Is it good?
-
Simplythebest11962 — 11 years ago(November 28, 2014 09:06 AM)
stazza posted,
bought the DVD, kinda "meh" boring, but all the effects from the 70's make it interesting to watch all those wires holding the models, and video overlays
overall, the acting is kinda dull and plot not all that dynamic. I will never watch it again for the plot, I'll only dig it out again for the good old effects. For me, it is the type of film I would pull out at 11pm and watch to help me fall asleep - it is dark in space, and this slow pace just makes me feel tired.
LOL So, it's that bad of a movie?
Thanks, for your feedback. What other movies would you recommend?
"It's a good thing!"Martha Stewart -
stazza — 11 years ago(December 03, 2014 01:39 PM)
Well, these are made for TV movies, so they are not all that great, but I bought the whole "series" (if you will) Genesis II, Planet Earth, Strange New World somehow they seem related and I am watching Genesis II and it is way better written and watchable than EARTH II. More like a "quality", finished TV show - closer to star trek quality, where as EARTH II seemed more like a 70's high school or college production.
Far as recommending GOOD space movies, there is always 2001, Apollo 13, The Right Stuff, Interstellar, Gravity the old stuff is kinda of a matter of taste: I love FORBIDDEN PLANET and even ROBINSON CRUSOE ON MARS, This Island Earth etc, but they are really dated. yet fun to me in their old school ways.
-
Simplythebest11962 — 11 years ago(December 03, 2014 01:47 PM)
stazza,
Thanks, for your feedback. Personally, I like made-for-tv movies & even pre 70's sci-fi movies. The ONLY pre-70's sci-fi movie I honestly didn't care for is Invaders from Mars.
The plot was boring and invaders actually looked like giant green BUG men. It was campy & I just found the whole movie boring. I haven't seen Forbidden Planet nor Robinson Crusoe on Mars, but I definitely want to. I wish TCM would show MORE of these movies. What other movies do you like from ANY genre & would you recommend?
"It's a good thing!"Martha Stewart -
stazza — 11 years ago(December 05, 2014 01:13 PM)
oh man, there is an endless list of movies that are decent/interesting plots, just not up to today's standards:
Logan's Run
Journey to the far side of the Sun
day the Earth Stood Still
Planet of the Apes (original version)
Blade Runner
Brazil
Primer
newer things like
Moon
Source Code
District 9 gets pretty harsh, but is a good plot -
dgranger — 10 years ago(July 24, 2015 05:25 PM)
District 9 put me to sleep and you can tell from the way it moved that the young alien was a monkey with CGI removing things from the image. Try the series "Firefly" and the resulting movie "Serenity".
If you want good tv SciFi/fantasy from the 60's other than Star Trek, try The Twilight Zone, The Wild, Wild West and The Outer Limits.
Stay away from Lost In Space. The only good thing about that show was the robot and even that was the old movie robot Robby den "Forbidden Planet" with the top piece changed and legs changed. Yeah, a family of space colonist are moving to a new planet when they get lost in space and crash on an alien planet and nobody thought to bring a change of clothes. They wear the same clothes every single episode and they don't wear out or get dirty. Amazing!
Harry Potter Lives!
Agnus Dei, qui tollis peccata mundi, dona nobis pacem. -
Simplythebest11962 — 9 years ago(April 03, 2016 12:12 PM)
by stazza Fri Dec 5 2014 13:13:04
IMDb member since January 2004
oh man, there is an endless list of movies that are decent/interesting plots, just not up to today's standards:
Logan's Run
Journey to the far side of the Sun
day the Earth Stood Still
Planet of the Apes (original version)
Blade Runner
Brazil
Primer
newer things like
Moon
Source Code
District 9 gets pretty harsh, but is a good plot
Thanks, for the recommendations!
Dream until your dreams come true. -
davercrb — 10 years ago(October 14, 2015 07:58 PM)
I would definitely say to watch it for yourself and see rather than me saying its great and others saying it sucks.
The movie itself depicted an early concept for a orbital habitat-in this case a low earth orbit space habitat called Earth II which operates as an independent city-state with it's own rules and codes. The movie was made during the project Apollo years and has a very optimistic attitude although by today's action movie standards it is far too cerebral and naive. Nevertheless I still enjoy it. Just for what it's worth- the cerebral part appeals to me but probably not to others brought up on Star Wars.
