MovieChat Forums > The Last Days on Mars (2013) Discussion > Hollywood thinks the only way to make a ...

Hollywood thinks the only way to make a scifi movie is ...

posted 11 years ago by xystophoros
18 replies | jump to latest

... to send monumentally stupid scientists or miners into space, introduce monsters, and pick the cast off one by one. There will be lots of screaming, running, slamming of airlock doors, malfunctioning computer systems, dumb characters who walk right into death, and dumb scientists who do things no scientist would ever actually do.

Last Days on Mars, Pandorum, Red Planet, Even Horizon, Virus, Pitch Black, Cube, Prometheus, etc, etc.

(I realize one or two of those aren't technically in space, but that is not necessarily revealed to the audience in those films.)

And to those saying Last Days on Mars is an Alien ripoff, that's not technically true -- it's a ripoff of the dozens of movies that have ripped off Alien, until the ripping off has come full circle in its mindlessness with Prometheus.

The solution is simple: Stop hiring hacks like Damon Lindeloff and JJ Abrams, and start mining the treasure trove of literary science fiction. There are so many amazing and mind-blowing science fiction stories out there, yet somehow they're never optioned for films while studios buy up more of the same stupid story about a monster who crawls through vents and kills half-dimensional characters one by one for 90 minutes.

[–] jeffyoung1 11 years ago

Hey, you wrote my post before I did. I was going to post pretty much the same thing you wrote in your first paragraph.
Hollywood science fiction horror movies rely on one key factor: RECKLESS ASTRONAUTS who exhibit the blind recklessness of a 4-four year old in picking up and playing with anything they see. From a psychological analysis the shrinks say I'm right. All adults still have the four-year old in us, just expressed in a more forceful, motivated way. As adults, besides the reckless curiosity, it's added to the reckless grab for fame and recognition in the pursuit of, 'advancing the frontiers of human knowledge'.

Why think outside of the box? The box was invented to keep people from acting in a negligent, reckless, unthinking, emotional, irrational manner that would harm themselves and others.

[–] oilinblood 11 years ago

i thought sunshine was pretty good. they weighed the big decisions together. like changing their route for the chance to have two devices instead of one. and they certainly knew the risks they took in the assignment and that their lives might be sacrificed.

the science wasnt completely bad either. it was good for hollywood.

great tension, good atmosphere. i hope Boyle and Garlund reunite for another space movie. i think they could do a good job on an alien type movie (which i need since prometheus absolutely killed all my hopes of something decent coming out with intelligence and atmosphere and tension and scares).

[–] StrontiumAE 11 years ago

Sunshine was good until it turned into a slasher pic in the last 15 minutes. Totally left field twist that ruined an otherwise good movie. As for The Last Days on Mars this...

And to those saying Last Days on Mars is an Alien ripoff, that's not technically true -- it's a ripoff of the dozens of movies that have ripped off Alien, until the ripping off has come full circle.

I actually went into this expecting something good. There was so much potential and much going for this. Then there was the space zombies.

http://www.1971-reviewae.com/2013/12/the-last-days-on-mars-as-lifeless -as.html

[–] oilinblood 11 years ago

i liked Sunshine and the twist was what made it memorable to me... the tension caused by something , as improbable as it was (but possible and improbable enough that neither the characters nor viewers think of it), that was a shocking jolt. The scene where the computer is talking to Cappa starting with "you are dying" and ending with Cappa asking where the mystery member of the ship is... raised some hairs on my neck. Movies just dont do that stuff to me anymore.

The topic though was really about doing good scifi that doesnt need moron characters making rediculous decisions to create the drama.

In sunshine, the decisions --small and large-- were heavily weighed by the characters. This was crucial in setting a tone and atmossphere. SCIFI constantly tells us that the setting of the characters is extremely dangerous, that they are in peril, that death could come at any moment.... and that the characters are intelligent. Then they write the script as if the character has no ability to evaluate his situation and make some logical choices--like staying to a quarantine procedure. Thus... the entire "in peril", "dangerous" seems comic. Anyone making stupid decisions when in peril...or not treating their dangerous situation with respect...deserves to die... and that is when audiences lose interest and just start cheering for the death of characters.

[–] borzov 11 years ago

actually it's not hollywood, it's a british flick. also it was adapted from a 1975 short story so there you go.

[–] Strazdamonas 11 years ago

If they would have followed proper protocol they would have easily neutralized the threat before it spread, and as such there would be no movie to watch.

Oh and DONT, for the love of god start adapting real science fiction to movies. Last time we did that we got Battlefield Earth, and its one i wish i could forget.

---------------------------------------------
Applied Science? All science is applied. Eventually.

[–] mel2000 11 years ago

If they would have followed proper protocol they would have easily neutralized the threat before it spread...

If they had followed proper protocol there would never have been a threat in the first place.

[–] camerica1978 8 years ago

Stupid Humans!!!

[–] sbowesuk 11 years ago

This movie lost me very early on precisely because of the idiotic characters. It basically portrayed what should have been exceptionally well trained and disciplined astronauts as unreliable, unprofessional, unpredictable morons.

Why Hollywood keeps giving crap like this the green light is beyond me. Perhaps they think that we the viewing public are too stupid to "get" characters with an IQ above 80. Personally I find it insulting.

Little wonder people are opting to torrent movies these days rather than part with hard cash for them. Hollywood, if you want us to pay for your movies, you're going to have to make something worth paying for.

