Aug 201996
 
two reels

The Borg travel back in time to assimilate humanity and disrupt Earth’s first warp drive test. The Enterprise follows to stop them, with Picard having Borg flashbacks and the Borg Queen attempting to seduce Data.

Like multiple of the films that came before it, a cast member takes over the director’s chair. This time it is Jonathan Frakes, who knows what to do with a camera. He also knows how to follow studio desires to not do anything too interesting.

A sequel to the two-part Best of Both Worlds Borg-centric TV episode, First Contact is primarily about Patrick Stewart overacting with Post-Borg-Traumatic-Stress syndrome, and Brent Spiner one-upping him as emotional Data being tempted. The first is annoying (really annoying as it goes on and on and on), with Picard throwing a tantrum, demonstrating that no one connected to the film had a firm understanding of psychology or character. The second brings the compensation of Alice Krige as the Borg Queen, which is a whole lot of compensation. The existence of the Borg Queen weakens the concept of the Borg, but less than later Next Gen episodes, and she’s worth it. In a film that flops between meaningless action, faux-tragedy, and weak comedy, she brings much needed sensuality and is a memorable villain, something too often lacking in Star Trek. Still, she has to ballance out silly scenes of Data moaning and pretending he’ll give in when we all know otherwise, and that’s too much to ask of her. (Hint to filmmakers: Do not make your film hinge around the suspense of a character’s temptation when we all know exactly what is going to happen.)

James Cromwell plays a funny drunk, which is amusing if you enjoy watching funny drunks. I could have skipped it, but it is a personal preference.

When it’s done, all is as it was (except for some continuity breaks with the character of Zefram Cochran). First Contact is an above average episode of the TV show. Not as good, or as epic as All Good ThingsYesterday’s EnterpriseQ Who, or its predecessor, Best of Both Worlds, but it’s enjoyable enough to make it to #10 on my list.

My ranking of all Star Trek movies is here.

Jun 201996
 
two reels

Rebirth of Mothra (1996) two reels
Rebirth of Mothra II (1997) one reel
Rebirth of Mothra III (1998) two reels

Three films in which a pair of fairy sisters, Moll and Lora, work to save humanity with the help of children and the goddess moth, Mothra, while their evil sister attempts to do the opposite using various huge monsters.

In Rebirth of Mothra, a middle-manager at a lumber company accidently releases Desghidorah (aka Death-Ghidorah), who will drain the world of energy if not stopped. The good fairies team up with the middle-manager’s wife and children, and of course, Mothra, to stop the monster, while the evil fairy coaches it.

In Rebirth of Mothra II, a pollution monster has returned to destroy the world and is countered by Mothra. The winner of the battle between the giants will be determined by who finds a treasure hidden in a pyramid in the middle of the ocean: the evil fairy and her two thieves or the good fairies, three children, and a furby with healing urine. Yes, that last bit isn’t a typo. A Furbee with healing urine.

In Rebirth of Mothra III, King Ghidora returns to Earth, with very different powers than he had in the Godzilla films. Now he captures children with a form of teleportation, storing them in a dome. Mothra travels back in time to the age of dinosaurs to fight him when he was weaker. In the present, a troubled youth attempts to save Lora, who’s been captured along with the children.

Mothra was the second most popular “monster” in Toho’s stable, and with the Godzilla films going on hiatus, they decided to spin off a trilogy of kids films. With the exception of the original Gojira, the Godzilla films had always had a juvenile quality, but the best were family films that everyone could enjoy. Mothra vs Godzilla is a family film, and a lot of fun. Son of Godzilla is a kid’s film, and is trash. The Rebirth of Mothra Trilogy is strictly for children. There’s nothing here for anyone older than 10. However, for Daikaiju kids films, they are better than average, and a step above the equivalent Godzilla films (i.e. the ‘70s juveniles), and leaps and bounds better than the early Gamera movies. The second falls down, but the first and third are surprisingly moving and should give the kids an enjoyable Saturday afternoon.

The first has a whacky segment early on, and the third spends a too much time dwelling on how hard it is to be a kid, but both play out primarily as earnest daikaiju films. The monstrous threat is very real, as are the emotions. The fights are surprisingly savage, a great deal more intense than in a majority of daikaiju films, and far more than in any of the others pitched at kids. I suspect you might have your own young children hiding behind pillows and getting teary-eyed now and again. By ‘90s daikaiju standards, the puppetry and special effects are pretty good, and by kids flick standards, they’re great.

