VALUTAZIONE IMDb
5,1/10
11.167
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Due amanti sono di stanza in una base spaziale remota su una delle lune di Saturno, quando dalla Terra vengono inviati un tecnocrate e la sua creazione: un maligno robot di due metri e mezzo... Leggi tuttoDue amanti sono di stanza in una base spaziale remota su una delle lune di Saturno, quando dalla Terra vengono inviati un tecnocrate e la sua creazione: un maligno robot di due metri e mezzo.Due amanti sono di stanza in una base spaziale remota su una delle lune di Saturno, quando dalla Terra vengono inviati un tecnocrate e la sua creazione: un maligno robot di due metri e mezzo.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
- Premi
- 5 candidature totali
Roy Dotrice
- Benson
- (voce)
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Stephanie English
- Technician
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Jill Goldston
- Small Brunette Woman on World Spaceways Ship
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Vera Goulet
- Technician
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Douglas Lambert
- Captain James
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Christopher Muncke
- 2nd Crewman
- (non citato nei titoli originali)
Recensioni in evidenza
The talent working on this film should have meant the end product was a lot more coherent than it actually was.John Barry who was involved with a story credit but was production designer for Star Wars and Superman must have had a big hand in the set design for this film as it looks incredible.The sets are so good they are a character in themselves and lend effectively to creating a sense of isolation.The sets remind me of Alien,yes they are that good which would be testament to the brilliance of Barry.Its a shame then that the rest of the film is rarther poor.It shows glimpses of promise but seems to falter just as its picking up.An expressionless Harvey Kietel seems dubbed and gave a physically hollow performance alongside an energetic Kirk Douglas and an airhead Farrah Fawcett.The visual effects are actually OK but the film seems to be missing big chunks and i get the feeling there's a version out there on the cutting room floor that is actually a lot better than what we have here.This film could probably be remade quite successfully,it has a great premise and is lacking a quality director to see it through. 6/10
A lot of people bag on this film and I'm the first to admit that it is not a good film but I would be lying if I said I wasn't entertained by certain things in it. I was entertained by the incredibly bad set designs. Here's a film with a good budget, big stars and directed by the great Stanley Donen and it looks like it was filmed in someone's garage! And of course Farrah gets naked. Thank god for VHS and the pause button! If your wondering why Farrah was a sex symbol in the 70's freeze the scene where she takes her clothes off. And Keitel was creepy and his voice sounded different. Maybe it was dubbed but he gave a convincing menacing performance. Not a good film but the story had promise.
Right. Saturn 3 is one of those films that always seems to divide reviewers into the two old and trustworthy camps: "what a great picture" and "who the heck let this pile of manure be made?" And then, it has the ability to have a solid middle ground; the "nyah...not bad..." crowd. I have to say that I fall into this latter group. I first saw Saturn 3 when I was a teenager and was gripped by it. I remember thinking how cool Hector looked and the fact that he was also downright creepy. In the years before seeing The Terminator Hector, for me, was the archetypal maniac machine that will stop at nothing to kill you in a (probably) gruesome way. Okay, the film's saving graces: the overall design of the sets and costumes. Ignoring the rather bleak look of the corridors, the Saturn 3 station has that feeling of being futuristic but also familiar in a Holiday Inn-sort of way, and the launching area at the film's beginning, with that great big flaming hole image effectively acting as a rather cool backdrop. Benson's (and also James') space suits are very nicely done. They give off the distinct air of practicality, like a hyper-modern air force pressure suit, and also a sense of impersonality about them which becomes menacing with the addition of the dark face plated helmets. Adam and Alex's work-out gear, however, is very dated and it's also quite excruciating to watch their exercise routine. The ships aren't Star Wars Star Destroyers, but then they're not meant to be. The way I look at it, they were designed to look slightly other worldly and also practical. Benson's pod that he flies to Saturn 3 looks entirely functional and although it appears rather clunky and distinctly un-aerodynamic, it's worth remembering that in space there isn't any wind resistance so sleek lines aren't necessary. Unfortunately, because this was a full-sized prop for the actors to interact with the other ships do look like the models they are. Hector is a piece of design excellence. For a start, the actual costume is made from metal, instantly rendering the appearance of a real robot. The actual laboured gait and measured way of moving employed by the actor playing Hector (probably due to the considerable weight of the suit) is instrumental in convincing the viewer of his cybernetic credentials. What helps is that we see Hector being constructed and that can block out any ideas of the "man in a suit" mold, particularly in regards to the insertion of the brain tissue into (effectively) the torso of the costume. Finally, Harvey Keitel. His performance in this film is derided by many as being too over the top and hammy but I think that he actually saw the script for what it really was - eighty-odd minutes of comic-book fun. He had a ball with the Benson character and it's quite obvious that he knew he wasn't asked to do Shakespeare and play it straight. Kirk Douglas and Farrah Fawcett are a let down to be sure. It's evident that Kirk's entering his dotage and the idea of him being an action hero and hot stud when he's the same age as most of the audience's grandfathers is frankly ludicrous. And showing your sagging butt, Kirk? Should've kept those training suit bottoms on. Farrah does play Alex well when she's there to look good, but any semblance of the idea that she's a research scientist just doesn't compute. The film in itself is a bit of a hit and miss affair. It aims to be a sophisticated sci-fi thriller like Alien but the casting of Douglas and Fawcett certainly taint any idea of it being classed as a thriller. The music (what there is of it) is original, the direction so-so and the overall concept is there, but it fails to it the target spot on. An enjoyable piece of hokum to pass the time would be a fair review.
