|
Saw this film a few nights ago. In my quest to better understand science fiction films and the prevailing pulse that keeps hollywood creating them, I never miss an opportunity to see them.
Pandorum received a 29% from Rotten Tomatoes. In a sense, saying you should avoid seeing this film. When a film that I am hellbent on seeing comes out with a bad rating, I purposely avoid reading the individual critic's reviews until I have made up my own mind as to what went right or wrong.
Now that I have seen this film and compared the critics ideas to my own, I can fully say that this film is one of the better sci-fi flicks I have seen in quite awhile. Almost at every turn, the critics seemed to knock this film for what I considered to be its strengths. I could not believe how deliberately wrong so many were in their appraisal. It was almost as if, it was a deliberate smear campaign to make a beauty appear ugly.
Pandorum features a truly epic ship. The thing is a massive hulk full of dark dangerous places. The ship sets are jaw dropping amazing. I don't believe I have seen anything like this on such a scale since the film Alien. If you know Alien, Resident Evil,(or heard of Eden Log) than this film would be a hybrid of these three. I do value Rotten Tomatoes opinions when I am choosing a film, but I can firmly say that my trust in their critics has been shaken.
The acting in Pandorum was excellent, the story was driven and the intrigue was very high.
I cannot give an excellent review to this film because the ending was a little rushed. I won't give that away, but I will say that I have been thinking about this film for quite a few days. If a film succeeds in doing that, I think it is worthy of a classic.
I might also add that I would never knock a sci fi film for a bad or unpopular ending. Blade Runner was initially released with a very sucky ending, but that didn't stop it from becoming one of the greatest films in science fiction history.
Contributor
|
Saw this film a few nights ago. In my quest to better understand science fiction films and the prevailing pulse that keeps hollywood creating them, I never miss an opportunity to see them.
Pandorum received a 29% from Rotten Tomatoes. In a sense, saying you should avoid seeing this film. When a film that I am hellbent on seeing comes out with a bad rating, I purposely avoid reading the individual critic's reviews until I have made up my own mind as to what went right or wrong.
Now that I have seen this film and compared the critics ideas to my own, I can fully say that this film is one of the better sci-fi flicks I have seen in quite awhile. Almost at every turn, the critics seemed to knock this film for what I considered to be its strengths. I could not believe how deliberately wrong so many were in their appraisal. It was almost as if, it was a deliberate smear campaign to make a beauty appear ugly.
Pandorum features a truly epic ship. The thing is a massive hulk full of dark dangerous places. The ship sets are jaw dropping amazing. I don't believe I have seen anything like this on such a scale since the film Alien. If you know Alien, Resident Evil,(or heard of Eden Log) than this film would be a hybrid of these three. I do value Rotten Tomatoes opinions when I am choosing a film, but I can firmly say that my trust in their critics has been shaken.
The acting in Pandorum was excellent, the story was driven and the intrigue was very high.
I cannot give an excellent review to this film because the ending was a little rushed. I won't give that away, but I will say that I have been thinking about this film for quite a few days. If a film succeeds in doing that, I think it is worthy of a classic.
I might also add that I would never knock a sci fi film for a bad or unpopular ending. Blade Runner was initially released with a very sucky ending, but that didn't stop it from becoming one of the greatest films in science fiction history.
Gonna check it. All I have to say is BLADERUNNER! In Zuxius room! With beer! At Paizocon! Awesome.
Gonna drag some buds to this movie this weekend as the girlfriend's out of town ;)
Will post my review here as well, but it sounds right up my alley!
Creative Director
|
While the design of the ship and the central storyline were really interesting... I'm afraid Pandorum was a misfire for me in the same way that Event Horizon was. A cool idea marred by poor editing and choppy directing and too much murk.
They obviously put a LOT of work into the set design... it's a shame to not be able to see that set design because things were too underlit or because scenes where the mutants were on-screen but the camera was jerking around too much or cutting too rapidly to ever get a good chance to see what those mutants actually looked like.
|
|
I believe jerky camera is rather a deliberate technique in filming. Saving Private Ryan comes to mind. James Cameron also said in his Aliens Extended Edition that quick cuts were better for action-horror films, because seeing his alien complete and all at once for a lengthy period of time would lead to visual disbelief that it was an alien. Subconsciously you try to see that there is a man under a suit, Cameron says. However, none of these techniques could make me dislike a film. I believe your "thumbs-down" Mr. Jacobs stems from something more. Choppy editing can be real bad, though I didn't notice it as acutely as you did.