The second is more of a fluffy children’s adventure tale. Nothing really matters and the kids just run around a maze-like temple for an hour. It might work for young children—I’d put the cut off around kindergarten—but better just to skip it.

That second runs into another problem: the children in the trilogy are annoying and the child actors are underwhelming. But in I and III, the children do very little, and are just around the action to be frightened and put in danger. In II, they are the protagonists, getting lots of screen time and lots of terrible dialog. They are worse than the urinating furby.

The fairies, on the other hand, are cute, with the good ones being played by teenage pop stars, which worked out well since they have multiple songs, all of which are pleasant (Lora was recast for the third when the actress’s career took off). The evil one overacts, but that’s pretty normal for the villainess in a kids movie.

All three movies have strong environmental messages, hammering their points over and over again, with characters repeatedly stating “pollution is bad and we must save nature.” Well, for a small child, perhaps that’s the way your message needs to be delivered. Still, it is another way the films are annoying for adults.

There’s a final problem. The dubbing is terrible. The emotions (or lack of them) do not match what should be coming from the character’s mouths. It kills the drama and the humor, and I take a Reel off of each when dubbed. The Japanese originals are the only way to watch these. Well, that will work if your kids happen to be speak Japanese. Otherwise, I’d be surprised if many seven-year-olds will want to read subtitles. I suppose you could use these as a reading lesson.

Apr 021996
 
three reels

A meteor shower brings the Legion to Earth: large insects along with a single true giant. They build nests, that when complete, launch a pod into space to further spread the species—the launch destroying everything in a six kilometer area. Colonel Watarase is on the case, leading soldiers against the bugs. He’s aided by Midori Honami, a general purpose scientist, and her computer-savvy friend.

Attack of the Legion isn’t really a sequel to Guardian of the Universe, and that’s its biggest flaw. The only returning human characters are Osako and Asagi, and their parts are extended cameos. The new characters are fine by daikaiju standards, but are a let down after the first film. The colonel is a generic, noble, military man. He’s fine, though forgettable. The replacement scientist is more of a problem. After strong-willed Nagamine, we get timid Honami. She hesitates before every sentence. Since she’s another young, hot, female scientist, I’m assuming they couldn’t get the actress from the first film, but didn’t rewrite anything except her name, and in order for the character to be different, they told the new actress to act scared all the time. Whatever the case, a weak woman was not the way to go.

Additionally, Legion has nothing to do with the mythology. Gamera is a gyoas fighter. So why does he show up to fight Legion? Yes, it’s to save the Earth, but that wasn’t his job.

So, as far as the Gamera story goes, this is a detour. But it isn’t a bad one. The FX is a touch better than in the previous film. There’s plenty of giant monster action (though it gets a bit silly at the end with each monster pulling secret powers out of nowhere), and the early stages of the film have some effective horror moments. And since there are lots of “little” monsters as well as the giants, there’s something for the humans to accomplish.

Note: I watch these with the Japanese language track as the dubbing was not done with care, but you can find this film with a second dubbed track, Lake Texarkana, where everyone speaks like rednecks. It’s amusing, though not the one to go to for your first screening.

Oct 111995
 
three reels

A professor (Aidan Quinn) who suffered the tragic loss of his twin sister when a child, is called to an out of the way manor to investigate a haunting.  The house is home to a mentally troubled old woman and three siblings: a beautiful woman (Kate Beckinsale), a controlling older brother (Anthony Andrews), and a wild younger one (Alex Lowe).  It is also home to a secret.

Quick Review: If you like the haunted house sub-genre of horror, then you’ll want to see this; it is a good example of the type.  It follows the standard storyline closely.  Our hero hears bumps and cries in the night, but finds nothing at first.  Slowly, the ghostly activity gets more and more obvious until it becomes deadly.  Then he must figure out what happened years before.  It’s the basic story of all the haunted house films and there is little new here.  There are also better representatives.  Still, it is fun in its predictable way.  Aidan Quinn is stiff and unbelievable as the professor, but the supporting cast is better.  The best of those is Kate Beckinsale.  She sparkles as the free spirited Christina who is attracted to the professor.  She is also beautiful and shows that off in several nude scenes.  Art is about beauty as well as meaning, and Beckinsale’s naked form greatly enhances the beauty of the film.  Add an extra if you are a fan of Ms. Beckinsale’s seductive charms.
Kate Beckinsale has gone on to become the mistress of the horror-action movement, starring in Underworld, Underworld: Evolution and Vanhelsing.

