A for Andromeda

A For Andromedia has a great story and good script, it is a work of intelligent science fiction. Science Fiction fans will have no problem getting through this work. The movie itself suffers for its low budget. The story needed to be projected forward in time. It's premise is on much safer ground in today's computing world than 2006, and would be even safer years from now. The movie needed a budget that reflected that. It comes across as a sort of play (or at least it did for me) which required my imagination and understanding to make it work. Face it, it's an intriguing idea for a movie. Working really hard are the cast, which is appreciated. One also has to appreciate the BBC, whom in this project, put their faith in cerebral sci fi. It certainly works, but could have had a better visual dimension, and if this story ever does, I'll certainly sign up for the reboot.

** Contains minor spoiler**

Despite being a remake of the 1960s BBC series, this comes across as an uninspired cross between Contact and Species. It is filmed using the typical cheap BBC Sci-Fi manner i.e. dull, grey, overcast and in a quarry. They spend the budget on the one "special effect", which is, of course, destroyed at the end. The story is unconvincing and the basic science is badly flawed (real time communication to Andromeda anyone?)

It tries to pad out a thin story line with the addition of a few extraneous few subplots, namely a love triangle, some espionage and the oh so stereotypical "government subverting science for evil" thing. Even Jane Asher can't drag this up from being a long, slow, and predictable hour and a half.

Its wonderful creative work under minimal budget, i don't think most of the people will understand and like it. Some of us will love it who good imagination =)

'A FOR ANDROMEDA is an example of what could be called conceptual science fiction', says producer Alison Willett in the 'extras' of the DVD of this film. She hoped the BBC would commission more of that, but it did not. They declined for instance to remake the sequel. This film was made in ten days on a low budget, but the result overcame those limitations. The casting was inspired. Jane Asher was superb as the woman professor, perfectly underplaying the role to make it more effective. And the irresistible Kelly Reilly plays both the young mathematician and her double, the space girl Andromeda. She has a way of mesmerising viewers, which was just what was needed. I have read some of the other reviews of this film and was shocked that some of them seem to have been so disappointed to see a thinker's rather than a thrill-seeker's sci fi movie. There are no exploding cars, machine guns, colliding stars, grey aliens, or terrifying ogres in this film, not even a single spaceship. When the initial TV series of this story was broadcast in 1961 (see my review), it caused a nationwide sensation in the UK. The astronomer and astrophysicist Sir Fred Hoyle's concept of a radio signal from another galaxy transmitting a code for the creation of an alien being blew the collective minds of the public. The usual BBC idiots wiped most of that series and only one whole episode, part of the final episode, and a few scattered fragments survived; a book of the story followed. The next year the sequel story was transmitted as ANDROMEDA BEAKTHROUGH (1962, see my review, as this series does survive in its entirety), and the book of that followed in 1965. The first series introduced the beautiful Julie Christie as the alien girl Andromeda; she did not yet know how to act, but everyone was dazzled by her looks. She was unavailable for the sequel, so the girl alien was played by Susan Hampshire. (I got to know her in the following year but she never once mentioned her recent adventure as a space creature.) To return to the newer film, another key ingredient was the well-measured and low key performance by Tom Hardy as the brilliant young scientist, who is the only one who can work the computer built according to the specifications of the signal. The film was excellently directed by John Strickland. The film is also a love story. And of course there is also some spying, an irate general, and an underground bunker. It all works, whatever some soreheads may claim. I knew Fred Hoyle pretty well. He shook the world up with his first science fiction novel, THE BLACK CLOUD (1957), which has suddenly become more relevant again in a surprising way. It needs to be pointed out that many of the aspects of A FOR ANDROMEDA have also become surprisingly relevant at the moment. I have no space to elaborate on this. But it all goes to show that Fred was decades ahead of his time in just about everything. And, by the way, there was no Big Bang. Fred was right about that too. The time is coming when everyone will be forced to admit it, no matter how much of a blow to their pride it may be to do so. Geniuses like Fred do not come along often enough.

I don't remember the original, so the plot was all new to me. It may have looked like it was derivative of other stories, but that all depends on which one came first.

Unlike more modern programmes that have 2 - 3 stories running in them this one was an old fashioned Sci Fi story from the golden age of Sci Fi when the PC was nowt but Sci Fi itself, and Aliens were all bad guys, so the Beeb had to try and Jazz it up a bit with the addition of a spy sub plot, but hey it didn't really detract from the story too much.

If you like your Sci Fi old school then this is for you, but if you want multi layered complex story lines move on.

The truth of the matter is that the acting was brilliant, and in particular the beautiful Miss Reilly kept this old sci fi buff watching through to the end. Well worth the watch. 10 out of 10 for Miss Reilly(she is a stunner).