Story

Space ship is crash landing. Sitting in the hub, trying to subdue their anxiety are members of Robinson family. They know that computer will take care of landing, so all they can do is just sit tight and play cards. They were on the way to Alpha Centauri aboard mothership Resolute to establish a colony. And now they don’t know what happened and why are they crash landing. We will soon learn that they were handpicked to be on the ship. Despite being a family, each one of them had to pass a rigorous test to fill the needed position on the ship: Maureen Robinson is mission commander. Her husband John is mission pilot and ex-military. Their daughters: Judy is doctor and Penny is mechanic. Their youngest is 11-year-old brilliant engineer Will.

Landing is not soft at all. Their ship lands on what seems to be an ice mountain, triggering avalanches and ice movement. They don’t know where they are, planet seems totally unfamiliar and yet has breathable air. Space ship starts sinking so they had to abandon it immediately. While trying to recover batteries from the sunken ship, Judy gets stuck in the immediately freezing waters. Family needs to act fast to free her out. At this point they don’t care that apparently the reason they crashed was because their mother ship was attacked by an alien robot, that surprisingly also crashed on the same planet. In fact, not so far from the Robinsons. And that robot might not be the most dangerous thing that survived the crash landing.

Jupiter 2 crashing to the planet

Structure

In the best tradition of Netflix series, season 1 of “Lost in Space” is also 10 episodes long. And the way it is structured might seem pretty weird. First couple of episodes play out like a survival video game. Go there, gather this, travel back, click here, do that. And repeat through different quests. Then the show makes a wild turn and totally abandons that idea and becomes family drama. Last two episodes becomes an action piece.

What I did enjoy is that each family member was given an independent backstory. Series pick us up from the crash moment, but there are flashbacks to what happened almost through whole season, even up to the last episode. These flashbacks basically answer most of the questions we have and help understand motivations behind each character’s action. There is a certain family drama. Maureen and John are on the brink of divorce, the only thing keeping them together is their children. I enjoyed their story arc, it gave them more emotional context to operate in. Maureen seems to be strong and independent, after all she is not only an accomplished scientist, but also managed to raise three children, while John was constantly away on military deployment. John knows literally nothing about his children. He understands and regrets that and tries to do everything to connect with them.

Children also have their skeletons in the closet. Judy, despite looking tough and agile like her mother, is still green and still needs a push to overcome her fears of being independent. Penny is a teenager, who no one listens to and who desperately wants her own space. And maybe a little faith from her parents. Will is a brilliant kid, but totally lacks social life. He has no friends and is in desperate need of father figure he missed so much. All these conflicts and their resolution is the backbone of the whole series.

Maureen (Parker) and John (Stephens) trying to figure out how lost they are

Style

While emotional conflicts between the characters carries “Lost in Space” it is that these exact conflicts that create most of the problems through the series. Characters constantly are trying to talk to each other, explain their feelings, or vice versa not tell anything because they are afraid how the other party will react to that. This turns otherwise potentially fun premise into an emotional rut. You will be surprised how much plot progresses because at some point children decide to withhold information from their parents. And for no apparent reason! Also, emotional state of several

members of the family leads to almost a disaster that could have been easily avoided.

As I mentioned above, episodes 3 to 8 are extremely slow. There is a lot happening, but everything is done with such slow pace that I wanted to give up watching the show. There were several cliffhangers throughout, that were never resolved or resolution extended to be the whole new story arc that didn’t lead anywhere. Like fuel recovery mission. Feels like it was written to fill the gaps and have an extra episode for nothing.

Unnamed planet looks like Earth, somehow

Other issue I had was with locale. The planet, at first seemed totally alien-like and full of danger. It turns out the planet is not that different, neither physically or visually from Earth. I mean, you can’t just add couple of moons and some weird insects/bats/hippos and call it an alien planet! Do some things to it goddamit! This is not 60’s, you can make ANYTHING with some CGI and whatnot. Otherwise it pretty much looks like a postcard view from Canada, Alaska or Iceland.