Two lovers stationed on a remote moon base of Saturn are intruded upon by a murderous man and his malevolent 8-ft robot.
Its production issues, changing of directors (one of which was the late great John Barry) and budget cuts aside for a film that was made in 1980 it feels like late 60s/70s. That said, the sets that take a leaf from Alien (1979) are partially effective and the blue ominous lighting works but is sadly used sparingly.
The late Farrah Fawcett is still a major draw and although there's a cringe worthy age gap between leads it is fitting to the narratives themes. Acting legend Kirk Douglas is a little inconsistent and not on form possibly due to the script or production woes. Harvey Keitel has been unconventionally re-dubbed which is a shame, but he still is effective as the homicidal sociopath, off beat, boorish Earth Captain Benson. Although choppy, there's some great setups with the interestingly designed Hector robot and Elmer Bernstein's score if fantastic.
It's not purposely ambiguous, but it leaves many questions and loose ends. It's by no means the worst science-fiction movie, John Barry's story offers some great ideas and has clearly influenced subsequent scifi's notably the Matrix (1999) plug-in.
It's flawed and inconsistent but still worth viewing for the concept alone.
Its production issues, changing of directors (one of which was the late great John Barry) and budget cuts aside for a film that was made in 1980 it feels like late 60s/70s. That said, the sets that take a leaf from Alien (1979) are partially effective and the blue ominous lighting works but is sadly used sparingly.
The late Farrah Fawcett is still a major draw and although there's a cringe worthy age gap between leads it is fitting to the narratives themes. Acting legend Kirk Douglas is a little inconsistent and not on form possibly due to the script or production woes. Harvey Keitel has been unconventionally re-dubbed which is a shame, but he still is effective as the homicidal sociopath, off beat, boorish Earth Captain Benson. Although choppy, there's some great setups with the interestingly designed Hector robot and Elmer Bernstein's score if fantastic.
It's not purposely ambiguous, but it leaves many questions and loose ends. It's by no means the worst science-fiction movie, John Barry's story offers some great ideas and has clearly influenced subsequent scifi's notably the Matrix (1999) plug-in.
It's flawed and inconsistent but still worth viewing for the concept alone.
Would-be foreboding sci-fi looks all shiny and new, like a futuristic department store. Three good actors (Farrah Fawcett, Kirk Douglas and Harvey Keitel) come off looking like incompetent dummies in this derivative, cardboard cartoon. When Keitel arrives at the space station of lovers Douglas and Fawcett, he is carrying a strange metal container. Douglas offers to carry it for him and Keitel answers, "NOOOOOOOO!" in a hilariously chilly manner that makes even Richard Burton's overacting seem tame by comparison. Poor Kirk and Farrah even strip down for this one (so much for the classy reputation of vet director Stanley Donen). There is a neat scene where robotic Hector takes a splinter from Farrah's eye, but her reaction afterward (rubbing it like a child and sticking her bottom lip out) is embarrassing. This is one step beyond, all right. It's so far out it's brain-dead. *1/2 from ****
Lo sapevi?
- QuizOriginal director John Barry had made his name as a set designer, and had been acclaimed for his work on Guerre stellari (1977) and Superman (1978). After he was removed from this movie, he was working as a second unit director on L'Impero colpisce ancora (1980) when he collapsed on-set and died of meningitis.
- BlooperWhen Adam jumps into the wastewater with Hector, it is clearly a stuntman wearing a bad wig.
- Versioni alternativeA scene of Adam and Alex taking a recreational blues pill was cut from the original UK cinema version in order for the film to receive an 'A' (PG) certificate. The scene was restored for the later 15-rated video version.
- Colonne sonore33 1/3
Written by Stomu Yamashta
Performed by Stomu Yamashta
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Saturn 3?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paesi di origine
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Saturno 3
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Shepperton Studios, Shepperton, Surrey, Inghilterra, Regno Unito(made at Shepperton Studio Centre, Shepperton, Middlesex, England)
- Aziende produttrici
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 10.000.000 £ (previsto)
- Lordo Stati Uniti e Canada
- 9.000.000 USD
- Lordo in tutto il mondo
- 9.000.000 USD
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 28 minuti
- Colore
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti