Les rescapés du futur

An inferior sequel to ¨Michael Chricton's Westworld¨ sci-fi starred by Richard Benjamin and James Brolin , here two reporters (Peter Fonda and Blythe Danner) enter to the new ¨Futureworld¨ theme park (like a futuristic Disneyland) for adult vacation , a pleasure palace resort called ¨Delos¨ which offers the opportunity to live in several fantasy worlds . It's run by powerful people (Arthur Hill and John P.Ryan) and serviced by lifelike robots that are turning against their creators and planning to take over the world .

The film gets stimulating in parts , action , chilling twists , thriller , suspense and results to be quite entertaining . It's made big scale and lavish budget but in a serial style of the thirties or forties . Climatic pursuit throughout the corridors of Delos is chillingly mounted and the starring is suddenly confronted samurais and robots , including footage shot at a spacial plant where is displayed dazzling and impressive scenarios . Peter Fonda is perfect as an intelligent and dashing journalist who does jokes with his partner Blythe Danner . Special cameo by Yul Brynner in his final film , he is frightening as the cold android gunfighter who inexorably pursues to Blythe Danner although in dreams but he was killed in the previous film . Director Richard T. Heffron has made an entirely believable scenario which creates the whole images seem admirably exciting , being first live-action movie to use computer-generated 3D imagery . A television series followed in 1980 titled ¨Beyond Westworld¨. Rating : 6 . Acceptable and passable .

Westworld was the film that put Michael Crichton well and truly on the map as a writer and sometime director to watch out for. His story of an amazing theme park gone wrong was revisited twenty years later, only with raptors in the place of cowboys. It could have been revisited a lot earlier, had Futureworld been a lazy, hurried sequel to it's successful predecessor. Instead the filmmakers produced something entirely original that stands on its own with no prior knowledge of the first film necessary to the average viewer.

The film begins two years after the disaster at Westworld, with the newly improved theme park Delos ready to open its doors again to the rich and influential public. Peter Fonda however smells a rat, and following a tip-off that all is not well he takes a holiday there himself, with his ex-girlfriend and fellow journalist in tow. Of course it would be a short and uneventful film if he turned out to be wrong, so he doesn't. He's right. In fact, things there are worse than he thought, but I won't give it away here. Suffice it to say that it's not only the robot technology that has improved at Delos.

Futureworld plays on the question that audiences raised following the release of Westworld - can you have sex with these robots? The answer is yes, and whilst we're not shown any (this is a family film after all) both the robots and some of the guests discuss it openly. One even quips "Once you've had sex with a robot, you'll never go back!" If Futureworld was a real place, the implications would be scary indeed.

This film seems to have attracted a lot of negative reviews which surprises me, as I felt it was a well paced science fiction thriller. It was produced by American International Pictures, with Samuel Z. Arkoff at the helm, and as such it is a very slick looking film on a very low budget. It never looks cheap, despite some of the costumes looking a little too theatrical. And why shouldn't they? After all, it's a holiday camp, not a re-enactment society.

I would recommend Futureworld to anyone who is a fan of Westworld, or of seventies science fiction in general. I would imagine if you're reading this you probably fit into the latter category!

In this infamously unnecessary (and inferior) sequel to "Westworld", Fonda and Danner play hotshot reporters invited to Delos, a fantastic (and fantastically expensive) amusement park. They are brought there, ostensibly, to relay to the public the vast changes made to the park since an unfortunate mishap a few years earlier (in which 50 people were killed!) In actuality, Fonda is there to look into the murder of a man who warned him about evil doings there, but there's still another reason that the duo was invited. The executives of the park have them in mind as part of a bigger master plan! The park is actually made up of four "worlds" with another one in the works. The reporters go to Futureworld where they are promised such exciting activities as skiing the Martian slopes (which turns out to be regular snow shot through a red gel) and riding an asteroid (?! How exactly would one do that and how could it be considered remotely entertaining?) There are a few neat gimmicky treats at Futureworld such as a chess game with holographic pieces that really move and actually take each other out of the game violently and a boxing game in which glove-like handles control the arms of two real-looking pugilists in satin shorts. However, Fonda and Danner aren't really there long enough to enjoy much more of it (and only fleeting - and boring - shots are ever shown of the other worlds.) The reporters wind up staying in a sort of dormitory, sneaking out and around whenever possible to find the real story behind the place. On one guided tour, Danner is induced into having a dream which can then be presented in video format. This is the low point of the film (or high point if one is a camp lover!) as Danner drifts around in chiffon and fake hair while Brynner (a memorable villain in the first film) pursues her all over the place. Eventually, he wards off other attackers and does a tacky, fog-shrouded dance with her and kisses her. Wow..... This is all there is to his appearance! What a rip off. Almost from the start, the film is mindless and tedious, but as it goes along, it gets more and more illogical. Just one of the many nagging questions is this: WHY, in a place where every single thing is monitored continually, are Fonda and Danner able to skulk around in highly restricted areas, flipping on lights and making noise THROUGHOUT the movie? It's ridiculous. There are two fairly decent supporting performances from Hill as an administrator and Margolin as a helpful repairman. Most of the other acting is abysmal. The leads are out of their element and share very limited chemistry. It matters little anyway because the film is so wrong-headed 90% of the time. Even though this cost more than "Westworld", it looks cheaper, with cruddy lighting, unimaginative direction and the space costuming being a particularly glaring miscalculation. Also, any potential surprise about the nature of Delos is completely spoiled during the opening credits. Skip it.

