5 reviews
- Leofwine_draca
- Oct 15, 2017
- Permalink
There are lots and lots of really, really bad science fiction films out there. With many of them it's apparent the filmmakers really didn't care - all they wanted to do was get a film made, regardless of the quality. I sense that that's not the case here. Although the film falls short in some respects,
I do have a good deal of respect for the filmmaking team, most of whom are fairly inexperienced. For instance, at the time I'm writing this, writer/director/producer/cinematographer has three IMDb credits as director. That's not many, and two of those were shorts. (I need to point out here that I don't know Mr. Goodman.) Realize this: one of the world's most famous director's first go at making a feature film wasn't as successful as Ares 11 in my opinion. I'll mention the famous filmmaker at the end of the review.
As for the acting, I have to say that it's all solid. The cast doesn't really have much to show their talents, but none of them come across as phony. This isn't the kind of film where the actors can "chew the scenery."
So for some more specifics...
It's obvious the filmmakers researched and incorporated realistic technology and dialogue into the film. I'm personally not a fan of films like Star Wars because the filmmakers can invent anything they want to get characters into trouble and out of trouble. As a result, I don't really connect with those characters or stories. That's just me; I much prefer science fiction films that are grounded in reality (with some exceptions). Although Ares 11 is obviously centered around capabilities we don't yet have, none of it seems to be removed from future possibility. So yes, the filmmakers took old and current space technology and extrapolated it to a realistic and achievable future.
Despite my appreciation for the work the filmmakers have done, there are some areas it fell short in. Hopefully they'll be reading this and can consider my words as guidance, for whatever these words are worth. There are parts in the film, especially during the first third or so, with lots of techy dialogue filler that serves no purpose other than to add an aura of authenticity. I think some of that fat could have been trimmed. That would, of course, make an already short feature film a little shorter, but that could be fleshed out with more character development, a facet of the film that I feel was neglected. The characters all seem to have interesting personalities on the surface, but we don't get a feel for what drives them, what makes them act as they do and make the decisions they do. (Some of the best science fiction films also ignore character development,. like Alien, but there's more inter-character conflict and that serves some of the same purpose.)
As the plot takes it's most dire turn, the dialogue spoken by the mission control person is extremely unlikely. I don't want to give away details, but I will say that some of what was suggested by that character, if discussed at all, would likely have been mentioned in vague terms because of its sensitive nature.
Going back to some positives, some fairly minor plot points were well thought-out. Example: the discussion about what to do with the "man portable" (my term) weapons onboard the spacecraft. This is an angle that could have easily been overlooked when writing the screenplay, but including it added a bit of interest that would otherwise be missing.
There were hits and there were misses. My IMDb reviews tend to be shorter than this one, and I usually either review terrible movies (writing those is fun) or hidden gems. I wouldn't classify Ares 11 as terrible or a gem, but I see that a lot of heart (and perspiration, as per the trivia) was invested in the film, and I want to encourage the filmmakers to keep at it.
Ares 11 is more earnest than most low budget films out there, and heck, even most mega budget films aren't as earnest as this.
Is Ares 11 great? No. Is Ares 11 good? Well, so-so. But Ares 11 isn't _bad_.
Okay, so now for the reveal. What director completed at least three short films before making a feature, a feature that I don't believe matched the quality of Ares 11?
Stanley Kubrick. Yes, that's correct. Kubrick made Day of the Fight, The Flying Padre, and The Seafarers, all short documentaries, all before he made Fear and Desire. Kubrick disowned Fear and Desire. I'm a HUGE Kubrick fan, but even I have to agree that Fear and Desire wasn't an artistic success. I'm sure Kubrick gave as much to making that as the Ares 11 filmmaking team did, and I think the Ares 11 team ended up with a much, much better film than Fear and Desire. So... Goodman, Hyland, Storch, De Hill, James, Bell, and everyone else involved in making Ares 11 - DO NOT STOP MAKING FILMS. May I suggest going back to shorts for awhile? This will let you all hone your craft, giving you more opportunities to experiment and fail or succeed than making fewer features would. I think two or three more shorts might prime you all for much greater things. I truly do hope I see more from all of you.
