AVALIAÇÃO DA IMDb
4,3/10
10 mil
SUA AVALIAÇÃO
Após uma missão falhada a Marte, Arti é agora utilizada para a missão de 2036 com alguns supervisores humanos. Encontra-se aí um monólito de origem desconhecida. Terá um grande efeito na Ter... Ler tudoApós uma missão falhada a Marte, Arti é agora utilizada para a missão de 2036 com alguns supervisores humanos. Encontra-se aí um monólito de origem desconhecida. Terá um grande efeito na Terra.Após uma missão falhada a Marte, Arti é agora utilizada para a missão de 2036 com alguns supervisores humanos. Encontra-se aí um monólito de origem desconhecida. Terá um grande efeito na Terra.
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Artistas
Steven Cree
- ARTi
- (narração)
David K.S. Tse
- Jian Lin
- (narração)
- (as David Tse)
Jud Charlton
- ARTi stand-in
- (narração)
Noush Skaugen
- Jill Valentine
- (narração)
Joe David Walters
- Jake Wilson
- (narração)
- …
- Direção
- Roteiristas
- Elenco e equipe completos
- Produção, bilheteria e muito mais no IMDbPro
Avaliações em destaque
What writer and director in 2017 would think it's a grand idea to resurrect the worst of so-called "science fiction" from the Seventies and Eighties, including the mind-numbing kaleidoscopic effects that were stand-ins for actual special effects?
There is no science on display here, though it is certainly fictional. Fiction without science is just fantasy. Exploitation of a few trendy buzzwords and concepts from STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) does not make it scientific. There is neither any deep thinking. The plot and concepts are incoherent, like the hallucinogenic "trip" of a career drug addict. The writer apparently had an extended trip himself and began to imagine himself as a philosophical genius who had wisdom to impart to the rest of us?
He isn't and he didn't.
There is no science on display here, though it is certainly fictional. Fiction without science is just fantasy. Exploitation of a few trendy buzzwords and concepts from STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics) does not make it scientific. There is neither any deep thinking. The plot and concepts are incoherent, like the hallucinogenic "trip" of a career drug addict. The writer apparently had an extended trip himself and began to imagine himself as a philosophical genius who had wisdom to impart to the rest of us?
He isn't and he didn't.
This movie, while certainly not the worst movie I've seen, plays more a good SiFi channel movie then a netflix original. I suppose my biggest issue is that this movie doesn't bring anything new to the table despite being incapable of staying on topic. It grabs at every sci fi concept out there (space flight, AI, aliens, future tech, etc) but it feels like it just takes from existing media rather than contributing.the CGI shifts quickly from good to terrible. Overall, not a great movie
So Starbuck goes into the mission control room and starts to engage with Hal who is operating the Mars lander. A minute passes. Then another minute and before long another minute has passed. Hal and Starbuck converse and try to solve the issues as another minute passes. 94 minutes later. ..roll credits
This wasn't very good.
Movies about AI always want to be thought-provoking, and at the same time they always reinvent the same wheels over and over. This movie is no different.
If this had been made in the 80's, it would probably be considered a much better movie. But this is 2018 and you really have to bring something better to the table, especially if you want to preach a certain message.
I'm guessing there was a clear lack of budget, because apart from the CGI quality that ranges from barely passable to outright terrible, they had to invent some "science" and background to the story to justify the lack of actors and sets; the movie takes place in one room, and it's 90% Katee Sackhoff you see on screen.
This is not necessarily a bad thing, because with a great script and a great actor you can really create something wonderful (and CGI be damned). But the script overall is just so poor and Katee Sackhoff, who manages to pull off a decent performance (but no more than that), simply can't carry something like this and just drowns in the bad dialogue and overall story that unfolds around her in a largely illogical and mostly very unoriginal manner.
The pacing overall is slow, but not too slow for me personally, and nearing the end it does try to offer some sort of resolvement, with a little twist. If the movie itself had been better up to that point, I probably could have appreciated that effort a bit more. It also didn't help that most of the bigger questions are actually never answered and that the last 15 or so minutes were apparently filmed through a kaleidoscope.
All in all, not an unlikeable movie, but it's just not good at all. 4,5/10, rounding it up to a generous 5.
Movies about AI always want to be thought-provoking, and at the same time they always reinvent the same wheels over and over. This movie is no different.
If this had been made in the 80's, it would probably be considered a much better movie. But this is 2018 and you really have to bring something better to the table, especially if you want to preach a certain message.
I'm guessing there was a clear lack of budget, because apart from the CGI quality that ranges from barely passable to outright terrible, they had to invent some "science" and background to the story to justify the lack of actors and sets; the movie takes place in one room, and it's 90% Katee Sackhoff you see on screen.
This is not necessarily a bad thing, because with a great script and a great actor you can really create something wonderful (and CGI be damned). But the script overall is just so poor and Katee Sackhoff, who manages to pull off a decent performance (but no more than that), simply can't carry something like this and just drowns in the bad dialogue and overall story that unfolds around her in a largely illogical and mostly very unoriginal manner.
The pacing overall is slow, but not too slow for me personally, and nearing the end it does try to offer some sort of resolvement, with a little twist. If the movie itself had been better up to that point, I probably could have appreciated that effort a bit more. It also didn't help that most of the bigger questions are actually never answered and that the last 15 or so minutes were apparently filmed through a kaleidoscope.
All in all, not an unlikeable movie, but it's just not good at all. 4,5/10, rounding it up to a generous 5.
... if you understand that SciFi doesn't need to be about exploding space ships and exotic aliens. I like how the "think about..." SciFi came back in the last few years with movies like Arrival. This is similar in setting. Everything plays out in the command center of an exploration mission. It starts out a bit boring, but after the discovery on Mars I got hooked. Then in the end it got all messy. The computer does something pretty much unexpected and inconsistent with its previous behavior (like ONE minute before), after that we get an ending which seems to try to mimic the ending of 2001 with a little bit of Contact spliced in, but in a way that seems like the writer thought "It has to be hard to understand for the audience. What better way to achieve this is there than writing an end I myself won't understand?" The ending of 2001 is easy to comprehend in comparison.
Você sabia?
- CuriosidadesShot in about 9 days.
- Erros de gravaçãoAt the beginning of the movie, when 'Martian 1' is approaching Mars, they are talking with Earth and getting responses in REAL-TIME ... several years BEFORE the Hyperlight Communication system was invented. The SHORTEST communication time with Mars is a bit over 3 minutes each way (give or take) at its' closest approach, and up to 40 minutes at its' farthest (when we couldn't communicate anyway as the Sun would directly between us).
This is time compression. Everybody is aware of the time gap but few people would sit still for a movie with ten or so minutes between queries and responses.
- Citações
Mackenzie 'Mack' Wilson: You may not be able to override, but I can... I got hands.
- ConexõesReferences Star Wars: Episódio IV - Uma Nova Esperança (1977)
Principais escolhas
Faça login para avaliar e ver a lista de recomendações personalizadas
- How long is 2036 Origin Unknown?Fornecido pela Alexa
Detalhes
- Data de lançamento
- País de origem
- Idioma
- Também conhecido como
- 2036 Kökeni Bilinmeyen
- Locações de filme
- Empresas de produção
- Consulte mais créditos da empresa na IMDbPro
- Tempo de duração
- 1 h 34 min(94 min)
- Cor
- Proporção
- 2.35 : 1
Contribua para esta página
Sugerir uma alteração ou adicionar conteúdo ausente