Spectacularly bad production
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Meteor
fnj2002 — 14 years ago(September 07, 2011 02:38 AM)
This thing was the most spectacular waste of good-to-wonderful acting talent ever perpetrated. When many of the actors underperform like this, who is at fault? The director? Even the outstanding actors who performed well (Sean Connery, Henry Fonda, Trevor Howard) couldn't come close to saving it.
The special effects and miniatures were ridiculously amateurish even by the standards of a decade before. Just compare the cheap plastic toys and unconvincing effects to the brilliance of
2001: A Space Odyssey
(1968),
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
(1977),
Star Wars
(1977), and
Alien
(1979).
Heck, as well as being a 1,000 times better movie in general, the effects and miniatures of
Forbidden Plant
(1956) had the pants beat off this thing.
Destination Moon
(1950) was better than this. This was closer to Buck Rogers from the 1930s. -
richard.fuller1 — 13 years ago(February 02, 2013 11:02 AM)
The miniature effects didn't sink this. The misguided plot and over-emphasis on somethng irrelevant as the cold war lingering is what made it dull and uninteresting.
That saddled with some idea that the music and then the models would really intensify things just made all that bickering completely unnecessary.
And tossing in little things like the Siberian family, the Japanese family and the ski bunny as tho the viewers would now go OMG, then turn wide-eyed back to Landau, Malden and Keith arguing and Connery and Wood flirting and think what? Oh, how romantic!
Definitely one odd puppy. -
Akzidenz_Grotesk — 12 years ago(January 08, 2014 07:14 PM)
You think the Cold War was irrelevant? This was made before the Gorbachev thaw. Nuclear holocaust was something very possible, not that it isn't anymore. Yes, in 2013 the Cold War seems a dull plot point but it was a reality then and its legacy is still far from irrelevant.
Hell on Frisco Bay! -
richard.fuller1 — 12 years ago(January 09, 2014 01:40 AM)
Dr_Esqueleto: "You think the Cold War was irrelevant? This was made before the Gorbachev thaw. Nuclear holocaust was something very possible, not that it isn't anymore. Yes, in 2013 the Cold War seems a dull plot point but it was a reality then and its legacy is still far from irrelevant."
Friend, when I watched Meteor for the first time in the early '80s, I didn't have an ever-lovin' clue how the cold war would be regarded over thirty years later.
When the movie came out wasn't the 1950s. We didn't hide under our desks from nuclear bomb threats. We were the cynical generation after the anti-establishment late '60s and '70s.
If a bomb was dropped on us, it was going to be someone else's fault. -
TVholic — 10 years ago(November 26, 2015 09:01 AM)
Don't presume to speak for everyone. Sure, we didn't duck and cover, but there were still plenty of us who couldn't be sure if someone in the Soviet Union wouldn't get an itchy trigger finger one day. You may have been a cynic, but we knew the Cold War was still on at the time. Just because it might be "someone else's fault" wouldn't have made us any less dead, especially those of us in the biggest cities in the US, who knew we were the prime targets.