NOTE IMDb
3,6/10
1,9 k
MA NOTE
Un scientifique et un pilote se portent volontaires pour une mission de haut niveau visant à atteindre les limites de l'univers. Au bout de 13 ans, le vaisseau s'écrase à la fin de l'univers... Tout lireUn scientifique et un pilote se portent volontaires pour une mission de haut niveau visant à atteindre les limites de l'univers. Au bout de 13 ans, le vaisseau s'écrase à la fin de l'univers et s'enfonce dans l'inconnu.Un scientifique et un pilote se portent volontaires pour une mission de haut niveau visant à atteindre les limites de l'univers. Au bout de 13 ans, le vaisseau s'écrase à la fin de l'univers et s'enfonce dans l'inconnu.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 nomination au total
William Matthews
- Lynch
- (as Matthew Tailford)
Avis à la une
This movie is somewhat interesting all the way through... right to the end of the totally senseless "ending"-- at which point the viewer realizes s/he has just totally wasted two hours of limited lifespan. What is expected to have a climax, an explanation, a reason for all the disjointed / out of sequence scenes winds up being nothing more than a plotless story flushed down the toilet.
Okay we get it. End of universe. Parallel universes. Space/time warp (maybe). There is a difference between concept and having a decent plot and story line. This movie is basically a few cliche concepts thrown together in an extremely slow, dull and lifeless manner. The lack of actual story structure is the dearth of this film.
Feel free to ignore the 10-star "Best picture ever" reviews as pure narcissistic "I understand it and you don't" tripe. There is nothing to "understand" in this film. It is two or three science fiction concepts thrown together in a total void of actual plot.
I hate to mention 2001: A Space Odyssey in the same review as this, because despite 2001's major flaws (totally incomprehensible unless one read the book first)... at least that movie had some extremely interesting elements. This movie is a yawner from scene one... with music to match. So bad that even the campy moments and mildly-sophisticated humor didn't pull this one out of the dumpster.
Some have compared this with Dark Star. Dark Star was a work of genius. This is... the exact opposite.
One star because zero isn't available.
Okay we get it. End of universe. Parallel universes. Space/time warp (maybe). There is a difference between concept and having a decent plot and story line. This movie is basically a few cliche concepts thrown together in an extremely slow, dull and lifeless manner. The lack of actual story structure is the dearth of this film.
Feel free to ignore the 10-star "Best picture ever" reviews as pure narcissistic "I understand it and you don't" tripe. There is nothing to "understand" in this film. It is two or three science fiction concepts thrown together in a total void of actual plot.
I hate to mention 2001: A Space Odyssey in the same review as this, because despite 2001's major flaws (totally incomprehensible unless one read the book first)... at least that movie had some extremely interesting elements. This movie is a yawner from scene one... with music to match. So bad that even the campy moments and mildly-sophisticated humor didn't pull this one out of the dumpster.
Some have compared this with Dark Star. Dark Star was a work of genius. This is... the exact opposite.
One star because zero isn't available.
"Isra 88" is about Lt. Col. Harold Richards (Casper Van Dien) and Dr. Abe Anderson (Sean Maher), who are sent into space on a mission to reach the edge of the universe. In their ship, that looks like a soup bowl, they hurtle through the black until there are no more stars to see.
This film was a huge let down. I had hopes that having Rico from 'Starship Troopers' and Simon Tamm from 'Firefly' would make for a decent watch, but this is a very long, very slow build to a unsatisfying ending. There are periods in the film that attempt to be humorous, but its pained and only adds to the surreal confusion of why the script is written like this. There is also a terrible CGI element with honeybees throughout that makes it even more ridiculous.
I played this at 1.5x speed and still thought it was too long. Avoid at all costs.
This film was a huge let down. I had hopes that having Rico from 'Starship Troopers' and Simon Tamm from 'Firefly' would make for a decent watch, but this is a very long, very slow build to a unsatisfying ending. There are periods in the film that attempt to be humorous, but its pained and only adds to the surreal confusion of why the script is written like this. There is also a terrible CGI element with honeybees throughout that makes it even more ridiculous.