Series also has an identity crisis in terms of audience selection. For the whole run of season 1 “Lost in Space” juggles between being a kid-friendly space adventure to adult oriented survival and drama. There is certain emotional depth to it, so series is either too dark for kids or too lame for adults. Not sure why Netflix chose to do it. Totally messes the whole experience.

Acting

There is nothing much I can say about acting in “Lost in Space”. The actors do their job, but it is surprisingly the actors who play the children – Taylor Russell (Judy), Mina Sundwall (Penny) and Maxwell Jenkins (Will) who really shine. Firstly, I have to compliment acting department, they literally chose child actors who look like their on-screen parents. I even had to google if Mina Sundwall was an actual daughter of Molly Parker or not. Second, they are probably the sincerest actors in the film. Judy is strong and independent young woman who is just on first steps of her life path. Russell shows deep internal struggle, yet externally is determined and in complete control.

Children (Jenkins, Sundwall and Russell) teaching robot

Penny is a teenager who just wants to live her life. She wants for everyone to stop treating her like a kid and is the only one who completely misses her old life on Earth. Sundwall is able to portray her not as a moody princess, but as a girl who just wants to have a life of a teenager. She wants to fall in love and be loved. Will is young kid who needs a friend. Not a father, but just a friend. Someone he can talk to and share his thoughts. Although I found his character annoying, I did enjoy how Jenkins was able to show everything that was requested of him.

That I can’t say about the villain, Dr.Smith, played by Parker Posey. She was supposed to be a psychopath manipulator, which requires constant shift in her performance. Unfortunately, Posey can’t deliver that wide spectrum of emotions. Her manipulative version was good. She felt genuine. But whenever we see her true self, it just seems fake. And that ruins the whole picture.

Summary

“Lost in Space” has an interesting premise. Season starts as a survival, but then turns into a family drama and ends with action. These shifts are not subtle, especially drama stage seemed totally slow and at times incredibly dull. Season had 10 episodes, and believe there is enough ground to cover for 10 episodes, yet some of the episodes have been poorly structured. Emotional backstory to the Robinson family was a nice addition and made heroes really relatable, however most of the plot is dragged because of the inability of characters to resolve their issues. On top of that, the villain was not written/executed well.

The post Lost In Space – Season 1 appeared first on Kino-AZ.

It starts

with disoriented Lena (Natalie Portman) surrounded by medical team in hazmat suits in what seems to be a military contamination room. She doesn’t know how she got there. Or what she was doing before. She thinks she has been “gone” for weeks, but she is told it has been four months. She is not sure if her teammates are dead or alive. Apparently she is only the second person in three years that went into the “Shimmer” and was able to return. See, place they call “Shimmer” is a weird exclusion zone that surround the area where an extra-terrestrial object struck the Earth. And Lena will tell her story. Story of unhappy marriage and self-destruction. Weird memory lapses and hallucinations. Mutation and evolution. Psychosis and hysteria. And maybe annihilation.

The Book

that the film is based on, they say is even weirder. Not sure, I have not read it yet. Regardless of that, story seems to be convoluted for a specific reason. First thing we learn as soon as they get into the shimmer is that none of what Lena says might actually be true, because all of her team were missing recollection of first four days (according to their calculations) in the Shimmer. What happened during that time? Does it matter anyhow? Why sudden mass memory loss? Second, Lena is lone survivor of the group (it seems). How much can she be trusted? Since we don’t have any other source to confirm her words, do we need to believe her? Third (and this is important) is Lena even a positive hero? She certainly is more complicated than your usual hero. Why should that matter to us?

It’s not first time in movie history when the sanity, morality and trustworthiness of hero is under a question. There is even a word for that, called “unreliable narrator”. But is Lena unreliable? And even if you take it at a face value, this movie tries to steer away from that. What if Lena filters what she is saying? Maybe she just truly believes her words? What movie does is that it basically ignores our need to know that. And it is a big slap for you, see, you can’t not know what is happening. You can’t take things a face value, can you?