[–] davannacarter 11 years ago

If you think is a movie is crap but still watch it, that says a lot about your lack of intelligence. You may think you're smart by just downloading it free, but you are not. You may not be paying with cash. But you're still paying for the movie with your time. And time is more important than money.

Hollywood keeps putting out crap because they know idiots like you will know it's crap but watch it anyway. You may watch it in the theater, on TV, or downloading it. But you'll watch it. Then you'll get online and say, "I knew that movie was going to be crap. But I watched it anyway. I know it isn't smart of me to watch something I know is gonna suck. But at least I didn't spend money on it."

[–] markfilipak 11 years ago

Davanna wrote:

Hollywood keeps putting out crap because they know idiots like you will know it's crap but watch it anyway.

How do you know it's crap before you've seen it? I'd really like to know.

BTW, as noted in several posts, this film is Irish, not Hollywood.
_____
I don't have a dog. And furthermore, my dog doesn't bite. And furthermore, you provoked him.

[–] davannacarter 11 years ago

How do you know it's crap before you've seen it? I'd really like to know.

I wasn't talking about knowing it's crap before you've seen it. I was talking about knowing it's crap early on but continuing to watch it anyway. Here's the quote from the poster I was responding to:

This movie lost me very early on precisely because of the idiotic characters.

So he knew it was crap early on but continued to watch it anyway. Would you take a bite out of a cake then say, "Ugh. This cake is terrible." but continue to eat it anyway? Would you put on a musician's latest album, think to yourself, "God, this music is awful. I can't stand it." but continue listening to it anyway? The answer is "no" to both questions. Yet the poster I responded to started watching the movie, lost interest in the movie early on, but continued to watch a movie he knew was going to continue to suck. Yet, for some reason, this genius blames Hollywood for making crappy movies as if Hollywood producers forced him to watch the movie at gunpoint. Completely idiotic.

[–] markfilipak 11 years ago

Yeah. I used to be so self-assured...

Now I'm older. And you know what? I'm sometimes surprised that what I initially thought was crap turns out to be enlightening or even inspiring. Growth can be painful, but it's always worthwhile... unless of course it's on the end of your nose.
_____
I don't have a dog. And furthermore, my dog doesn't bite. And furthermore, you provoked him.

[–] davannacarter 11 years ago

Yeah. I used to be so self-assured...

Now I'm older. And you know what? I'm sometimes surprised that what I initially thought was crap turns out to be enlightening or even inspiring. Growth can be painful, but it's always worthwhile... unless of course it's on the end of your nose.

Interestingly enough, as I grow older I have less patience for stupid movies. I could spend my day watching movies that are SyFy channel type stupid or most ridiculously dull boring arthouse films. Nowadays, I don't have patience to sit through junk. Perhaps there's a cynicism that comes from old age after realizing your idealism doesn't work in the real world. And you have to be more responsible and realistic. Otherwise, you'll spend your time chasing after something that won't come true.

I'm not sure what it is. But it's made me lose my patience with stupid movies like I have lost patience with the mindless children's shows I used to watch as a kid. If a movie starts out not satisfying my taste, I am going to watch it 2/5 of the way through before fast forwarding or just cutting it off entirely. I won't watch a movie, find out it sucks from the beginning, keep watching it to the end, and then bitch at Hollywood producers for "forcing" me to watch it. That's beyond stupid.

[–] markfilipak 11 years ago

Well, you haven't given me anything I can find fault in. How about some examples?

For example, consider Closer (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0376541) or The Hours (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0274558). They are both films that had to grow on me. I had to contemplate them to appreciate them. They are both very subtle and very rich "foods".

For a contrary example, consider Pulp Fiction (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110912). Like everyone, I was originally impressed by it, but Vincent coming back to life in what should have been the 3rd act led me to think. When I realized what a cheap trick Tarantino had pulled by simply rearranging the scenes so that the film seemed like time-travel magic without the time traveling, I downgraded it to 7/10 because his tricks pulled me right out of the film. They became a distraction. I don't even bother with Tarantino films anymore.

I don't bother with anything that says "Marvel". I avoid J.J. Abrams, Michael Bay, Uwe Boll, Jan de Bont, Dean Devlin, Roland Emmerich, Mark L. Lester, Dolph Lundgren, Lars Hermann, and Jean-Claude Van Damme, but some of that is just my taste, not anything definitive. And I don't watch TV.

What about you? Do you have some examples of films you initially didn't appreciate, but then came to admire?

Oh, a film that particularly changed as I saw it repeatedly was American Beauty (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0169547). The 1st time I watched it, it was about Lester. The 2nd time I watched it, it was about Lester's relationship with Caroline & Jane. The 3rd time I watched it, and from then on, it has been about Ricky. Ricky's the change agent. Ricky's the American Beauty.
_____
I don't have a dog. And furthermore, my dog doesn't bite. And furthermore, you provoked him.

[–] teal123 11 years ago

Hear, hear, +1.

I hope the people who are going to produce the adaptation of Andy Weir's "The Martian" will have the sense to listen.

[–] laplante-co-672-297856 11 years ago

Totally agree.

Although I liked the premise okay, I commented to my wife that REAL astronauts are buttoned down types who deal with crisis in a straight forward methodical way. They are trained to work as a team.

In THESE movies though, they always lose their sh!t at the first hint of trouble, and quickly turn on each other (except for the inevitable hero). You wonder how this pussies ever made it through training...

[–] polsixe 10 years ago

And then someone makes an Avatar or Star Wars which don't have any of those memes and makes a billion dollars.