MovieChat Forums > Outland (1981) Discussion > One of the most poorly edited films I ha...

One of the most poorly edited films I have ever seen!

posted 16 years ago by christomacin
15 replies | jump to latest

The basic story was good, the actors were good, the sets were good. However, this film really lacked forward momentum. Hyams was a little too impressed with the special effects and had too many scenes near the end of people walking silently in corridors with shotguns. It was all too protracted and needlessly draggy. Hyams is no Sergio Leone. This film just seemed filled with a lot of dead screen time. This film could easily have 10 or 12 minutes cut out of it and not miss anything, while making the scenes move more quickly. Also, I though Goldsmith's score was a bit overblown.

All in all, not a bad movie, but it could have been a classic.

[–] tricksoftrade02 16 years ago

I think that movies today move faster, people are becoming accustomed to more information and action at all times. Look at all the info flying around on some TV shows, I believe this contributes to A.D.D. and many viewers have become impatient with 'down time'. You have to remember this movie was made in the early 80's before blackberry, ipod, internet and the intstant gratification of the senses.

My 16 year old nephew often becomes bored with movies that are over 20 years old. On slow parts he often whips out his blackberry and starts texting, the moviegoer as lost the art of reflection.

[–] christomacin 16 years ago

I totally agree with you that today's whippersnappers have pathetic attention spans, and I find it less and less enjoyable going to see newer movies for precisely this reason. However, I am in my late 30's, so I am not sure that totally explains my problem with Outland, which was a film of my youth. I really liked Outland when I saw it as a kid in the theater, but I really do think the pacing of this film is terrible, mostly toward the end. I understand what Hyams was trying to do, but it just came across as ponderous rather than suspenseful. I didn't realize it until watching it again about 10 years ago. Maybe I am being too hard on the film, but I have gotten picky on Hyams films generally. He used to be one of my favorite directors, now not so much. I do remember Outland fondly as the first Connery movie I saw in the theater, so it has a soft spot in my heart just the same.

[–] okeydokeykaraoke 15 years ago

i understand your point about the conclusion of the film dragging a bit, but i thought on the whole the editing was actually quite good in parts, especially the chase sequence earlier in the film...

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] scotbpens 15 years ago

My 16 year old nephew often becomes bored with movies that are over 20 years old.

Well, if he ever has trouble falling asleep, just give him the original Russian version of Solaris to watch! (AKA A Bunch of Russian Dudes Sitting Around Talking.)

All the universe . . . or nothingness. Which shall it be, Passworthy? Which shall it be?

[–] Etherdave 14 years ago

Hmmm... I saw this film in my youth as well, but today I still find it hugely entertaining. I don't see any problems with the pacing or editing, and Hyams' directing seems as competent as anyone else's of the period; his use of low camera angles and dollies consistently sets an atmosphere of claustrophobia and paranoia. While the music is highly reminiscent of 'Alien' and 'Poltergeist', it fits the drama of this film quite well, and in some cases is better scored to the screen action than either. This is one of my favorite non-bond Connery films, a near equal to the preposterous, ridiculous, absolutely gorgeous 'Zardoz'.

[–] filmklassik 9 years ago

Do you really believe modern audiences have shorter attention spans than audiences in 1981? How then do we explain the fact that the dominant mode of storytelling today -- long form TV such as BREAKING BAD, TRUE DETECTIVE, WALKING DEAD, MAD MEN, etc -- isn't being edited for short attention spans?

[–] hafabee 14 years ago

I don't feel that the movie suffers from poor editing at all; in fact the editing is pretty good. What the movie could have used were a few more interesting angles in shooting though. That gets a lot better for some reason towards the end of the movie...I suppose for the most part they simply didn't have a lot of room for setting up some great shots what with the claustrophobic feel to the facility and the 4th wall and all.

I dislike much of the fast editing many action movies have today. We cant see the action clearly because it is cut to pieces. Maybe Im getting too old, or perhaps the filmmakers are just trying to disguise their poor work.

Me too, a lot of editing these days looks terrible. Its of course suppose to make action scenes look chaotic but it just becomes a jumbled mess. One recent example of this that I saw was Batman Begins by Chris Nolan. Beautiful cinematography, great story, but when the action sequences started the cuts were so quick and terribly assembled it brought the whole movie down.

[–] Ashley Pomeroy 11 years ago

"draggy"

Interestingly the film was edited by Stuart Baird, who later went on to direct Star Trek: Nemesis, which has a similarly dark look. After Nemesis flopped he went back to editing, and is apparently very good at it; he edited Casino Royale and Skyfall.

My opinion is that the film editing is just fine, but I agree that Hyams needed to chop a quarter of an hour or so off the running time, or generate some more plot. The story simply wasn't involved enough to justify the film's length. It needed a third strand, perhaps some kind of threat to the mining colony itself, or *something* involving Io.

It's interesting to compare it with Total Recall, which has a similar milieu, but feels more epic because it has the plot thread with the alien oxygen generator. Outland ultimately feels inconsequential.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Ashley Pomeroy 11 years ago

"I don't see any Iopeners"

1. My wife recently visited one of Jupiter's moons.

2. Europa?

1. No, it was her idea.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] filmklassik 9 years ago

One problem I have with movies and TV shows today is the abundance of sub plots. B, C and D stories usually bore the hell out of me.

I came for the A story, dammit.

And I thought OUTLAND was much better than TOTAL RECALL, if not quite as good as ALIEN (which also had no B story)

[–] filmklassik 9 years ago

I wouldn't change a frame.

And most movies suck today.

[–] mrmathexpert4 9 years ago

The movie was ruined by everything that followed after the hiring of the 2 killers. Such a poor job by Peter Hyams.