Years after the failure of Westworld, the same company have regrouped and are planning to open the same theme park again but improved and totally safe. Chuck Browning, the journalist who originally broke the Westworld story, is approached by a mysterious man who has information on this new park – but he is killed before he can tell his story. Looking for dirt under the surface, Browning and colleague Ballard join the elite group selected for the opening few days at the park and begin to investigate a world where nothing is what it seems – nothing.

Having enjoyed the Jurassic Park rehearsal that was Westworld, I tuned in to this sequel hoping for, at very least, more of same stuff with a clever new slant on it. In defence of the film it does try to do something with the plot and widens it out into a bigger, potentially better conspiracy story but for some reason it fails to really engage. The first half of the film drags like a chain smoker and it seems happy to just bang out sequences that we are supposed to go 'wow' at simply because they involve special effects or robots. This is a terrible first hour because the special effects at best are superimposed men painted red and green to look like holographic chess pieces and, at worst a laughable moment where people sky down the red dust on Mars – on rather, they ski down a normal mountain but the whole scene is shot through a red filter! That is not a special effect and even in 1976 I doubt that these 'effects' were enough to stop audiences from getting bored in the first half of the movie.

The second half is a marked improvement but, by then, a lot of damage had been done and a flurry of action and conspiracy was not quite enough to make it a good film. It does have some good scenes but, ironically enough, these feature between the duplicated characters rather than being the effect shots that the producers were clearly banking on being the business side of the film. However, the extent of the threat is never translated to the film and the ending is terrible – far too muted to have even the faintest relation to the plot we were being sold just a few minutes before. The film only once or twice has even vague tension and certainly nowhere near the degree that the plot demanded.

The cast are also hamstrung by the material. Fonda looks bemused the whole time and it looks likely that nobody told him what was happening in the film – he certainly doesn't look like a man who has just uncovered an evil conspiracy! Danner is also as shapeless and dipsy and she didn't make me care one bit about her. The support cast try hard to look 'evil' and 'conspiratorial' but really they are not given the tools to do the job and just end up scowling! A cameo from Yul Brynner just seems to be totally pointless and resulting in his entire scene just being stupid.

Overall this is a very poor sequel. It tries to repeat the formula from the first film while opening it out into its own plot but it fails in a big way.

The first hour is empty, unspectacular that was meant to be spectacle but wasn't and a second half that has a potentially good plot which is just wasted by a delivery that is so lacking in excitement and tension that you'd think there was no conspiracy or danger whatsoever! Stick to the original.

As "Futureworld" opens, the Delos Corporation is determined to make up for all of the bad publicity they received when the robots of their Westworld environment malfunctioned. They invite several dignitaries, as well as reporters Chuck (Peter Fonda) and Tracy (Blythe Danner), convinced that they've eliminated the bugs in their program. Well, Chuck is suspicious from the start, even more so when he makes contact with a former Delos employee who wanted to spill some vital information. So when he arrives at Delos's vacation resort, he does a lot of snooping around before finding out that there's a nefarious plan being hatched by resort employees. As one can see from this synopsis, this sequel is more in the conspiracy thriller vein than the action movie vein. The summary in the Leonard Maltin paperback is quite accurate when it says "short on action, but intelligently done". It's an interesting plot, to be sure, not developing in the way one might expect it to. The pacing is deliberate, and things never really build to a fever pitch, which could disappoint those viewers hoping for a more exciting experience. It also reduces the memorable character of the robot Gunslinger (Yul Brynner briefly reprises the role) to an afterthought; it's truly disappointing to see it reduced to starring in a dream sequence. Still, this is pretty entertaining stuff that benefits from very good performances. Fonda and Danner are both appealing as always, generating some good chemistry. (One amusing touch is having Chuck always address Tracy as "Socks"!) The excellent supporting cast includes Arthur Hill as Delos employee Duffy, John P. Ryan as stiff and humourless scientist Dr. Schneider, Jim Antonio as upbeat guest Ron Thurlow, and the highly engaging Stuart Margolin as blue collar worker Harry, with bit parts played by the likes of Robert Cornthwaite, Darrell Larson, John Fujioka, and 'Password' host Allen Ludden. The film also has a good look going for it thanks to art director Trevor Williams and cinematographers Gene Polito and Howard Schwartz; the rousing music is courtesy of Fred Karlin. All in all, "Futureworld" isn't going to appeal to people who love a fast pace and major set pieces, but those looking for a more low key sci-fi flick just might want to give it a look. Seven out of 10.