Childhood's End - Die letzte Generation
Originaltitel: Childhood's End
Nachdem friedliche Außerirdische auf die Erde eingedrungen sind, lebt die Menschheit in einer Utopie unter der indirekten Herrschaft der Außerirdischen, aber hat diese Utopie einen hohen Pre... Alles lesenNachdem friedliche Außerirdische auf die Erde eingedrungen sind, lebt die Menschheit in einer Utopie unter der indirekten Herrschaft der Außerirdischen, aber hat diese Utopie einen hohen Preis?Nachdem friedliche Außerirdische auf die Erde eingedrungen sind, lebt die Menschheit in einer Utopie unter der indirekten Herrschaft der Außerirdischen, aber hat diese Utopie einen hohen Preis?
- Auszeichnungen
- 3 Nominierungen insgesamt
Folgen durchsuchen
Empfohlene Bewertungen
I will try very hard not to spoil anyone's enjoyment of the first episode. (Incidentally, the introduction in the Kindle version of Childhood's end -- and probably the latest print edition as well -- includes a major spoiler, which is a criminal act. Should you buy the book, skip the introduction until AFTER you've read the book and/or seen the series.) As other people have said, the premise revolves around some apparently benevolent aliens who invade, declaring an end of war, hunger, climate change, hatred, and the other banes of 21st century society. Most people love the idea, but pockets of opposition rise up from people who feel threatened in one way or another.
The twists and turns in the plot are complex, complicated, and often subtle. The surprise is that the series manages them very well.
The script was quite remarkable, adapting the 60-year-old novel and weaving its complexities more deftly than I had expected. The romantic aspects were largely invented for the series. Like most of Clarke's science fiction contemporaries, 20-something "boys" in the science fiction world were geeks (we called them nerds) who had little understanding and less experience with "girls". Simple ignorance explains why they had so few strong women characters. The film version brings the story into the present and at least attempts to restore the balance.
Many factors worked against this film. The film is visual to some degree, but it is mostly dialog and atmosphere. For some of us, it was an amazing novel that raised some provocative questions and didn't answer them. For me, when I heard that someone was turning the long-loved book into a movie, I reacted with skepticism, uttering my mantra over such things. It would be good or it would be terrible. It was unlikely to fall anywhere in between.
I suspect it was a difficult film to sell to advertisers -- the lifeblood of the industry. There was a lot of mystery and adventure, but little or no pyrotechnics. It might not draw a sufficient audience to justify such ambitious projects. I noticed a large number of house ads and station promos in the breaks instead of paying commercials. To the credit of the producers, writers, and director, they didn't compromise the material to draw a bigger audience. As a result, the story takes time to unfold, and some audience members might not be patient enough to stick it out. But if you want to see a genuine attempt to put a seminal and unconventional novel on the home screen, give this a try. It isn't perfect, but it was well worth the effort -- and it's well worth your time.
The twists and turns in the plot are complex, complicated, and often subtle. The surprise is that the series manages them very well.
The script was quite remarkable, adapting the 60-year-old novel and weaving its complexities more deftly than I had expected. The romantic aspects were largely invented for the series. Like most of Clarke's science fiction contemporaries, 20-something "boys" in the science fiction world were geeks (we called them nerds) who had little understanding and less experience with "girls". Simple ignorance explains why they had so few strong women characters. The film version brings the story into the present and at least attempts to restore the balance.
Many factors worked against this film. The film is visual to some degree, but it is mostly dialog and atmosphere. For some of us, it was an amazing novel that raised some provocative questions and didn't answer them. For me, when I heard that someone was turning the long-loved book into a movie, I reacted with skepticism, uttering my mantra over such things. It would be good or it would be terrible. It was unlikely to fall anywhere in between.
I suspect it was a difficult film to sell to advertisers -- the lifeblood of the industry. There was a lot of mystery and adventure, but little or no pyrotechnics. It might not draw a sufficient audience to justify such ambitious projects. I noticed a large number of house ads and station promos in the breaks instead of paying commercials. To the credit of the producers, writers, and director, they didn't compromise the material to draw a bigger audience. As a result, the story takes time to unfold, and some audience members might not be patient enough to stick it out. But if you want to see a genuine attempt to put a seminal and unconventional novel on the home screen, give this a try. It isn't perfect, but it was well worth the effort -- and it's well worth your time.
Science fiction meets religion meets the universe in an unlikely tale that is Childhoods End.
Based on the work of science fiction writer Arthur C Clarke this mini series melds notions of science and religion in a clever apocalyptic tale of human evolution.
Irrespective of whether you like Clarke's work (I personally find him a little too abstract at times) or not, this is a polished series. The premise is well established and the narrative, for the most part faithfully follows Clarke's imaginings.
I personally found this series oddly touching. It taps into the essence of what it means to be human. To be loved, to be remembered, to exist. The choice of cast is spot on. There are some very good actors who commit their talents to this series.
Is there a downside? This is one of those instances where it really depends who much you like or dislike Clarke's work. Unlike 2001 A Space Odyssey, which bored me to tears, this series kept my attention and held it. Its a very human drama as much as its science fiction.
I give this series an eight out of ten. You can make up your own mind.
Based on the work of science fiction writer Arthur C Clarke this mini series melds notions of science and religion in a clever apocalyptic tale of human evolution.
Irrespective of whether you like Clarke's work (I personally find him a little too abstract at times) or not, this is a polished series. The premise is well established and the narrative, for the most part faithfully follows Clarke's imaginings.
I personally found this series oddly touching. It taps into the essence of what it means to be human. To be loved, to be remembered, to exist. The choice of cast is spot on. There are some very good actors who commit their talents to this series.