Visually

Lena (Portman) ready to get into Shimmer

this film is easily compared to works of Tarkovsky, the master of the genre. Imagine stylistically a blend of “Solaris” and “Stalker“. Difference of Alex Garland‘s directorial work though shows up in the subtleties. The long shots are not long. Pauses are not forceful. Exposition is only visual. All the questions and answers appear in a viewers mind. Garland basically forces you to think, analyze and comprehend. Design of the film is impeccable. Insides of Shimmer will remind you of a very vibrant and weird hallucinogenic trip. From outside Shimmer looks like an oil spill on the surface of a water, with rainbow reflections and constant movements. It is visible that there is something different going on inside the Shimmer. But this colors and mutations and transformations, are they for good or bad?

I didn’t like much about “Ex Machina” (for my own reasons) of Alex Garland. That film was more story with very little showcase of directorial work. “Annihilation” vice versa, shows the ingenuity and evolution. Whereas the first two acts are slow and passive, third act is very direct and nail-biting. Creepy, probably is the best word. I was surprisingly unnerved by it. And very big kudos to Garland to be able to deliver you there. That was no easy feat, to still be able to get you on the edge of your seat after what might have seem to be very long ride.

Soundtrack has to be noted separately. I am not sure how this movie can be viewed without the amazing music score. Especially how the music follows the action and elements on the screen is something that keeps the movie flowing and being coherent, and at times even adding more uneasiness.

Expedition members are not sure what is ahead of them

Natalie Portman

is something out of this world in this film. Her unbelievably convincing portrayal of character is what keeps the movie intact, especially during slow first part of it. You can see this intricate details in a contrast of Lena’s behavior with her husband, where she is caring, emotional and optimistic, and without him, where she is cold, measuring and realistic.

I will also commend supporting cast members Jennifer Jason Leigh, Gina Rodriguez and Oscar Isaac. Leigh specifically delivers a very cold and emotionally distant portrayal. Some would say that Isaac’s role was a blah, but I was surprised how he played that blah role. I am more used to him playing more emotional and straightforward characters.

In the end

we have a very innovative and proper sci-fi, that is bound only by it’s own nature, not by what is dictated by anyone else. And here comes the biggest issue why you, my dear friend, will not like “Annihilation”. Inadvertently or no, you will try to compare it to another sci-fi masterpiece “Arrival“, which this movie is not. I am not sure how much it was brought up during production, but “Annihilation” lacks that big, deep emotional punch in the face that “Arrival” had. With that it goes into more of a indie, arthouse territory (think “Melancholia“, maybe). It works very well for me, but does it for you?

The post Annihilation appeared first on Kino-AZ.

And you can feel it from the get go. 95% of the film is confined to the bunker in which three main characters are trapped, being saved by the owner. USA is under attack by some mysterious enemy (Russins? Koreans? ISIS? Aliens?). Howard (John Goodman) is the owner of the bunker. He is a huge conspiracy theorist. Otherwise who would have built and furnished a full-blown bunker? By some circumstances, he ends up taking two guests in – Michelle (Mary Elizabeth Winstead) and Emmett (John Gallagher Jr.). He claims they owe him for saving their lives. Because, God knows, it might be a nuclear attack or something. And per Howard everyone is dead already. But slowly the guests start worrying about their well-being in “caring” hands of Howard. They start wondering the severity of the attack. Or whether it ever happened to begin with.

Premise is ambitious. Having three heroes sit tight in confined space and figure out what is going on is very engaging. Howard’s borderline psycho personality pushes others to come up with

Three main character in the bunker

plans to escape. Film is a nail-biter. All three cast members deliver solid work. Goodman is menacingly devious, Winstead is cautious, but brave, Gallagher Jr is naive and trusting. Director Dan Trachtenberg creates the atmosphere and keeps viewer engaged till the end. So you would think everything is great with this film? Not at all. What the movie fails on is the a multiple structural and plot holes.

