urgrue-2
A rejoint le févr. 1999
Bienvenue sur nouveau profil
Nos mises à jour sont toujours en cours de développement. Bien que la version précédente de le profil ne soit plus accessible, nous travaillons activement à des améliorations, et certaines fonctionnalités manquantes seront bientôt de retour ! Restez à l'écoute de leur retour. En attendant, l’analyse des évaluations est toujours disponible sur nos applications iOS et Android, qui se trouvent sur la page de profil. Pour consulter la répartition de vos évaluations par année et par genre, veuillez consulter notre nouveau Guide d'aide.
Badges2
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d'aide sur les badges.
Avis4
Note de urgrue-2
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.
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.
how can anyone not love this film? this movie goes so beyond bad it puts ed wood to shame. to think dozens of people actually put time and effort into this film, and even got paid for their "efforts," is just mind-blowing. forget camp, forget rocky horror picture show, steven segal, look who's talking too, just forget every bad film you ever saw. if you want to cry and laugh until you die convulsing on the floor, watch this film. has more cheese than the moon, worse editing and effects than 'liquid sky', more gratuitous skimpy outfits than a britney spears video, 'the silencer' is just wall-to-wall cringers.