The basic plot is that for their own geopolitical reasons the Chinese launch a MIRV intended as a threat to Moscow. The parking orbit of the missile is effectively the same as the habitat. A newcomer to Earth II feels the existing habitat citizens are far too naive and wants to seize the missile. Using the basic townhall style gov't he argues for disarming and capture of the missile. I thought the meeting where both sides present their case to be quite interesting with both emotional and logical arguments and very much illustrative of the governing style aboard the habitat. The FNG wins the debate and the missile is . successfully captured but bad things happen. It is at this point that the movie demonstrates a serious attempt to get the science at least close to right. They properly handle inertial attitudes, and the effect of raw sunlight on metals designed to melt at fairly low temperatures. They handle rendezvous fairly well. Their attempt at orbital mechanics has some profound weaknesses but that is understandable and really doesn't bother me much- certainly it is handled far better than in almost any SF movie made since. While orbital mechanics is not as difficult as it is sometimes made out to be it is nevertheless something of an arcane and very counter-intuitive art (ex. to speed up you have to you have to hit the brakes)
In the end the missile is eliminated and they all live happily ever after. In the meantime there is a great danger of the missile exploding over the northern US , zero g surgery in progress, and a shuttle has to stop the rotation of the habitat-a veerryyy dangerous and difficult maneuver-something that in real life would give everyone involved the willies
As I said-see it for yourself. -
Simplythebest11962 — 10 years ago(October 15, 2015 07:25 AM)
by davercrb 11 hours ago (Wed Oct 14 2015 19:58:19) Flag | Reply |
IMDb member since October 2015
I would definitely say to watch it for yourself and see rather than me saying its great and others saying it sucks.
The movie itself depicted an early concept for a orbital habitat-in this case a low earth orbit space habitat called Earth II which operates as an independent city-state with it's own rules and codes. The movie was made during the project Apollo years and has a very optimistic attitude although by today's action movie standards it is far too cerebral and naive. Nevertheless I still enjoy it. Just for what it's worth- the cerebral part appeals to me but probably not to others brought up on Star Wars.
The basic plot is that for their own geopolitical reasons the Chinese launch a MIRV intended as a threat to Moscow. The parking orbit of the missile is effectively the same as the habitat. A newcomer to Earth II feels the existing habitat citizens are far too naive and wants to seize the missile. Using the basic townhall style gov't he argues for disarming and capture of the missile. I thought the meeting where both sides present their case to be quite interesting with both emotional and logical arguments and very much illustrative of the governing style aboard the habitat. The FNG wins the debate and the missile is . successfully captured but bad things happen. It is at this point that the movie demonstrates a serious attempt to get the science at least close to right. They properly handle inertial attitudes, and the effect of raw sunlight on metals designed to melt at fairly low temperatures. They handle rendezvous fairly well. Their attempt at orbital mechanics has some profound weaknesses but that is understandable and really doesn't bother me much- certainly it is handled far better than in almost any SF movie made since. While orbital mechanics is not as difficult as it is sometimes made out to be it is nevertheless something of an arcane and very counter-intuitive art (ex. to speed up you have to you have to hit the brakes)
In the end the missile is eliminated and they all live happily ever after. In the meantime there is a great danger of the missile exploding over the northern US , zero g surgery in progress, and a shuttle has to stop the rotation of the habitat-a veerryyy dangerous and difficult maneuver-something that in real life would give everyone involved the willies
As I said-see it for yourself.
Great feedback, but you gave away the plot! LOL -
philoj — 9 years ago(April 03, 2016 11:24 AM)
I like a LOT of movies and TV that other "more discerning" viewers pan, and I have to say - this is not a good movie. It's beyond formulaic, beyond stiff. And if you know anything about orbital mechanics (which more people do these days thanks to Kerbal Space Program) then the central plot point will drive you up the wall (and not in a good zero-g way)
It's worth putting on as a historical examination of TV and social fantasy of the early 70s. But I would put it on somewhere that you can do something else while it's on and just keep half an eye on it.
To quote one of the reviews above: "It was a time when TV producers didn't realize that a good story is more important than bad special effects"
Philo's Law: To learn from your mistakes, you have to realize you're making mistakes. -
Simplythebest11962 — 9 years ago(April 03, 2016 12:12 PM)
by philoj 47 minutes ago (Sun Apr 3 2016 11:24:38)
IMDb member since July 2001
I like a LOT of movies and TV that other "more discerning" viewers pan, and I have to say - this is not a good movie. It's beyond formulaic, beyond stiff. And if you know anything about orbital mechanics (which more people do these days thanks to Kerbal Space Program) then the central plot point will drive you up the wall (and not in a good zero-g way)
It's worth putting on as a historical examination of TV and social fantasy of the early 70s. But I would put it on somewhere that you can do something else while it's on and just keep half an eye on it.
To quote one of the reviews above: "It was a time when TV producers didn't realize that a good story is more important than bad special effects"
thanks, for your feedback.
Dream until your dreams come true.