Hardware

This is a very cool little sci-fi flick. OK, it's no Aliens, but it has a lot of really interesting things happening. First off it has a slick look, filmed very well by first time director/writer Richard Stanley, a lot of strobes and brilliant colour give it a perfect setting for the `robot goes crazy' plot. I also liked the post-apocalyptic landscape, which I think worked well along with Iggy Pop's narration as `Angry Bob'. It takes a little while to build, but the ending packs a decent punch, along with just enough gratuitous violence to keep me happy. There are also plenty of religious references and imagery to look for, all centering around the `MARK 13 Cyborg.' So, if you like sci-fi, I think you should give this movie a try, it's a pretty cool ride with some very cool imagery.

If ever you want an example of a very 1980s movie, with soaring Pink Floyd imitation guitars, then make a note of Hardware. Hardware is actually, even at this early age, part of a robot tradition. Star Wars had been around for a while, and then there was The Black Hole (1979), Saturn 3 (1980), and Short Circuit (1986). I'm giving this movie a 7 because it entertained, but if I were a real movie critic I'd give it less. Almost all the camerawork is in a close-up range, and the robots field of vision was way too spludgey, a sort of amateur Predator vision. We needed wider shots to really see the robot, and we needed to see more of the city itself, not just the crazy lady's crazy artist's loft. Anyway, that's my take. I liked the soundtrack and the human characters, they were all really suitably post-apocalypse, and the general story made sense in a sci-fi fashion, and the ravages of the droid were suitably outrageous. I'd love to see it remade with a more modern take. This is definitely one for the archives.

Those judging Hardware using the same criteria for judging major Hollywood sci-fi films are missing the point entirely.

Hardware is much more an art film than it is science fiction; it merely happens to have a sci-fi theme.

Given, the plot is a little cheesy. Given, the situation fairly unbelievable. And given, there are a few holes in the story.

Almost no film has all of these elements, but Hardware has something even more important. The way the story is told is nothing short of genius. Perhaps not in the way the happenings actually unfold, but in how they are presented. Hardware is an astounding achievement in lighting, cinematography, and audio engineering. As a professional video editor myself, I can assure you that this movie benefits from an A+ editing job.

I completely agree that there are only 2 types of people: those who love Hardware, and those who simply do not get it.

From the first frame of video, this movie is a constant barrage on the eyes, ears, and mind. If nothing else, you must admire the bleak vision of a post-nuclear holocaust America presented in Hardware. Images ranging from billowing smoke stacks and butchers in apartment lobbies to toddlers physically tied to their dead parents, Stanley paints a haunting vision of the future that will not be forgotten after you press stop.

Hardware is not what you would expect to come out of Hollywood. It is what you would expect a pure artist to create. Perhaps it is better suited to fans of independent film than just sci-fi fans. Films like Terminator and Aliens might be regarded as much better sci-fi work, but I assure you that they can't touch the riskiness and edginess of Hardware in how they are presented. That is why you hear casual moviegoers complaining about this movie. For pure fans of the art behind film making, sci-fi just doesn't get any better than Hardware.

It should be noted that the excellent score does much to augment the visuals in this film. It's criminal that nobody has seen it necessary to print Hardware on DVD as I would love to experience it in Dolby 5.1.

As a final note, Hardware may not be a film everyone will enjoy. Even if you don't like it, you will become a more enlightened viewer if you can at least identify why this is such a courageous film and how it differs from the Hollywood fodder you are probably used to.

I've never really understood what some people see in 'Hardware'. I thought it was mediocre when I first watched it a couple of years after it was released, and a second viewing more recently did nothing to make me rate it higher. The movie's special effects and overall visual look are quite impressive for such a low budget movie, and that is just about the only positive thing I can say about it. The script is lousy - a seen-it-all-before rehash of second hand ideas (most notably 'Stalker', 'Mad Max 2' and 'The Terminator') that goes nowhere... slowly. Dylan McDermott is now much better known due to his TV success, but it still doesn't mean he's a very dull leading man. Stacey Travis ('Ghost World') is also pretty forgettable. John Lynch ('In The Name Of The Father') and William Hootkins ('American Gothic') are much more interesting performers, but they weren't enough to salvage this one. And the less said about the completely pointless cameo from rock legend Lemmy (Motorhead) the better. 'Hardware' is difficult to recommend. I say stick with the much more entertaining killer robot thrillers 'Saturn 3' and 'The Terminator'. However I wouldn't let this movie put you off Richard Stanley's later movie 'Dust Devil'. It isn't without some faults but it's ten times more interesting than 'Hardware', and definitely worth a look.

The 21st century world is a radioactive wasteland as a result of a nuclear war. A traveling scavenger comes across the remains of a cyborg named Mark 13 in the desert; He salvages pieces of it. The cyborg head ends up with a metal sculptress, who is unaware of the cyborg's infamy as a governmental killing machine project that was scrapped due to its defects. Mark 13 reconstructs itself utilizing household appliances and metal parts, and goes amok.

Hardware is a movie that relies on its post-modernistic stylings to bring out its flavor but most of the time it falls flat. It's full of oddly placed music, I heard somewhere that the director Richard Stanley used to direct music videos, so maybe that explains a few reasons as to why this movie is the way it is. The red filter used through at least 50% of the movie can become highly annoying and get in the way of viewing some potentially good, violent scenes. Also the scenes which slowly push the plots progression could have done without the distraction.

Luckily enough, when the movie really gets going (it takes almost an hour!) its quite a fun ride of just extremely painful death scenes as the clunky robot Mark-13 chases down all humans in his way.