Is there a downside? This is one of those instances where it really depends who much you like or dislike Clarke's work. Unlike 2001 A Space Odyssey, which bored me to tears, this series kept my attention and held it. Its a very human drama as much as its science fiction.
I give this series an eight out of ten. You can make up your own mind.
I loved the book back then when I first read it, and still remember how impressed I was. So was looking forward to watching the series.
My overall impression is - it should have been a movie. The first episode works, next two seem a bit dragged out.
Whoever wrote the plot didn't make a good job out of it because everything is patchy and I think for those who are not familiar with the book it may be hard to follow what is going on. Main negative is unnecessary romantic lines that are done just to fill time. And the message the book tries to send get lost somewhere in the process...
At the plus side, cast is great, visual effects are OK, there are many wonderful moments, 'Imagine' sequence is wonderfully done, and soundtrack is good all around. It's obvious filmmakers put a lot of thought in it and it shows.
So overall I recommend to watch it, but probably read the book first. It's better anyway.
My overall impression is - it should have been a movie. The first episode works, next two seem a bit dragged out.
Whoever wrote the plot didn't make a good job out of it because everything is patchy and I think for those who are not familiar with the book it may be hard to follow what is going on. Main negative is unnecessary romantic lines that are done just to fill time. And the message the book tries to send get lost somewhere in the process...
At the plus side, cast is great, visual effects are OK, there are many wonderful moments, 'Imagine' sequence is wonderfully done, and soundtrack is good all around. It's obvious filmmakers put a lot of thought in it and it shows.
So overall I recommend to watch it, but probably read the book first. It's better anyway.
This is a vision of a first encounter. In that the show succeeds brilliantly. If one were only to watch the first episode then one could be quite satisfied. I was. It was foolish of me to want the second episode so soon afterward. The second episode starts meandering into the realms of predictable, that is, all is not what it seems. The third episode does not satisfy. The viewer is left wondering why all sorts of things are happening and it's a huge why all the way to the end. It needed science to back the fiction, to join the dots, and for me, as a lover of science fiction, it fell short.
I think it's an important compliment to the overall canon of science fiction shows out there, after all, it was originally quite a good book. The photography, editing, acting and so forth, including the effects, all are done extremely well. There is a love story as well but we never understand how that is relevant except in a very loose way if one compares the fate of the lovers to the fate of the world. Again, a huge why? In fact fate, as a theme, seems here to be very close to what others would see as plot holes. I understand the higher message the show is aiming for and it's OK as science fiction, but it was cruel to expand what is basically a poetic idea suitable for a paperback into over three hours of visual drama. Two hours with less irrelevant flashbacks and a brave stab at an evolutionary science explanation for that 'why' would have improved everything.
I'm not in agreement with those that say this show didn't follow the book and that is what is missing. I read the book at least forty years ago but it couldn't have been all that bright as I only remembered the initial theme, the arrival.
It's definitely not a rip off, but I think there are lessons here. It's not far off the mark and if the people behind this production move on to another science fiction theme then I certainly will want to see it .
I think it's an important compliment to the overall canon of science fiction shows out there, after all, it was originally quite a good book. The photography, editing, acting and so forth, including the effects, all are done extremely well. There is a love story as well but we never understand how that is relevant except in a very loose way if one compares the fate of the lovers to the fate of the world. Again, a huge why? In fact fate, as a theme, seems here to be very close to what others would see as plot holes. I understand the higher message the show is aiming for and it's OK as science fiction, but it was cruel to expand what is basically a poetic idea suitable for a paperback into over three hours of visual drama. Two hours with less irrelevant flashbacks and a brave stab at an evolutionary science explanation for that 'why' would have improved everything.
I'm not in agreement with those that say this show didn't follow the book and that is what is missing. I read the book at least forty years ago but it couldn't have been all that bright as I only remembered the initial theme, the arrival.
It's definitely not a rip off, but I think there are lessons here. It's not far off the mark and if the people behind this production move on to another science fiction theme then I certainly will want to see it .
I just watched the first episode, and, all I can say is 'Wow'.
First of all, the story is sixty years old. Many of the 'tropes' came from this story, so accusing it of being a blatant ripoff of x, y and z isn't going to work.
Second of all, Syfy made this. I had to double check. Seriously. This combined with "The Expanse" hopefully marks a shift towards good... no, great, content in Syfy's future.
As for the story? Epic, heartwarming, goosebump raising. Think back fifty years to a time of optimism for the future. Put yourself in that mindset, leave your jaded selves at the door and enjoy yourself for a short time.
First of all, the story is sixty years old. Many of the 'tropes' came from this story, so accusing it of being a blatant ripoff of x, y and z isn't going to work.
Second of all, Syfy made this. I had to double check. Seriously. This combined with "The Expanse" hopefully marks a shift towards good... no, great, content in Syfy's future.
As for the story? Epic, heartwarming, goosebump raising. Think back fifty years to a time of optimism for the future. Put yourself in that mindset, leave your jaded selves at the door and enjoy yourself for a short time.
Wusstest du schon
- WissenswertesThe music heard on the Stormgrens' radio is all from the 1950s, the decade when the novel Childhoods End was published.
- VerbindungenFeatured in Story of Science Fiction: Alien Life (2018)
Top-Auswahl
Melde dich zum Bewerten an und greife auf die Watchlist für personalisierte Empfehlungen zu.
Details
- Laufzeit
- 1 Std. 22 Min.(82 min)
- Farbe
- Seitenverhältnis
- 16:9 HD
Zu dieser Seite beitragen
Bearbeitung vorschlagen oder fehlenden Inhalt hinzufügen