Vida o sueño

Let me add my voice to the chorus of naysayers. The A&E remake of "Lathe of Heaven" is a very poor effort. The original PBS production in which novelist Ursula Le Guin participated created awe and scope with a tiny budget. It used clever filmmaking techniques to tell a complex story efficiently. The A&E remake is slow, unremarkable and tediously confined to just a few well appointed sets. Much of the story is reduced to dull exposition. Worst of all, James Caan fails to produce the menace needed to create any suspense. Let's hope the remake of "Solaris" due in late 2002 fares better.

Having read LeGuinn's book and seen PBS's excellent rendering of her story this new version is a crashing disappointment. The first problem is that there is so little left of the story that much of its impact is missing. In spite of being light on effects and budget the earlier PBS production makes much better use of its resources to communicate LeGuinn's apocalyptic drama to the viewer.

What happened to the space aliens? They seem to be replaced by David Straithorn's character who occasionally pops into scenes with sage verbiage. Unfortunately, so much has been stripped that there is no tissue left to connect him to what little plot remains after the producers and directors finished their hatchet job on content and context. Who knows why they did that?

What's left is a nothingness rivaled only by Jor-Jor's apocalyptic reality. In order to understand what's going on here, one might want to read the book, or view PBS's 1980's telling of the story. Please don't waste your time with this turkey, especially since the PBS version is available on DVD.

I agree with the consensus. This film stinks. The true plot is brusquely steamrolled over in order to force the emphasis toward a badly cast romance between George and Heather.

This type of butchery is very common these days. Look at most of the `original series' on the Sci-fi (sic) channel. Get a bunch of young and beautiful people into spaceships, fill it with flashing lights, a crotchety alien with a bony forehead and the personality of your uncle Irving, derivative dialog about `shields failing' and `re-routing emergency power', don't EVER have an original or though provoking story-line and voila you get the distilled pap that passes these days as science fiction.

Its unfortunate that style, special effects and sex-appeal are what now count instead of real dialog and story. The original Lathe of Heaven wasn't perfect, but everything about it, from the slow build-up of George's relation with Dr. Haber, to the philosophical discussions about righting the world's wrongs made for an engaging and genuine exercise in science fiction.

Big budgets, merchandising tie-ins, vapid music and a bland dumbed-down appeal characterize far too many productions these days.

I thought this was a well made re-make of the 1980 PBS special, which starred Bruce Davison, not Craig Wasson as another reviewer mistakenly noted. (You might remember Bruce Davison as Senator Kelly form X-Men) the real fun I noticed was the Six degrees of separation aspect that Kevin Conway who played Dr. Haber in the 1980 version starred in a movie in 1991 called Rambling Rose with Lukas Haas who would end up playing Orr in this re-make. But I digress, The most exciting thing about this film was it's ability to prove that Lisa Bonet actually CAN act. Seriously, this is a cerebral Sci-Fi movie and a very watchable one at that. I thought Haas was a mismatch for the part but he was able to pull it off.

Like many others, I was very interested in this remake of "The Lathe of Heaven," for several reasons. The book by Ursula K. LeGuin is widely regarded as a science-fiction classic, although I have never thought it was among her best work. I read it after I saw the first "Lathe of Heaven" on PBS in 1980 and realized that considerable liberties had been taken with the story, although it was much closer to the book than this latest endeavor.

Back then, "Lathe" was a bold experiment for PBS and the producers: To make an original full-length science-fiction TV movie on a limited budget that would appeal to an audience used to flashier entertainment. Remember, it was only three years since "Star Wars" and "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" had revitalized screen science fiction, until then very much in the doldrums. The producers of LOH wanted to make a more intimate story than those blockbuster movies, one based more on human relationships. With their low budget, they looked for places and expedients that would transmit their vision. Although the story was set in Portland, Oregon, they filmed a lot of it in Dallas because of that city's more futuristic architecture. I liked it very much and videotaped it, and have the tape to this day. (Unfortunately but inevitably, the tape had deteriorated significantly when I transferred it to DVD at the end of 2006. Never fear, it appears that it's now available on commercial DVD.)

It says a great deal about inflation in the movie business that the remake had a "small" budget of "only" $5 million. That would have been a lot of money for the original filmmakers. I also wonder why here in the States we had to wait until September of 2002 to see it when the first comments about it, from a viewer in Turkey, are from February!

But whenever it aired, my reaction would be the same: Why did they bother to make it at all? There is so little of the original here that it is essentially a different work. They have taken the story and drained it of its blood. And what does happen goes beyond problems with temporal discontinuities and paradoxes; these people behave without logic or motivation. It looks like a long episode of the "new" Outer Limits or a similar show, one of those low-budget syndicated series that they film in Canada because it's cheaper there, where there is money only for a few sets, a couple of computer graphics, and a lot of talk in closeup (to hide the spareness of the sets). All of the acting and dialogue takes place in murmurs. I usually like James Caan, but it looks like he's been watching Bruce Willis's recent film work and decided to try the minimalist, non-acting approach.

Now that I've brought up The Outer Limits, remember how the opening credits used to talk about "awe and mystery"? Well, if you want awe and mystery, forget about this remake and go back to the 1980 version; it had much more of those qualities.