Back to Ghost Stories

Oct 101995
 
one reel

All of the residents of a rural American village black out, waking hours later with ten of the women pregnant. Dr. Alan Chaffee (Christopher Reeve) informs the families that tests show the fetuses are healthy, and Dr. Susan Verner (Kirstie Alley), representing the government, offers them money to have the babies. However, after they are born, it is apparent that there is something seriously wrong with them. They all look alike, act alike, and have the power to control minds.

There are reasons to remake a film: If the first had a brilliant idea but flawed production; Or if social changes have made the original ineffective in getting across an important theme; Or if a new take on the material can create something different. None of these are the case with Village of the Damned. The 1960 version was a well done, little film, staring the always excellent George Sanders, that’s withstood time. It isn’t frightening, but I doubt it was in 1960.

John Carpenter, who so successfully put a new spin on The Thing (actually, he returned to the concept in the short story) brings nothing to Village of the Damned. This is the same old story, lacking the charm, and inappropriately undated to the ’90s. The time switch works against the story as the world isn’t cut off enough any more; the people of Midwich appear less as rural folks and more like bizarre cultists, secluded with their unbalanced priest.

No attempt is made to show the kids sliding into their alien nature, giving some indication of why the “parents” would care for them. Rather, these children are so obviously evil that it’s absurd that the townspeople would live normally with them. Strangely, everyone states that the children have no emotion, including the children themselves. But they are extremely emotional kids, who are constantly in a bad mood and become angry at almost everything.

Shoddy work dots the film. Repeatedly, someone is set to kill a child, and then pauses for no reason, giving enough time for the children to use their mental powers. Dr. Chaffee uses an ocean view as a means of self-hypnosis to defend against mind reading, but switches to a brick wall because that’s what was used in the 1960 movie. Dr. Verner is part of some shady government program, but it doesn’t do anything and is never explained.

Village of the Damned is an unnecessary and ill-conceived adaptation of a superior picture. Skip this and see the original.

 Aliens, Reviews Tagged with:
Oct 091995
 
one reel

Horror film-loving priest, Seamus (Paul Morris), falls in love with Heather (Jennifer Huss), a stripper that works at a club that’s filled with vampires (Jenny Wallace, Amber Newman, Stacey Sparks). As the vampires remove their tops, Seamus must come to grips with his feelings and fears that Heather could become one of the undead.

I’m perfectly happy with the concept of a vampire stripper movie. There are sexy vampires, and they take their cloths off. Hey, that sounds pretty good.

But the funny thing about making a film, is that someone needs to have some skill. Hopefully the director is the one with cinematic training, but at least the key grip knowing his job would help. No one working on Vamps: Deadly Dreamgirls knows how to make a film. I’m not talking about artistic talent; I mean the minimal mechanical skills needed to turn on and off a camera.

Come on guys, if you were going to invest money into making a movie (not that a lot was “invested” here) couldn’t you splurge on a Camera 101 class at the local community college? They might explain that cameras can move, both left and right and up and down. And perhaps they could have pointed out that there are benefits to lighting a scene. Better yet, a local filmmaking collective might have hosted a workshop on sound recording. That would have helped. There, they could have explained that the volume in a film should not rise and fall at random moments, and that muffled sound is a bad thing. Sure, you might expect people to already know that, but the existence of Vamps: Deadly Dreamgirls proves otherwise.

I feel sorry for everyone involved in this film. It displays a lot of heart, but the results are what you’d expect from grammar school kids who decide to put on a show. Well, grammar school kids who like to expose their breasts.  Heart isn’t enough, fellows. Film schools exist. Go find one. The acting is unskilled as well, but if your film is about breasts, the acting can be weak.

It isn’t hard to find films starring breasts, ones where the set doesn’t appear to be six feet wide, and you don’t have to clutch a remote to constantly adjust the volume. Get one of those instead.

 Reviews, Vampires Tagged with:
Oct 091995
 
two reels

Caribbean vampire, Maximillian (Eddie Murphy), travels to New York to find a half vampire woman to be his bride.  The woman, Rita (Angela Bassett), is unaware of her vampire heritage.  She’s a police officer with a partner (Allen Payne) who wants her for himself.  Maximillian, with the help of his new ghoul (Kadeem Hardison) must persuade her to accept him.

