Starfire

Well, Solar Crisis really isn't all that bad. It has the look and feel of an "A" movie that didn't quite make it. It's also a little too long for what it has to offer. Ninety minutes as opposed to one hundred fifteen minutes would have given it more movement, and impact. Yet whenever we get the opportunity to see Charlton Heston, Jack Palance, and Peter Boyle in the same film, there is going to be some fun. I like the premise of the film, and much of its execution. Though it never comes together in a compelling package, it is definitely a film that a Sci Fi fan should see at least once. I think the climax is moving, and very well done.

There is a healthy dose of Japanese mindset behind the scenes, that seems to create some differences of perception of what works in science fiction. The Japanese have an intriguing cultural perception of reality, and I love many of their films. But that sagacity does not seem to extend fully into "space" films. I don't think they have never quite exceeded their heritage of gimmicky, "comic book" science fiction movies.

Solar Crisis has excellent actors, sustained suspense,lots of drama, and reasonable action. But it tries to be too much, too broad, and just never quite reaches its goal.

Solar Crisis (1990)

** (out of 4)

Somehow this mix of the sci-fi and disaster genres got a pretty big cast to sign on. Set in 2050, the Earth is about to be burned down due to a giant solar flare from the sun. A group of astronauts must try to drop a bomb of these flares so that they will shoot off in another direction but there are people on Earth who want to stop them for their own wicked plans. Believe it or not, somehow this film managed to get a $55 million dollar budget but then it barely got a theatrical release here in America. Tim Matheson, Charlton Heston, Jack Palance, Peter Boyle and cult favorite Michael Berryman all signed onto appear in this film and I think it's rather funny that the producers would spend so much money and not get much in return. The film isn't nearly as bad as many people make it out to be but it's best one comes into it as a "B" movie and not expecting some sort of "A" level Hollywood film. The movie has a rather confusing plot that at times doesn't make too much sense. I think the biggest problem is that there's probably a lot of stuff from novel that didn't make it into the film. The American version runs six-minutes shorter than the Japanese one and it was disowned by the real director (Richard C. Sarafian) so this has a Alan Smithee credit. Another problem with the film is that the special effects just aren't that believable. This is especially true when it comes to the stuff in outer space but also on Earth when we see what's basically the world in chaos as everyone is waiting for their death. What does keep the film somewhat entertaining are the actor. I've always been a fan of Matheson and he manages to keep one entertained here as the leader of the spaceship. Heston, playing his father, gives that tough guy approach to the character and we get to see him beat up a couple people, which is always good. Palance plays a guy who basically walks around like a bum and once again the actor is so over-the-top that you can't help but enjoy the performance. Boyle doesn't have much to do but it's still nice seeing him. Annabel Schofield is good in her supporting bit. SOLAR CRISIS is a rather weird film because you wonder why a "B" movie has such a high budget but at the same time you realize that the material needed an even higher one to really do the story any justice. I will say that this film shares a lot of similarities with Michael Bay's Armageddon and I do wonder if some of the stuff here was borrowed for it.

The arcs you see coming out from the sun's "surface" are not solar flares. They are called prominences. Prominences may last a day... or a month. A solar flares can extend far into space, and solar storms, a flare combined with a coronal mass ejection can be very dangerous.

Disowned by Richard C. Sarafian, this disaster stunk up Japanese theaters before coming to the States and going immediately to video, where it was not seen again until the Turner networks needed something other than infomercials to fill their 3am-6am time slots and found this tape at the bottom of their bin. The Smithee name is supposed to be used when the studio hacks the movie so badly that the director no longer wants his name attached to it. But I'm afraid that Sarafian can not blame the studio entirely on this one. The actors, mostly recent graduates of "Overacting 101", deliver one cornball line after another. The plot is convoluted. The special effects are unimpressive. The parts that aren't laughable are just plain boring. The script or the book must have been good - why else would Palance, Matheson, Boyle, or Heston agree to appear in this dud? But something went horribly wrong from the page to the screen. Summary: Avoid. Not even bad enough to be so-bad-it's-good.

Alright first off: this is not a great film, it is not even a particularly good film, but I have seen many that were much worse. I am curious as to who the director was who ducked out on this one and turned it over to Alan Smithee (for those not in the know: Alan Smithee is a name that the DGA assigns to films who's directors do not want to admit a connection to for some reason, artistic of otherwise.)

Some of the performances were a little flat, although Jack Palance was as eccentrically off beat as usual. That alone always gives any film a one point boost. Peter Boyle was just as underplayed a villain as usual, not getting his hands dirty. But there was a lot of real tension in the film. In anyone was over the top it was Dorian Harewood, and I suspect that was because of bad direction. I suspect with a better director, budget and script this could have been a much better film. I still enjoyed it though. Just one of my little quirks I guess.