Solar Crisis

Here's the set up. Earth is going to be half fried by a giant flare the sun is getting ready to shoot off. A ship is sent to drop a bomb on the sun to make the flare go off away from Earth.

Not a bad premise, and the film has a lot going for it. But...

The problem is with a subplot. Half the population is in danger of being fried to death, and someone on Earth wants the mission to fail.

Why?

Otherwise there are great special effects, a few tense scenes with real conflict. If they had edited out that sub plot, it would be a much better film.

Still recommended for science fiction / space buffs. Worth a look.

What was Charlton Heston thinking when he signed up for this disaster?? Alright, I'll be fair. I rented Solar Crisis (translation: wasted a buck) with an open mind. It had an interesting plot, so it seemed, and some famous guys. So there must be something there. Man oh man was I wrong. I realized that with the opening scene in which cheap subtitles scrolled across the screen, describing the Impeding Doom of Earth. To make matters worse, a voice-over further insulted my intelligence by reading the words too. Gee, since I was dumb enough to rent the film, they must figure I can't read either. Then came the real blow: The weak, weak acting (usually showcased by laughably over-dramatic monologues) coupled with the bland, bland writing, strewn together with the lousy, lousy soundtrack make for one nose-wrinkling mess. Dr. Haas was especially bad, as was the ship's commander whose name escapes me. We are treated to such memorable lines as: "Our only security blanket out there is ourselves" and the immortal "I'm the only one who can ever free you!" Please. Free me, for the love of God.

Alright first off: this is not a great film, it is not even a particularly good film, but I have seen many that were much worse. I am curious as to who the director was who ducked out on this one and turned it over to Alan Smithee (for those not in the know: Alan Smithee is a name that the DGA assigns to films who's directors do not want to admit a connection to for some reason, artistic of otherwise.)

Some of the performances were a little flat, although Jack Palance was as eccentrically off beat as usual. That alone always gives any film a one point boost. Peter Boyle was just as underplayed a villain as usual, not getting his hands dirty. But there was a lot of real tension in the film. In anyone was over the top it was Dorian Harewood, and I suspect that was because of bad direction. I suspect with a better director, budget and script this could have been a much better film. I still enjoyed it though. Just one of my little quirks I guess.

Well, Solar Crisis really isn't all that bad. It has the look and feel of an "A" movie that didn't quite make it. It's also a little too long for what it has to offer. Ninety minutes as opposed to one hundred fifteen minutes would have given it more movement, and impact. Yet whenever we get the opportunity to see Charlton Heston, Jack Palance, and Peter Boyle in the same film, there is going to be some fun. I like the premise of the film, and much of its execution. Though it never comes together in a compelling package, it is definitely a film that a Sci Fi fan should see at least once. I think the climax is moving, and very well done.

There is a healthy dose of Japanese mindset behind the scenes, that seems to create some differences of perception of what works in science fiction. The Japanese have an intriguing cultural perception of reality, and I love many of their films. But that sagacity does not seem to extend fully into "space" films. I don't think they have never quite exceeded their heritage of gimmicky, "comic book" science fiction movies.

Solar Crisis has excellent actors, sustained suspense,lots of drama, and reasonable action. But it tries to be too much, too broad, and just never quite reaches its goal.

Disowned by Richard C. Sarafian, this disaster stunk up Japanese theaters before coming to the States and going immediately to video, where it was not seen again until the Turner networks needed something other than infomercials to fill their 3am-6am time slots and found this tape at the bottom of their bin. The Smithee name is supposed to be used when the studio hacks the movie so badly that the director no longer wants his name attached to it. But I'm afraid that Sarafian can not blame the studio entirely on this one. The actors, mostly recent graduates of "Overacting 101", deliver one cornball line after another. The plot is convoluted. The special effects are unimpressive. The parts that aren't laughable are just plain boring. The script or the book must have been good - why else would Palance, Matheson, Boyle, or Heston agree to appear in this dud? But something went horribly wrong from the page to the screen. Summary: Avoid. Not even bad enough to be so-bad-it's-good.