I’m sure this looked good to someone in a business office, but anyone with an understanding of film would see the problems before the project began.  Horror that is also funny is difficult.  Add in romance and it approaches impossible.  Wes Craven had shown no ability to integrate the three and Murphy only knew Comedy and romantic comedy.  The script, primarily under the control of Murphy and his brother, demonstrates that the Murphys had seen some old vampire films, but not they they understood how to create frights or avoid clichés.

Little of Craven’s influence works. The empty ship crashing into the dock is an old-time vampire film gimmick and it’s never looked better.  Briefly, I was lulled into thinking I was in for a respectable retelling of the standard vampire story, but only briefly.  A crucifixion is the only other successful horror image.

The humor is uneven. Kadeem Hardison’s decaying zombie is amusing in an embarrassing way, but doesn’t fit into a film with either horror or romance.  It’s broad, slapstick silliness.  John Witherspoon comes off as a 1930s film stereotype and not something I would have expected in a film made outside of KKK control in the ’90s.  Murphy’s extra characters (a thief and a preacher) are feeble even when compared to his dress-up roles in Coming to America. The preacher could have been funny with some additions, but as is, the routine goes nowhere.

What works best is the romance, but only from Murphy’s end.  He makes a surprisingly good, debonair vampire.  As Maximillian is the character we follow, here is where the film could have really succeeded.  Unfortunately, while Murphy’s playing for light flirtation, Angela Bassett thinks she’s in King Lear, flailing about with intensive anguish and anger every time she’s on screen.  Allen Payne, as the third side of the triangle, is also in Lear, but as “Guard Number 2.”  He also intense, but in a way lacking any interest.  Whenever Bassett and Payne are on screen, it feels like I’m watching another film, and it’s not a very good one.  It does, however, contain a lot of shouting.

The Anne Rice school of vampires hadn’t taken over the screen yet in ’95 (Interview with the Vampire had come out only the year before) so Murphy and Craven were still thinking of the vampire as the villain.  They should have known better.  As a romance with Maximillian as the protagonist, this could have been a landmark film.

 Reviews, Vampires Tagged with:
Oct 091995
 
toxic

 A parody of other Dracula films, it tells the same story of Count Dracula (Leslie Nielsen) moving to England, seducing Lucy (Lysette Anthony) and Mina (Amy Yasbeck), and confronting Van Helsing (Mel Brooks) and Jonathan Harker (Steven Weber).

Quick Review: Watching this waste of film stock, it is sad to think that the man who made Blazing Saddles and The Producers is responsible. Just how funny is suggesting that everyone gets an enema? How about watching over and over someone falling down, tripping, hitting his head, or running into a wall? That’s all Dracula: Dead and Loving It has to offer besides many “funny” accents. There is nothing new, exciting, or edgy here. You’ve seen Leslie Nielsen do his routines before in the The Naked Gun, but now he has a cape. Maybe Mel Brooks has nothing more to say, or simply can’t think of a joke. Not everything in his earlier films was funny, but when not funny, at least it was different. Dracula: Dead and Loving It has the same old jokes, done with less skill.

 Reviews, Vampires Tagged with:
Oct 091995
 
two reels

The hook-handed, ghostly Candyman (Tony Todd) is haunting New Orleans and the Tarrant family. He killed Annie Tarrant’s (Kelly Rowan) father and husband, and her brother has been arrested for the crimes. Annie realizes there’s a secret that connects her to the ghost, and sets out to uncover it.

Candyman was a frightening and artistic Slasher/Ghost Story, with original concepts that question the assumptions of society. Candyman 2: Farewell to the Flesh is a sequel. It is less frightening, far less artistic, and reuses some of the ideas from the first while introducing none of its own. It dumps Helen, the intriguing lead who should have been in any sequel and was excellently portrayed by Virginia Madsen, and introduces us to Annie, a slightly-better-than-the-norm Slasher victim, played reasonably well by Kelly Rowan. It brings back Tony Todd, but with little of the intensity he’d previously shown, and gives him plenty of unnecessary dialog to spout. It repeats the score by Philip Glass, which gave the first a transcendent feel, but here sounds tacked on. It isn’t a bad film, but it isn’t anything special either.

The gore is still there.  For anyone who doesn’t enjoy suffering and blood, there are some seriously unpleasant moments before the credits role, topped by the sawing off of a hand. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on your disposition), the frights don’t have the same kind of impact as the violence. Filled with far too many cheap jump scares, we get: “It’s just a cat,” “It’s just a bird,” and three cases of “It’s just a person I didn’t notice walking up behind me.” And of course, there’s the always unnecessary dreams of killings that don’t take place.

