Change Your Image
hall41
Reviews
Flowers in the Attic (1987)
Should Easily Be in Bottom 100
How does this film even approach the 5.0 mark? How anyone could consider this picture *above average* or even a neutral viewing experience simply astounds me. I, myself, watched it in its televised entirety, while compelled by what I can now only describe as a state of masochistic curiosity - a need to know how low the craft of cinema can go, and how much I could endure.
I can imagine some of you envisioning this movie as a sort of recreational bad movie that has a sort of hokey fun sense about it. Allow me to emphatically refute that notion: this movie is a negative viewing experience under any conditions and should only be watched by hard-core punishment gluttons. Not only does it feature atrocious acting, pacing, and dialog, but it --for no discernable reason other than the discomfort of the viewer -- (Dare I call them "Spoilers"?) gradually introduces incest into the story, first cruelly hinting at it, then finally confirming it. When you aren't being repulsed by the creepy-but-not-in-a-way-ness, the sheer tedium of the movie drives the you to attempt to engage the story. You wonder "What Would I do in this situation?" forgetting that the situation is a psychotic grandmother imprisoning two able-bodied teenagers, and you would, of course, beat the bejeezus out of the granny, and leave the house and get on with your life. This would've happened, like, day one, thus conveniently eliminating the need for the rest of the movie.
I can honestly say that this movie is in serious contention for -- and this is coming from a MST3K fan who has full knowledge that the following phrase is too often tossed around lightly -- The Worst Movie I've Ever Seen. If you have any clue as to why this movie is liked by anyone, anywhere, I'd be interested in hearing from you.
Alpha Centauri (1999)
A Worthy Follow-Up to CivII
Civilization II ends (for the non-warmongers) with the colonization of a planet in the Alpha Centauri solar system. I remember completing the journey for the first time and being sorely disappointed that I was not able to oversee the colonization of the new world -- instead I got a short cinematic. With the release of Alpha Centauri, civers everywhere finally got the chance to finish the job.
The game is remarkably more complex than its predecessor. Ideological factions take the place of nationality-based civilizations; a myriad of "social engineering" choices are available instead of simplistic governmental options; units are now customizable to an absurd degree; diplomatic tools are more plentiful; the list goes on...
Also superb is the atmosphere generated by the game's numerous snippets of wisdom, cinematics, and back-story. Each new technology and facility acquired is accompanied by a quote from one of several literary works, both real and fictional, or some other appropriate sound byte, usually read convincingly by one of the voice actors who portray the faction leaders.
I can think of only a couple of complaints. The game has a steeper learning curve than do the Civilization games. While this is due in part to the increased complexity of the game, another factor is lack of intuitiveness. With Civilization, it wasn't hard to remember the purpose served by the various units and improvements, because they were all drawn from history. In Alpha Centauri, the game is based in large part on the imagination of its designers, making it more difficult to get the hang of the game's components. But once you play your first several games, you'll be frightened by the number of the game's nuances you are unable to forget.
Another disadvantage of the game's complexity is that the AI isn't particularly adept at finding and exploiting the most powerful strategic configurations. Population Booms, Supply Crawlers, and certain customized units are game-breaking strategies, which are rarely if ever employed by the AI factions and the result is that games are not terribly challenging unless you stack the deck against yourself intentionally. The AI tries to make up for this by being overly aggressive, which detracts from the realism of the game. You have to shake your head when the "Peacekeepers" and "Gaians" (environmentalist faction) start tossing around PlanetBuster ("quasi-nuclear") weapons like cheap firecrackers. However the AI isn't much better at tactical planning than it is at civic planning, so this doesn't increase the difficulty of the game substantially.
This is a very-well-made game that takes a big step towards transforming computer gaming into an art-form. With the retail price of this game down around $15 as of now, you can't go wrong.
Westworld (1973)
For Crichton Die-Hards Only
It is easy to detect the beginnings of both "Jurassic Park" and "Timeline" in this early Crichton effort. But it isn't nearly as entertaining as either of these later titles. In the film, as we learn from a mock commercial in the opening scene, a travel company has constructed three realistic historical environments: Westworld, Medievalworld, and Romanworld. In addition to atmosphere, the parks feature human-like robots which permit the tourists to engage in all the sex & violence they can handle. Of course, while no one is looking, the robots transform into sentient beings and decide to embark on their own murderous rampage.
Unlike many of Crichton's works, Westworld doesn't feature believable scientific mumbo-jumbo. The transcendent robot phenomenon is simply labeled a glitch, and several other features of the park and its robotic inhabitants are counter-intuitive. It seems to drag on a bit, as well. The scenes in Medievalworld seem unnecessary and aren't terribly interesting. The extended "chase" scene at the end also could have done with some editing.
You could certainly do worse, but this isn't a what I would call a sci-fi classic.