After Earth

[JasonEvans]

Don't... just don't.

[JasonEvans]

I am kidding... sorta.

After Earth is not a terrible movie. It just isn't any good.

The marketing has, very intentionally, largely left M Night Shyamalan's out of ads and the such. They know that Night is sorta boxoffice poison at this point, having destroyed any credibility he had from his first few films. Make no mistake, After Earth is much better than The Happening and Avatar:The Last Airbender, but those two films are two of the worst major studio films of the past decade, so it ain't like After Earth had a high bar to clear in the Shyamalan catalog. I actually think it might even be better than the ridiculously confused Lady in the Water, though that film at least was good for the first half of the flick.

The problem with this movie is I never came close to connecting with it. I was constantly distracted by little stuff -- strange accents, cheap-looking sets, Jaden Smith's annoying whining, Will Smith's utter lack of emotion, laughingly bad CGI effects... All of these things kept on taking me out of "movie immersion" mode and prevented me from enjoying the story.



Of course, the other thing that prevented me from enjoying the story was how dull and obvious it was. Over the years, we have become used to M Night's use of the twist to turn a story on its ear. Rest assured, there are zero twists in this film... ZERO! Nothing happens that is not 100% predictable. In fact, within the first 5 or 10 minutes of the movie you can probably guess at every single thing that will happen. Will Smith is credited with coming up with the story. Lets just say that he should probably stick to acting (though I think this is his worst acting performance of his career).

The elder Smith plays a military leader who is great at what he does because he has no fear. Mankind has been threatened by some evil alien race has genetically engineered human-killing creatures that can smell our fear. Big Willie is fearless so they can't smell him and it allows him to massacre them (they are also blind, a pretty silly flaw in their makeup). Will plays his character both as fearless and largely as emotionless. If you had told me he was playing a robot, I would have believed it. Ugh!

I'm not going to get into more of the plot, because the trailers pretty much explain everything that is going to happen. The movie leaves much unexplained, though I am not sure I cared all that much about the explanations. For example -- the weapon of choice for mankind 1000 years in the future is basically a multipurpose sword. No guns, no laser-weapons. When faced with these fear-smelling monsters, which basically cannot attack anything they cannot physically reach, mankind battles them with swords and then climbs into highly advanced spaceships to jet across the galaxy. Ummm, a simple shotgun would have probably made the fear-smellers utterly useless against us, but the movie wants hand-to-hand combat so we use swords. Whaaaaat?!?!?!

The above paragraph highlights what is so wrong with this movie. I could not sit back and immerse myself in it. I kept on thinking of questions, inconsistencies, and stuff that just did not feel right. In many ways, it was the opposite of sci-fi movies like Looper or Star Trek Into Darkness where you get so drawn into the characters and the story that you ignore the plot holes and inconsistencies while you are watching the movie. In this film, the plot holes SCREAM at you.

Well, that is enough about a film that I can't imagine anyone really enjoying. You won't hate it. You won't curse at the screen and demand your money back. But you won't have a good moviegoing experience either. Its not terrible, its just broken enough not to be good.

After Earth is currently at 13% on Rotten Tomatoes and even one of the 'fresh' reviews calls it asinine... ouch!



-Jason "by the way, some are saying that the above volcanic image, which is prevalent in the film, is a Scientology symbol and that the film is a secret Scientology project by Will Smith (who is supposedly a secret Scientologist)... that is far more interesting than the movie itself" Evans

[BD80]

... -Jason "by the way, some are saying that the above volcanic image, which is prevalent in the film, is a Scientology symbol and that the film is a secret Scientology project by Will Smith (who is supposedly a secret Scientologist)... that is far more interesting than the movie itself" Evans

So the rumors of "The Fresh Prince" going drag as Edna Turnblad in Hairspray II are true?

[alteran]

{snip}
I'm not going to get into more of the plot, because the trailers pretty much explain everything that is going to happen. The movie leaves much unexplained, though I am not sure I cared all that much about the explanations. For example -- the weapon of choice for mankind 1000 years in the future is basically a multipurpose sword. No guns, no laser-weapons. When faced with these fear-smelling monsters, which basically cannot attack anything they cannot physically reach, mankind battles them with swords and then climbs into highly advanced spaceships to jet across the galaxy. Ummm, a simple shotgun would have probably made the fear-smellers utterly useless against us, but the movie wants hand-to-hand combat so we use swords. Whaaaaat?!?!?!

