Shockwave

I've never reviewed a movie before without watching the whole thing. This is a special case. I began watching the movie. 3 minute later, crappiness reached critical mass. People screaming at badly animated CGI robots. Pistols with endless clips that magically fire without recoil (In fact, upon looking closer, I realized that the pistols are more magical than I realized at first. They somehow fire without the hammer even moving!) Right about the time the guy in camouflage parked his truck underneath the robot and waited for it to laser him is where I quit watching and started doing my math homework. Did they even try with this movie? Jeez. I feel insulted. Thank God I only wasted $2 renting it. Easiest review I've ever made.

CCCCCCRRRRAAAAAPPPPP! I've seen better homemade movies on YouTube.

Shockwave looked like a real dog and it was except for the cameos by all the different scifi and horror flick cast. A member from every Star Trek franchise was there, Billy Mummy from Lost in Space, and a host of others. The endless supply of bullets with no clip changes. I have to say that I believe the acting was good, but the script and direction seemed off. The story is old and tired. An experiment gone wrong that creates a being that tries to take over the world, or at least got off a deserted island. The editing didn't help much and made the film seem labored. The final battle in the rain and the stars stayed dry the whole time. A B- movie due to all the technical flaws. If you like plain old action and don't mind the continuity breaks, this is for you.

Yeah, it's a good question - and a rhetorical one too. Judging by the sub-SyFy Channel standard of A.I. ASSAULT, aka SHOCKWAVE, the answer's a definite "no", because this is Z-grade CGI trash through and through. The problem with A.I. ASSAULT is that it's saddled with an absolutely awful, lunk-headed script which starts nowhere and goes nowhere. The characters are cardboard cut-outs, the performances would stink in a porn film, and the direction is sub-par. In fact, the only thing good about the whole movie is a pair of alien robots which dominate the storyline.

These creations are shamelessly lifted from Wells' original WAR OF THE WORLD, giant Tripod-things that go around butchering soldiers in various mildly gory (but inevitably cheesy) ways. They show promise, but the premise soon boils down to various characters wandering around an island somewhere, endlessly fighting them off and getting bumped off one by one. It's all very humdrum and by rote; the robots could be exchange for any movie monster in existence and it would all boil down to the same thing.

The film's main selling point is the presence of a number of ex-STAR TREK actors who inevitably show up for brief cameos before disappearing again. An indelibly aged George Takei is here, along with Robert Picardo and Michael Dorn. B-movie favourite Tim Thomerson also appears as a stuffy army official. Sadly, none of these actors even come close to making A.I. ASSAULT anything approaching a decent movie.

Well, I can tell is a Sci Fi channel assault on our intelligence. They have some Star Trek actors and actor from B5 on the movie, Everyone needs to work even stars from long faded shows. The computer generated robots were decent and the storyline had promise. My problem with this film is as follows: (1) I just love movie military personal with hair too long. (2) This movie supposedly take place on an island near Fiji, why is everyone wearing a jacket. We have a few shot of the tropics, but the rest of the movie seems to be filmed in the Pacific Northwest. It would be an otherwise decent film if they spent a bit of time on the details.

With the notable exception of the excellent "Dark Kingdom," the SciFi Channel seems to have an aversion to original productions that don't insult its audience's intelligence. Self-aware combat robots decide to go into business for themselves after crashing on a tropical island that looks amazingly like Santa Barbara County. A commando team is sent in with the brainiac daughter of the scientist who created the critters, charged not with destroying but recapturing them. Complicating matters is a trio of cruise-ship robbers whose getaway helicopter happened to crash on the same island for the same reason (a sudden, unexpectedly huge tropical storm that the gods tossed in to add to the tension because it would be too much work to create it through the story). The machines resemble H.G. Wells's original fighting machines, with the embittered sociopathy of "The Terminator's" SkyNet & the opportunistic assimilation abilities shown in "South Park's" episode "Trapper Keeper." Bits & pieces of story elements that could be attributed to "Resident Evil," "Westworld" & any number of trapped-on-an-island-with-monsters movies serve to finish off any hint of originality. The CGI critter-machines are up to par, although they make annoying creaking noises like the Tin Man from "The Wizard of Oz." The other sets & props range from so-so to laughably cheap. The commandos are ludicrously incompetent, having received their patrolling, combat & weapons training from third-graders in some backyard. "Star Trek" icons George Takei (ex-Sulu) & Michael Dorn (ex-Worf) might have lent some interest but share no scenes together & have small, dispensable parts. "AI" violates one of the most basic rules in monster movies by both showing & describing the monster in the very first scene, leaving nothing more for imagination or anticipation. The same carelessness with the sets is given to the explanation of the monsters & the rationale for their misbehavior, although the word "matrix" is applied to them at least 3 times. Why does SciFi keep doing this to us? Is it because Michael Bay keeps getting away with making giant movies without plausible stories? Are we being collectively punished for our morbid fascination with Edward D. Wood, Jr.? Is there some secret proviso in Hollywood that prohibits the possession of a valid library card? I'd rather sit through a miniseries of all 39 sequels to "The Wizard of Oz" than see more of these. Uh-oh, better be careful what I wish for.