Chrysalis

Just saw this last night at the Shriekfest film fest in Los Angeles. I'm not a big Bradbury fan myself (more of a Harlan Ellison fan) but I must say this is a really good piece of work. It's sad to see some of the things that are considered Science Fiction films these days, but this is the real deal. The movie is based on a Ray Bradbury short story and pretty much deals with mankind's attempt at survival after the planet has been messed up pretty badly. We see some of that damage early on in the film but then quickly the film introduces us to an isolated group of scientists who are going about trying to figure out a way to undo some of the damage to the environment, specifically to plant life. This is where it gets real interesting since one of them begins to mutate and develops a Chrysalis that covers his body. No one really knows what could come out of that thing. What works so well is how invested you are in the struggle between all the characters, each with their very unique perspective on how to deal with the crisis. The actors are really good at keeping you invested in the proceedings. You can tell the film is truly an homage to those classic science fiction stories to come out of the pulp magazines during the golden age. The FX are really well done, everything looks organic and as far as I could tell no CG. Should be coming out soon. Lets hope this gets more exposure than Bradbury's last effort A SOUND OF THUNDER. This one deserves to be seen. I'm starting to feel real positive about Sci-Fi cinema again with MAN FROM EARTH last year and now CHRYSALIS.

CHRYSALIS is one of the dullest science fiction movies I can imagine. This no-budget independent picture is based on a Ray Bradbury story, not so you'd know it. Now, speculative fiction is always good at dealing with ideas and the Big Picture, topics that never translate very well to the screen where the layout and execution is much different and where acting and characters come to the fore. An author can weave you into a magical world through the strength of his prose alone whereas a director's methods are much more limited.

The execution in this film? Two guys in a dark room arguing while a third guy is strapped to a gurney and subject to various low rent FX work. That's your entire film. Sure, some of the themes explored by the debating characters are interesting, but they're also rather superficial and it's tiresome that the merciless scientist is another bad guy Brit. I think time may well prove that the source material for this film is pretty much unfilmable because certainly as a film this is a massive failure.

I'm getting the feeling that this was a pretty faithful adaptation of Bradbury's story. I haven't read that story, so I don't know how close, but Bradbury (who amazingly, is still alive) had unprecedented control over his work. (As opposed to Richard Matheson, whose work is pretty much put through a blender.) The thing is, this was a movie made on the cheap, and I'm not sure it really translates well to screen. Okay, I wasn't expecting a CGI shoot-em-up, but an hour and a half of guys arguing about whether a prop in the middle of the room is a danger or not gets boring after a while, too.

Worth watching? Maybe to hardcore Bradbury fans looking for faithful adaptations.

Ran across this in the video store, and picked it up on a whim. Boy am I pleased that I did that. Definitely going to find a copy of my own.

If you have a chance to see this on DVD, please watch the film FIRST, then watch the extras (mini-featurettes on various aspects of the making of the film), then go back and listen to the commentary (which I have a gripe about, more later!) Basically, this film is a faithful adaptation of the 1946 short story that originally appeared in Amazing Stories, and finally made it into book form in the 1966 collection "S is for Space." Contrary to modern film-making, in the bulk of the footage of the film, there are NO green screens, NO CGI, just good, authentic looking sets, giving the entire film a gritty, realistic feel. It's obvious the actors were getting "into their roles" just from the atmosphere they had to work in. (FYI, the only green screen filming was used during production of some of those news reports on TV.)

Character development is exactly as one would expect from Ray Bradbury, who was, in fact, consulted frequently during the production, and gave his personal endorsement of the film at film festivals. Note: this means that this film is about CHARACTERS, not special effects.

The special effects, also (such as they are) are handled old-school as well, and mostly VERY effectively. >>Watch those mini-features to figure out what was a live person, and what wasn't! I failed!<< But this was the intention of the film makers, who wanted this to feel like a 1950's film, not a modern-day computer-generated effectaganza. It even features a couple of 1950's-style cheesy-bits... but even those are done so low key, and you're so absorbed into the interpersonal drama, that you probably won't get distracted by them.

Now for the gripe: The audio editing (especially volume) for the commentary track was awful. Period. No contest.

At some points, the film volume was so high, you could barely hear the comments. The bits of the conversation with Roger Lay (I think it was... but not sure!) and Ray Bradbury were obviously prerecorded, and spliced in, though content-wise, it was such a pleasure to hear from the inestimable RB himself, you almost don't care -- until the film volume drowns them both out. Also, during that separate recording session, you can tell that RB is talking LOUDLY and CLEARLY (as clear as a 90+ yo gentleman can be, anyway) into the mike, making the conversation a little jarring. The content is good -- mostly -- if you can get past the volume level mismatches.

Final note, and no it's not really a spoiler... If you expect this film to go out with a bang (explosions, gaudy spectacles, lots of death-and-dismemberment), you're not much of a Ray Bradbury fan, are you?

All in all, this is a keeper, not a renter. Highly recommended!

I'm dying to see this again. Saw it earlier this year at the Sci-Fi fest in Boston amid dreadful films that don't even deserve to be in the science fiction genre (Alien Raiders, please...). The crowd at the event was more into the b schlock movies and was not the type of group that can appreciate cerebral science fiction. I was really upset that this was the only real SF film premiering at this year's event, but was totally satisfied by it. I have been telling friends about it ever since, wanting them to check it out but there's no date on when it will get a wide release.

Unfortunately all the creature and gore movies get released and genuinely good stories that truly deserve to be seen, and that actually uphold the great science fiction literary tradition don't get the attention they deserve. somebody please put this film out!!!!