First, film doesn’t know what it wants to be. I mean, sure, it was a psychological thriller when it was written. But with introduction of Cloverfield element in the story film starts deviating from the premise. What starts as a serial killer/slasher film, turns into thriller, which turns into horror, which turns into survival, which turns into something totally else in the end (not spoiling). This constant shift in narrative may have helped the film in the beginning, but it gets really annoying towards the end. It is at then you realize that maybe they should have left off the whole Cloverfield theme out of it and just made the film to be on its own. But that’s just wishful thinking.

Second, some choices of the heroes make no sense at all. Without dwelling into much detail, one of the plot lines is based on the flaw in the design of the bunker, which is so painstakingly obvious, it’s not even funny. It feels like screenwriters had a bad day trying to come up with ingenious way to have a character “discover” a secret. Very annoying. In another example (and this is very recurring) characters somehow find privacy to talk/plan/act. In a bunker. A small confined space. Where the restroom door is just a shower curtain. Meh.

Third, the ending. You have to see it to understand what I am saying.

In summary, “10 Cloverfield Lane” is a very engaging and entertaining film on the surface, with solid acting and directing, but logically and structurally has many flaws that substantially limit the experience.

The post 10 Cloverfield Lane appeared first on Kino-AZ.

Well, I’ll tell you why. One dark night full with fireworks in the sky, one nurse Sam is returning home – shady project style housing called “the block”, where she has moved not a while ago. But she encounters a surprise – local teenage gang, led by Moses (John Boyega) decides to rob her. Sam is frightened and cooperative, and as soon as the gang gets her phone and the purse, they are ready to take off when sudden object fells from the sky right into the parked nearby car, smashing it in process. That objects turns out to be crazy little creature that attacks Moses and his band (making a room for Sam to run away). But kids are not just some lame kids – they have knifes, bats, machetes and what not, so they kill the creature. Unfortunately, soon they realize that its just a beginning and creatures coming after won’t be so easy to kill. And instead of running away, they decide to give a fight to the invaders of the block…

Film essentially resembles “District 9” in unique representation of the characters and alien problem. Yes, this is another alien invasion film, how many are we going to have yet, you are going to ask, but believe me when I say, this is NOT the alien invasion movie you have seen before. All the films alike released this year – “Battle: Los Angeles”, “Super 8”, “Cowboys and Aliens”, “The Thing”, “Transformers 3” – all this big budget Hollywood productions don’t stand a chance against “Attack the Block” in the creativity, character development, storyline or even the acting.

The tone of the movie is similar to that of “Shaun of the Dead“, and that’s not surprising, the director is a long collaborator of Edgar Wright and Simon Pegg. Even Nick Frost has a minor role, as a supporting character, who provides some good laughs throughout.

I’d like to mention the character development in the movie. Every member of the band of unlikely heroes is full of resentment, anger, hate, and are true future street thugs. They rob people, smoke weed, deal some other “white” drugs, and are ready to move the steps of gangster hierarchy. But in one moment they turn all their hate towards society and police to the alien creatures, maybe forever changing their attitude toward life in general. The biggest transition comes in the character of Moses, played really well by newcomer John Boyega. And by the end of the movie you no longer feel resentment against these kids. You understand under different conditions – with proper education, housing, government support – they would have been completely different people.

Being a low budget film, the director was somehow limited in CGI usage, and yet he somehow keeps a proper balance of not showing much and not showing enough. Unlike some other movies mentioned above, which either withhold the creatures up until long into the movie, or show them in such detail that not a single object in the frame is actually real.

I really enjoyed the movie and would like to praise the effort of bringing something new to the genre full of cliches. I give it 8/10.

PS: If you decide to watch it, I highly recommend watching it with subtitles. British street slang is not so easy to comprehend.

The post Attack the Block appeared first on Kino-AZ.