I can understand your dislike of this film if you didn't like Event Horizon. Alas, another film that I liked a bunch.
|
Creative Director
|
I believe jerky camera is rather a deliberate technique in filming. Saving Private Ryan comes to mind. James Cameron also said in his Aliens Extended Edition that quick cuts were better for action-horror films, because seeing his alien complete and all at once for a lengthy period of time would lead to visual disbelief that it was an alien. Subconsciously you try to see that there is a man under a suit, Cameron says. However, none of these techniques could make me dislike a film. I believe your "thumbs-down" Mr. Jacobs stems from something more. Choppy editing can be real bad, though I didn't notice it as acutely as you did.
I can understand your dislike of this film if you didn't like Event Horizon. Alas, another film that I liked a bunch.
Jerky camera is indeed a deliberate technique. And like many techniques, it's easy to mimic but hard to do right.
|
I just saw this tonight--without spoiling anything: I really like the idea, and I think the execution was topping out in the 85-90% range, so a success, in my opinion.
Issues:
A problem I had:
Even 200 years from now, I doubt that spacecraft will be built with the ability to withstand pressures greater than 1 atmosphere--there's simply no need.
I'd argue that a vessel like the Elysium would be majority-built in orbit (certainly, we'll have buckytube tethers by the time we could conceivably build a generation ship), and I wonder that it would (or could) be designed to make planetfall. Possibly, it could be designed as a modular vessel that could land in sections, so the ship material could be recycled into habitats, etc.
Thus, I don't think, even if Tanis has an exceptionally low gravity index, a ship the size of the Elysium could survive intact, even in a water landing.
Could the pods be built to withstand 6 or even 8 atmospheres (think of the size of that ship and how much of it was underwater)? Sure, and probably so, since they're lifepods. Would anyone survive the surfacing and immediate decompression at sea level? No way, and I have trouble imagining that even nanotechnology could repair cell damage as fast as would be needed to make the last scene viable.
A problem a friend of mine had, and we argued over pizza for about an hour on this topic alone: "1213 survivors!" he said. "That's simply not enough to restart the species."
I argue that 1213 people, assuming at least 50% are gender pairs (progenitor set), and at least 50% of those produce 2.6 children per pair (generation 0) and at least 50% of those produce amongst each other 2.6 children per pair (generation 1) then generation 1 will be genetically dissimilar enough to safely produce 2.6 children per pair when mated with the (now quite old) non-familia, male members of the progenitor set and the species will grow logarithmically, with no danger of genetic bottleneck for at least 14000 years. I'm happy to share my math with anyone actually interested.
As to the darkness of the film (as in, actually dark because of power issues), I thought this added an uncompromising amount of verisimilitude, as did the shaky camera technique used when the characters were in fights, running, etc. Very effective for me at least.
I just saw this tonight--without spoiling anything: I really like the idea, and I think the execution was topping out in the 85-90% range, so a success, in my opinion.
Issues: ** spoiler omitted **...
I like your math. My question is, does it take marriage(or at least it's rough equivalent) into the question? Or is polygamy the norm for the first(and maybe second) generations?
|
|
I like your math. My question is, does it take marriage(or at least it's rough equivalent) into the question? Or is polygamy the norm for the first(and maybe second) generations?
Good question!
Initially, the plan assumes that generation 1 would necessarily produce via pairing with previously-paired members of the progenitor set.
However, on reflection--this plan does not require polygamy, and in fact does not require actual intercourse. I think it's safe to assume that the tech exists onboard the ship to conduct IVF.
The plan does require a willingness on the part of the female population (and their naturally-occuring male --or female--companions) to participate in an aggressive, multi-donor IVF program.
Finally, IVF might very well accelerate the population growth beyond my initial calculations.
I really liked this movie.
I really liked this movie.
I liked it too.
Sure I got a bit tired of too much darkness (as in the light level) but overall it was a good Sci-Fi flick.