It’s best not to watch this soon after the first as the concept and background has changed. The urban-legend-come-to-life has been abandoned in all but name, as has the racial issues except to point out that things were bad when slavery was legal (isn’t that a given?). Nothing about modern prejudices pops up.  Instead, there is only a standard revenge haunting. That Candyman has a slightly different past and reason for existing is easy to ignore, although it does raise questions about the filmmakers: Did they not recall the first film?  Didn’t they like it?

While shot in New Orleans, little is made of the city. Marti Gras is going on, but it might as well have been any Monday. The pointless narration from a DJ may have had some connection to the celebration, but then it might not.  Either way, his dialog doesn’t clarify anything, nor is it amusing.

For a film with a great deal of emotional upset, none of it rings true. Annie’s brother just yells all the time.  Annie’s mother isn’t given a realistic line in the film.  And Annie seems hardly to notice that her husband had a hook shoved through him. I should have been empathizing with them, instead of just watching.

By Ghost Story standards, Candyman 2 is unimpressive, however, most of my complaints vanish if you are looking for a Slasher. There are plenty of killings with tons of blood and a monster who can stand with Jason and Freddy.  It certainly beats picking up a Friday the 13th sequel.

While functional on its own, it’s sad to see so little of what made the first chilling. Candyman is a movie that has stayed with me. I barely remembered this follow-up one a minute after I left my seat.

Oct 091995
 

Four boys, Kyle (voice: Matt Stone), Stan (voice: Trey Parker), Cartman (voice: Trey Parker), and Kenny, are caroling and arguing, when Jesus shows up.  He’s upset with Santa Claus taking the focus off of his birth.  Jesus and Santa start fighting, destroying everything around them, so the boys call upon a really important person, skater Brian Bortono, to solve the problem.  5 min.

This is the first true South Park cartoon, and has something to offend almost everyone.  It is also fall-to-the-floor funny.  Clocking in at just over five minutes, it manages to get an amazing amount done in that time.  There’s blasphemy, social satire, incessant swearing from the mouths of children, decapitation and several other forms of death (again, dealing with children), and a cynical tone.

The Spirit of Christmas is a remake of another film, also called The Spirit of Christmas, that filmmakers Trey Parker and Matt Stone had created three years earlier.  They kept the best jokes from the first, but also made substantial changes, creating a much funnier work.

In 1995, The Spirit of Christmas probably deserved 4s, but times have changed.  Much of its effectiveness came from its ability to shock.  In ’95, you were unlikely to find anything else quite like it (except its hard to find predecessor).  But South Park’s own success as a series has made this material more acceptable, or at least more common.

The series has had multiple Christmas episodes including: Mr. Hankey, the Christmas Poo, Merry Christmas Charlie Manson!, Mr. Hankey’s Christmas Classics, A Very Crappy Christmas, and Woodland Critter Christmas.

Oct 081995
 
three reels

A hard to define nuclear event has caused Godzilla’s internal nuclear “heart” to overheat, and the giant monster will soon explode, destroying Earth’s atmosphere. At the same time, creatures created by the oxygen destroyer that killed the original Godzilla forty years ago have appeared and threaten to lay waste to Japan. The scientific/military organization known as G-Force must eliminate the new creatures, find Godzilla Jr., and stop the explosion before the world is destroyed.

Toho studio, either because they were out of ideas or because they figured there was more money to be made letting Hollywood take over, announced that Godzilla vs. Destroyah would contain the radioactive dinosaur’s death. So, they threw caution, and anything remotely connected to science, to the wind, and made an enjoyable wrap-up for the Heisei series (’84-’95).

The human plots to most Godzilla flicks are weak, and for the Heisei films, almost always a detriment. Godzilla vs. Destroyah remedies that by not having the humans do much of anything. They sit and watch computer screens or they sit and watch monsters battle. They sit a lot. And it really is an improvement over recent entries like Godzilla vs. Space Godzilla. All the people need to do is not detract from the monsters, and except for some whining from Miki, the psychic from the previous five films, that’s pretty much what happens. They are commentators on the giants.

More than any of the others in the long line of sequels, this one takes us back to the 1954 original. There’s a cameo by the lead actress of Gojira/Godzilla, King of the Monsters, and several characters are related to those in the earlier movie. There’s even a photo of Professor Serizawa on a shelf, and the monster Destroyer (“Destroyah” is only used in the title for copyright reasons) is a result of the use of his oxygen destroyer forty years ago. None of this makes a bit of difference to the story, but it’s a nice homage for fans of the first film.