The above paragraph highlights what is so wrong with this movie. I could not sit back and immerse myself in it. I kept on thinking of questions, inconsistencies, and stuff that just did not feel right. In many ways, it was the opposite of sci-fi movies like Looper or Star Trek Into Darkness where you get so drawn into the characters and the story that you ignore the plot holes and inconsistencies while you are watching the movie. In this film, the plot holes SCREAM at you.
{/snip}

I don't know whether it's just me growing old (okay, it's partially that), but it seems a growing (and maddening) trend in Hollywood is releasing sci-fi movies with particularly glaring plot holes.

I am not referring to the things you have dig down into obsessively and plot graphs to figure out, I'm talking butt-obvious stuff like, "why aren't they trying to shoot the blind people-killing animals with guns instead of getting into killing range with letter-openers?", or "why aren't they running perpendicular to that huge ship rolling toward them instead of along its path?"

Look, I know it's sci-fi and hence requires a certain amount of, uhm, generosity of belief, but that's no excuse for making things nonsensical or internally inconsistent.

I mean, look, I paid MONEY to be here, I WANT pretend your story makes sense, is it so much to ask that you not insult my intelligence or make me feel like a chump for playing along?

[Mal]

Joe Morgenstern agrees with JE, and goes one further, opening his review with this question: "Is 'After Earth' the worst movie ever made?" He doesn't go so far as to answer in the affirmative, reminding us that we always have 'Battlefield Earth' for that distinction. He also goes there and makes the Scientology tie-in, beyond reference to 'Battlefield Earth," noting that the no fear thing is a major part of its philosophical underpinnings and wondering how and when Will Smith became so unentertainingly serious and earnest.

So, yeah, this one will bomb. Note to self: don't go see any fiction film with a two word title ending in "Earth." It will stink.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Note to self: don't go see any fiction film with a two word title ending in "Earth." It will stink.

I wondered how many there are (I have no idea) and if any were any good. There is at least one.

"Another Earth". Sounds like a bizarre premise, but got solid reviews, made no money. (Although when you bank over 1.7 million and your budget was only 200K...that's pretty good.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Another_Earth

[JasonEvans]

I wondered how many there are (I have no idea) and if any were any good. There is at least one.

"Another Earth". Sounds like a bizarre premise, but got solid reviews, made no money. (Although when you bank over 1.7 million and your budget was only 200K...that's pretty good.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Another_Earth

All of the following are either documentaries, bad horror/sci fi films, or films that received such limited release that there simply is no way of knowing if they were any good at all (though probably not or they would have gotten wider release).

1954 - Target Earth
1956 - Destination Earth
1974 - Planet Earth - with Majel Barrett, Gene Roddenberry's wife who had numerous roles on the various Star Trek franchises
1983 - Red Earth
1985 - Survival Earth
1998 - Invasion Earth
2001 - Amazing Earth - a documentary voiced by Patrick Stewart
2003 - Pure Earth - about an avalanche, starring Mark Hammil
2006 - Pure Earth
2006 - Iced Earth
2008 - Mother Earth
2009 - Blue Earth - doc about life under the seas
2009 - Annihilation Earth - with Marina Sirtis, of ST:TNG fame
2010 - First Earth
2011 - Collision Earth

There was a documentary called Dynamic Earth that was voiced by Liam Neeson. It never got a distributor though.

-Jason "there may be a few others I missed... but the 2 word Earth title is certainly a bad sign!" Evans

[77devil]

Joe Morgenstern agrees with JE, and goes one further, opening his review with this question: "Is 'After Earth' the worst movie ever made?" He doesn't go so far as to answer in the affirmative, reminding us that we always have 'Battlefield Earth' for that distinction. He also goes there and makes the Scientology tie-in, beyond reference to 'Battlefield Earth," noting that the no fear thing is a major part of its philosophical underpinnings and wondering how and when Will Smith became so unentertainingly serious and earnest.

So, yeah, this one will bomb. Note to self: don't go see any fiction film with a two word title ending in "Earth." It will stink.

So I asked myself, why do studios keep bankrolling M. NIght Shyamalan? Turns out that for one exception his movies make a tidy profit. Which begs the next question, who are the people that go see these terrible movies?

http://www.businessweek.com/articles...-office-profit

[BD80]

Joe Morgenstern agrees with JE, and goes one further, opening his review with this question: "Is 'After Earth' the worst movie ever made?" He doesn't go so far as to answer in the affirmative, reminding us that we always have 'Battlefield Earth' for that distinction. He also goes there and makes the Scientology tie-in, beyond reference to 'Battlefield Earth," noting that the no fear thing is a major part of its philosophical underpinnings and wondering how and when Will Smith became so unentertainingly serious and earnest. ...

Is this the end of Will Smith's career? Quick, name all of the good movies/roles for John Travolta since Battlefield Earth in 2000.

[JasonEvans]

Is this the end of Will Smith's career? Quick, name all of the good movies/roles for John Travolta since Battlefield Earth in 2000.

No chance. He is already filming Winter's Tale with Russell Crowe and Colin Farrell. It is written and directed by Akiva Goldsman who also wrote A Beautiful Mind, I Am Legend, I Robot, The Davinci Code, and Cinderella Man. He's an excellent writer and the odds are good that Winter's Tale will be a good movie. Additionally, he is taking the path of least resistance when it comes to other future projects, working on sequels to I Robot, Hancock, and Bad Boys. Will has been cast to star in the upcoming American Can, the story of a marine who rescues a bunch of people during Hurricane Katrina that is being directed by Edward Zwick, another excellent director with a strong history of making films like this into award winners (Glory, Legends of the Fall, The Last Samurai, Blood Diamond).

Plus, Will Smith was a much much bigger star in his heyday (before he took 4 years off to be a husband and father) than John Travolta ever was. Will Smith was the unquestioned king of the boxoffice for about a decade. Travolta was big, but never that big.

Travolta was already on a downward spiral before Battleship Earth. He hasn't made a good movie since Primary Colors in 1998 or maybe since Face/Off in 1997.

-Jason "how different would we all feel about Will Smith today if he had picked Django instead of MIB 3 for his return to Hollywood? Biiig mistake!" Evans

[Duvall]

No chance. He is already filming Winter's Tale with Russell Crowe and Colin Farrell. It is written and directed by Akiva Goldsman who also wrote A Beautiful Mind, I Am Legend, I Robot, The Davinci Code, and Cinderella Man. He's an excellent writer and the odds are good that Winter's Tale will be a good movie.

Spotted a typo there - you must have left out a "not," as in "Akiva Goldsman is not an excellent writer."

[brevity]

-Jason "how different would we all feel about Will Smith today if he had picked Django instead of MIB 3 for his return to Hollywood? Biiig mistake!" Evans

That's nothing. How different would we feel about M. Night Shyamalan today if he had directed Life of Pi instead of dumping it in favor of making Lady in the Water? His career was at a crossroads, having just made The Village and squeezed the last ounce of audience goodwill for his trick endings. Here was a prestige project to show that he, like his idol Steven Spielberg, could be a master craftsman of someone else's vision. And his family is from Pondicherry, India, where Life of Pi is set. But no. I guess working with Paul Giamatti was too good to pass up.

Oh well. Life of Pi worked out well for Ang Lee... and the moviegoing public.

[JasonEvans]

Spotted a typo there - you must have left out a "not," as in "Akiva Goldsman is not an excellent writer."

Dissent. He owns an Oscar for writing A Beautiful Mind and was nominated for a slew of awards for Cinderella Man too. The Akiva of the mid-90s was poorly regarded, though I think some decent scrips fell prey to some terrible directing decision. Lost in Space had some decent ideas in it. Batman Forever, Batman & Robin, and A Time To Kill were all awful. But, by the time he did A Beautiful Mind, he had really found himself.

I think he did about as good as job as one could with Dan Brown's very difficult to adapt books Da Vinci Code and Angels and Demons. I think both his Will Smith projects, I Robot and I Am Legend, are pretty decent scripts. I Am Legend is a very good film where the director messed some of it up with a changed ending that was not what Goldsman intended. I love the writing Goldsman did on the TV show Fringe too.

I have high hopes for Winter's Tale. It is based on a widely acclaimed book and Goldsman is always best adapting from books (that's what the vast majority of his projects are). It is being shot by cinematographer Caleb Deschanel, who I have been a fan of since I sat next to him in a screening of his film The Natural in 1983.

-Jason "it is worth noting that Will Smith will not have a lead role in the movie - Colin Farrell is the main character" Evans

[Olympic Fan]

It is being shot by cinematographer Caleb Deschanel, who I have been a fan of since I sat next to him in a screening of his film The Natural in 1983.

I've been a fan of Deschanel's work since "The Right Stuff" the year before The Natural. Still think that's an underrated masterpiece. And his work was the only thing I liked about Gibson's "The Passion of the Christ". Surprised to see that while nominated for five Oscars, he's never won one.

Plus, of course, he is the father of Emily and Zooey ... that deserves an academy award in itself.

[dball]

Travolta was already on a downward spiral before Battleship Earth. He hasn't made a good movie since Primary Colors in 1998 or maybe since Face/Off in 1997.

-Jason Evans

What? No love for "Bolt"?

[bjornolf]

What? No love for "Bolt"?

I hate to admit this, but I liked him in Hairspray.