapable human misery in the end. That part, I liked
> not as much.
That was the existential part. The idea was to satirize the menial job, not
glorify it, and the rest was simply a comment on the meaninglessness of
events you cannot control.
>
> Sure you're not just looking at it through rose-tinted Naked Girl
> glasses?
I don't want to give out more information than you could possibly want, but
I had at least two major hard-ons watching this film. But that was just
icing on the cake of an also-great cinema experience.
>
> Maybe this makes me shallow, but I have a hard time enjoying a story if
> it ends badly for the character I identify with, or if it doesn't deal
> with people or circumstances that appeal to me. Regardless of how well
> it's made.
Same here, totally. This is simply a function of good mental health - you
*should* recoil from anti-life type stuff. Rand's whole social commentary
was that everyone has those wires crossed. This is why I think Ken rejected
the film.
But Vogel is...ahhh...
But Vogel is....he's, ahhh...
I am sorry, I have trouble with this.
Vogel is rr..rr..right. The overarching point is the beauty that is
everywhere amidst the depravity, and one won't be visible unless you are
keen enough to observe both. That sounds like a new-age crap-mantra, but
AMERICAN BEAUTY concretizes it for you.
>
> But that's Kevin Spacey, right? He's great. I'd watch him paint his
> garage floor.
He's a real talent. I am sad for him because he'll never exceed what he did
in AB.
Chris Cathcart
Atlas Bugged wrote:
> > But that's Kevin Spacey, right? He's great. I'd watch him paint his
> > garage floor.
>
> He's a real talent. I am sad for him because he'll never exceed what he did
> in AB.
Looking through the IMDb filmography-by-rating (apparently I've seen
everything so far rating over a 6.7, with a couple minor exceptions),
there is one other performance that stands out, aside from the usual
suspects (pun, and no pun): Swimming with Sharks. It's such a
performance that the Simpsons spoofed it for an episode when Homer took
Mr. Smither's place as Mr. Burns' underling.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114594/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homer_the_Smithers
Atlas Bugged
> Looking through the IMDb filmography-by-rating (apparently I've seen
> everything so far rating over a 6.7, with a couple minor exceptions),
> there is one other performance that stands out, aside from the usual
> suspects (pun, and no pun): Swimming with Sharks. It's such a
> performance that the Simpsons spoofed it for an episode when Homer took
> Mr. Smither's place as Mr. Burns' underling.
> http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114594/
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homer_the_Smithers
That's interesting and obviously overlooked. Have you seen his homage to
Bobby Darin? It's reported to be a lifelong-goal of Spacey's to have made
the film.
Spacey can inhabit a character like almost no one else. GLENGARY GLENROSS
is another remarkable performance.
Unfortunately, Spacey has had his share of dogs, such as PAY IT FORWARD and
that dreadful mess-of-a-film where he intentionally gets on death row.
Bob Vogel
Atlas Bugged wrote:
>
> Spacey can inhabit a character like almost no one else. GLENGARY GLENROSS
> is another remarkable performance.
In the late 80's, Spacey was good even as psycho mobster Mel Prophet on
TV's "Wiseguy", which is my first memory of him. "Mulatto ... devil ...
woman ..."