I played this at 1.5x speed and still thought it was too long. Avoid at all costs.
I actually thought this film was well done and quite entertaining and kept me interested long enough to watch to the end. Obviously has flaws but why it has such a low rating on IMdB is beyond me.. I guess if you paid for this at the theater I could see being let down some. But seriously it was well acted and had some excellent scenes as the hero Dr. Abe Anderson (played by Sean Maher quite well) went through mental gymnastics from reality to hallucinations and imaginations back to reality. I watched this on a rainy Saturday afternoon on tv and I am glad I did not read any think on this web site before I watched it. It was good.. it was entertaining and the story actually moved along nicely. 6 out of 10
This is a weird film. It would probably make a better play. The space mission depicted is entirely unrealistic and the story told is revealed in a non-linear, disjointed way. So if you get past that description, and you aren't looking for something along the lines of 'Gravity' or 'Sunshine' it's not so bad.
But. It's kinda slow. It takes a while to work out what really is going on and what the film is interested in. The space aspect of it really is incidental, the film 'Moon' might be a reasonable comparison (another film that would probably work well as a play...) The final scenes are devastating if you've stuck with it. It's well-acted, I thought, with a peculiar retro-future feel that some people may find appealing. I nearly gave up on it about twenty minutes in but ultimately I'm glad I didn't.
But. It's kinda slow. It takes a while to work out what really is going on and what the film is interested in. The space aspect of it really is incidental, the film 'Moon' might be a reasonable comparison (another film that would probably work well as a play...) The final scenes are devastating if you've stuck with it. It's well-acted, I thought, with a peculiar retro-future feel that some people may find appealing. I nearly gave up on it about twenty minutes in but ultimately I'm glad I didn't.
The good news: You don't have to pause the film for restroom breaks.
The bad news: For the first 90 minutes you'll be praying for a weak bladder.
The really bad news: Too much repetition.
The good news: The art direction. It's apparent that either a lot of attention was paid to make things look realistic as far as aerospace and science equipment. The bad news: The plot. Is there one? The really bad news: Too much repetition.
The good news: The cinematography. The bad news: Watching characters ponder things isn't very entertaining. The really bad news: Too much repetition.
The good news: The acting is good. The bad news: There isn't much acting. The really bad news: Too much repetition.
The good news: In one scene Casper Van Dien plays against type, 180 degrees out, and he nails it. The bad news: That was the only entertaining part of the film. The really bad news: Too much repetition.
The good news: It's only two hours long. The bad news: The ending. HUH? The ending was a bit abrupt and The really bad news: Too much repetition.
The good news: The movie ended. The bad news: The movie started. The really bad news: Too much repetition.
So much talent was wasted.
The good news: The art direction. It's apparent that either a lot of attention was paid to make things look realistic as far as aerospace and science equipment. The bad news: The plot. Is there one? The really bad news: Too much repetition.
The good news: The cinematography. The bad news: Watching characters ponder things isn't very entertaining. The really bad news: Too much repetition.
The good news: The acting is good. The bad news: There isn't much acting. The really bad news: Too much repetition.
The good news: In one scene Casper Van Dien plays against type, 180 degrees out, and he nails it. The bad news: That was the only entertaining part of the film. The really bad news: Too much repetition.
The good news: It's only two hours long. The bad news: The ending. HUH? The ending was a bit abrupt and The really bad news: Too much repetition.
The good news: The movie ended. The bad news: The movie started. The really bad news: Too much repetition.
So much talent was wasted.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesSean Maher did all his own stunts.
- GaffesNormally a soldier wears the ribbons on his uniform as a group. LT Col Richardson is wearing a purple heart metal with Oak leaf cluster instead of the ribbon. This was an intentional goof.
- Crédits fousJonatbon Martus, whose name appears on the "News Feed", was a good friend of the Director and had died a year prior to the shoot of an aneurysm of the brain. Thomas honored him in using his name. Kristin Oswald, whose name also appears in the "News Feed", is Thomas' cousin, killed in a vehicle accident and is also honored.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
- How long is Beyond the Edge?Alimenté par Alexa
Détails
- Durée
- 1h 59min(119 min)
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant