TiVo Community Forum banner
1 - 17 of 17 Posts

·
Hi. What is this?
Joined
·
11,729 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I saw a popup ad for this while watching Battlestar Galactica. All I know is that it's from 2005 and stars C. Thomas Howell. Sci-Fi Channel doesn't have any other info except that it's a "faithful adaptation" of the classic novel.
 

·
Diogenes-type seeker
Joined
·
2,895 Posts
Watch it only if you need sleep. I rented it a few months back and every time I started it, I woke up the next day. No effects to speak of, it's a low-budget flick...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,378 Posts
No effects? How do you do giant Martian war machines and heat rays without special effects?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
326 Posts
It was made for around 10 grand, (OK 100 grand)...the producers couldn't even afford any army helicopters (or M-16's for the soldiers). Hey, the "walkers" are fairly good for such a cheaply made film! A direct-to-dvd rip-off of the Tom Cruise film.
My .02
 

·
Hi. What is this?
Joined
·
11,729 Posts
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
We lasted about 20 minutes before throwing in the towel. What the HELL happened to C. Thomas Howell? Was he drunk? Was his character supposed to be drunk? He really looked and sounded like the last 20 years were really rough. At least the first 20 minutes were good for some laugh out loud moments.
 

·
Phased Member
Joined
·
1,429 Posts
Saw it for a few minutes here and there. Horrible.

Dunno how faithful it was supposed to be.

-Mike
 

·
mega Pnut m&m
Joined
·
379 Posts
i watched this the other day. it was soooooooooooooo bad. the editing made no sense and i never knew what the characters were talking about.

bad bad bad bad bad bad.

M.
 

·
Coming and going
Joined
·
8,027 Posts
I was almost going to record it but decided to wait on some feedback.. glad I did not waste the disk space.
 

·
formerly TiVoOpsMgr
Joined
·
2,482 Posts
This was supposed to be a disaster movie -- and it was a disaster all right.

Bad acting, bad editing, bad writing*, bad effects -- this movie had it all.

* Their attempts at modernization and the promised "updating" were horrifically misconceived.

Why on earth did they bother? When you're going to do a remake of a film that was already just recently a big budget remake, and you realize you only have a tiny budget, wouldn't you give up and spend your money elsewhere?
 
1 - 17 of 17 Posts
Top