Stranded

It's low budget. It's a Spanish sci-fi. The acting can only be described as wooden, especially by Maria Lidon. The science will not hold up to even cursory scrutiny. So why is "Stranded" so interesting? It's original, that's why. There are no sand monsters, in fact there is nothing to do battle with, except the hopelessness of the crew's situation. The underlying logic drives the film, not c.g.i. and that is why the originality. If you enjoy the thrill of discovery, and the deliberate pace is not going to be a problem, then this is a must see. The Martian landscapes are stunning. Even the ending is no cop out, which adds to the realism that has preceded it. - MERK

Yep," Stranded" (2001) is a standard formula crash on mars. They do not attempt to slowly reveal the plot. It is an in-your-face yep someone's gotta go who gets to pick and where do they go story. But you knew this before you bought this movie.

Even though this film is foreign and some of the acting and reading is stilted we're still fascinated with the interaction of the characters and how they are going to get from point A to point Z. The film does not have to be original or professional; all it has to do is hold our attention and show us their version of the well-known story.

The two points that stand out to me are first how Luca Baglioni (Vincent Gallo) wants to spend his dying moments with Jenny Johnson (Maria de Medeiros.) We could've "made book" on that answer. The second which might've been a little drawn out but I enjoyed it anyway was the reference to Barsoom and Barsoom's characters; I half expect John Carter to pop out from behind the rocks.

My experience of this movie was mostly one of regret and longing for what it could, with minor improvements, have been, tempered with respect for what I believe its creators were trying to accomplish – in the words of its own website "…to excite audiences with a story that will seem credible and dramatic…".

To do this, they appear to have made, and succeeded in, and effort to avoid practically every sci-fi action cliché. This movie is essentially documentary in form, distinct from a true documentary in that it describes purely fictional events and people. On one level, this is refreshing, on another, tedious, but on any level, it is not cliché.

To succeed with this approach, however, a film's realism, with all the details that go into it, must be virtually flawless, so that well-science-informed viewers – who are likely to be the only people audience to fully appreciate and enjoy such a film – do not have their suspension of disbelief abused by such impossibilities as space helmets with visible gaps in their supposedly airtight seals, etc. Failure of such critical details effectively ruins the film beyond redemption, even if it succeeds brilliantly in other areas, such as the rendering of a convincing-looking Martian landscape.

Another area it can fail is if some or all of the characters fail to behave according to the well-informed viewers' expectations of how well-trained astronauts – or the viewers themselves - would behave. Though the interaction of the characters in "Stranded" seems genuine and realistic on occasion, it often doesn't, and, upon discovering the incredible, these supposed scientists and adventurers seem devoid of even normal curiosity. The only line of characterization that consistently feels real is the awe they feel at the beauty of the Martian surface and sky, despite the lethality these threaten.

I believe that the right technical consultant could have made this movie a classic on a par with "2001: A Space Odyssey" – while clearly made on a tighter budget, "Stranded" avoids the confusing metaphysical finale that many feels marred "2001". As it stands, I expect this movie will be lost and forgotten in the worlds discount DVD bins with barely a ripple in science fiction fandom. Even with its inevitable movie channel rotation, I will be surprised if it gathers 1,000 votes on IMDb.

These days sci-fi tends to be all about action, gleaming spaceships, and aliens with wrinkly tentacles. No fantasy, no mystery, no bizarre unknown. Action flicks or relationship dramas set in space. That's not my idea of sci-fi.

This film takes its time. We spend a good chunk of the film watching the crew crash-landed on Mars without enough supplies, trying to figure out what to do. It takes a long time before we get to the mystery, and for once, we don't get to see the dwarf behind the curtain. If this were a Hollywood film, all of Stranded would be cut down to about 15 minutes, and the rest of the film would be an action film where the surviving crew are being chased by some lame baddie, maybe a crew member gone mad, or some rusty martian janitorial robot with a few screws loose.

I like the film. Make no mistake, it has a lot of BAD things about it. A few awful casting choices, amateurish directing, and absolutely awful voice-over narration. The first five minutes are so awful you wouldn't believe it. But once the film gets underway, there's enough good to it to let you ignore the bad.

If you like Hollywood sci-fi, don't watch this film because you'll absolutely hate it. But if you like films such as 2001, Solaris, and THX-1138, then you might want to give this film a chance. By no means is it up to the standards of such masterpieces, but it's far more memorable and interesting than any other Mars-flick made in recent years.

I wish there were more science-fiction films like this one being made today.

I can't understand all the negativity towards this flick! Here's a modest little film that doesn't depend on huge special effects and gratuitous action sequences in order to tell a cracking little story, with enough twists and turns to keep an old sci-fi fan like myself guessing until the end.

The premise is certainly nothing we haven't had before (think "Mission to Mars", or "Robinson Crusoe on Mars"), but this particular storyline was dense and well paced, no loose ends, everything for a purpose.

The other aspect of the movie I liked was the atmosphere that it managed to build through, what I think, are all the things that people have criticized it for.

It had a sense of calm, other-worldliness, to which the non-US accents, and at times off-beat delivery by some of the actors contributed. The dialog is more naturalistic than in a big-budget Hollywood action sci-fi flick, and this may be why some people found it "weird".

Some of the dialog was a bit corny, but I think deliberately - a little tip of the hat to earlier tales of that ilk (one of the characters conspicuously starts quoting from "John Carter of Mars" at one point, and we feel we're in an entirely different movie for a moment)

The sedate narration from the main actress, the gorgeous locations shots, and even the interior of the Martian complex with its mysterious technology, all contributed to a dream-like and alien quality invoked by this movie.

Great fun!

Rating - 10 out of 10.