The heart of the movie is the monsters. That’s why the movie exists. And it delivers with a fantastic, ferocious Godzilla, glowing red from his impending meltdown. Godzilla Jr. has been repaired; no longer is he the Pokemon figure from Godzilla vs. Space Godzilla.  Destroyer is a disappointment. In his smaller form(s), he looks like a puppet being pulled across a set. It’s obvious that his legs aren’t supporting him. When he’s the giant, his movement is far too limited, particularly his wings, which aren’t up to the level of ones you could find at a good Halloween shop. Destroyer would have been a nicely designed foe for Godzilla in 1972, but here he suffers from comparison with the starring creature.

The city-smashing and military battles should satisfy any fan.  The new secret weapon (The Super X3), is less powerful than its earlier incarnations in previous films, but also looks a lot more reasonable. I can almost believe in this craft (well, in a universe that includes hundred meter tall dinosaurs, I can believe in it). All of the many beam weapons are as colorful and dramatic as anyone could wish for. Add in a score by Akira Ifukube, that makes everything seem more important than it is, and you end up with one of the better of the all-eye-candy Godzilla films.

But it is only eye candy. There’s lip service given to environmentalism, but like the human relationships, it goes nowhere and means nothing. This is a movie that asks you not to think, and to care only about a couple of oversized lizards. Works for me.

For fans of the Godzilla franchise: Godzilla vs. Destroyah revises and clarifies the canon. Godzilla Jr. is not a member of a vegetarian species similar to Godzilla; he’s of the same species. The time twisting events of Godzilla vs. King Ghidorah, including Godzilla not existing in 1954 and being created instead years later, did not happen. It is also not the case, as implied in Godzilla 1985, that Godzilla survived the oxygen destroyer in ’54. He died, as Gojira/Godzilla, King of the Monsters makes clear.

Oct 081995
 
three reels

Government Scientists, lead by Xavier Fitch (Ben Kingsley), mix human and alien DNA to create Sil (Michelle Williams), an innocent girl they keep in a clear cage. When she escapes, a team (Michael Madsen, Alfred Molina, Forest Whitaker, Marg Helgenberger) is put together to destroy her. That may be difficult as the suddenly mature Sil (Natasha Henstridge) is lethal and will do anything to mate.

Some movies set their sights low (for instance, the entire Slasher sub-genre), a little entertainment via a few base-level sensations is enough. That’s Species, a fast paced, exciting, gore-fest filled with nudity and humor that succeeds due to its limited goal. This isn’t Shakespeare, people; this is a really cute babe taking off her top and then shoving her alien tentacle-tongue through a guy’s skull.

The film’s opening is extremely effective. Grave Xavier Fitch watches as poison canisters are positioned to murder a crying young girl. He say’s he’s sorry, but does nothing else. Now even if you think all children should be gassed, you’re going to be on her side. And when she escapes, it’s an adrenaline rush. Sil gained my sympathy and kept it till the end. She’s captivating any time she’s onscreen, whether as believable Williams or as the sexy Henstridge. Species could have been a brilliant, thought provoking film if it had dealt more with her feelings, needs, and identity, but the filmmakers knew that such films usually fail, so decided to make a lesser, sure-win picture.

While entertaining, does the story make sense? No. The premise is absurd. A bunch of scientists get the DNA of space aliens and decide to mix it with human’s. Why? What would bring them to do that? They could figure out the genome of an artichoke any time they want, yet no lab is making human-artichoke hybrids (Or are they?  Might there be a vegetable woman waiting to break free even now?). Then, fearing this might be the end of mankind, the government only gathers together the lead scientist on the project, an assassin, two “lesser” scientists, and an empath to stop her. Wouldn’t the survival of the species be worth a bit more effort?  And I did write “empath.”  I’m asked not only to believe in Sil, but also in this all-purpose psychic (who behaves like a sit-com sidekick) who’s there whenever the writer can’t figure how to progress the story. Then there is the ending, which contains many sins, including showing far too much of the monster suit/CGI. The makeup and FX are not up to the challenge of translating bio-mechanical artist H.R. Giger’s design for the alien Sil to the screen. While it’s easy to find faults, Species doesn’t fail where it counts most, and since plot and mystery aren’t the main attractions, this is one that’s easy to watch over and over.

Followed by Species II (1998) and Species III (2004).

Back to Mad ScientistsBack to Aliens