I do have a good deal of respect for the filmmaking team, most of whom are fairly inexperienced. For instance, at the time I'm writing this, writer/director/producer/cinematographer has three IMDb credits as director. That's not many, and two of those were shorts. (I need to point out here that I don't know Mr. Goodman.) Realize this: one of the world's most famous director's first go at making a feature film wasn't as successful as Ares 11 in my opinion. I'll mention the famous filmmaker at the end of the review.
As for the acting, I have to say that it's all solid. The cast doesn't really have much to show their talents, but none of them come across as phony. This isn't the kind of film where the actors can "chew the scenery."
So for some more specifics...
It's obvious the filmmakers researched and incorporated realistic technology and dialogue into the film. I'm personally not a fan of films like Star Wars because the filmmakers can invent anything they want to get characters into trouble and out of trouble. As a result, I don't really connect with those characters or stories. That's just me; I much prefer science fiction films that are grounded in reality (with some exceptions). Although Ares 11 is obviously centered around capabilities we don't yet have, none of it seems to be removed from future possibility. So yes, the filmmakers took old and current space technology and extrapolated it to a realistic and achievable future.
Despite my appreciation for the work the filmmakers have done, there are some areas it fell short in. Hopefully they'll be reading this and can consider my words as guidance, for whatever these words are worth. There are parts in the film, especially during the first third or so, with lots of techy dialogue filler that serves no purpose other than to add an aura of authenticity. I think some of that fat could have been trimmed. That would, of course, make an already short feature film a little shorter, but that could be fleshed out with more character development, a facet of the film that I feel was neglected. The characters all seem to have interesting personalities on the surface, but we don't get a feel for what drives them, what makes them act as they do and make the decisions they do. (Some of the best science fiction films also ignore character development,. like Alien, but there's more inter-character conflict and that serves some of the same purpose.)
As the plot takes it's most dire turn, the dialogue spoken by the mission control person is extremely unlikely. I don't want to give away details, but I will say that some of what was suggested by that character, if discussed at all, would likely have been mentioned in vague terms because of its sensitive nature.
Going back to some positives, some fairly minor plot points were well thought-out. Example: the discussion about what to do with the "man portable" (my term) weapons onboard the spacecraft. This is an angle that could have easily been overlooked when writing the screenplay, but including it added a bit of interest that would otherwise be missing.
There were hits and there were misses. My IMDb reviews tend to be shorter than this one, and I usually either review terrible movies (writing those is fun) or hidden gems. I wouldn't classify Ares 11 as terrible or a gem, but I see that a lot of heart (and perspiration, as per the trivia) was invested in the film, and I want to encourage the filmmakers to keep at it.
Ares 11 is more earnest than most low budget films out there, and heck, even most mega budget films aren't as earnest as this.
Is Ares 11 great? No. Is Ares 11 good? Well, so-so. But Ares 11 isn't _bad_.
Okay, so now for the reveal. What director completed at least three short films before making a feature, a feature that I don't believe matched the quality of Ares 11?
Stanley Kubrick. Yes, that's correct. Kubrick made Day of the Fight, The Flying Padre, and The Seafarers, all short documentaries, all before he made Fear and Desire. Kubrick disowned Fear and Desire. I'm a HUGE Kubrick fan, but even I have to agree that Fear and Desire wasn't an artistic success. I'm sure Kubrick gave as much to making that as the Ares 11 filmmaking team did, and I think the Ares 11 team ended up with a much, much better film than Fear and Desire. So... Goodman, Hyland, Storch, De Hill, James, Bell, and everyone else involved in making Ares 11 - DO NOT STOP MAKING FILMS. May I suggest going back to shorts for awhile? This will let you all hone your craft, giving you more opportunities to experiment and fail or succeed than making fewer features would. I think two or three more shorts might prime you all for much greater things. I truly do hope I see more from all of you.
- DavidBarak
- Feb 13, 2021
- Permalink
The only thing good about this movie is that it's only 1:18 minutes long. Seriously, that's it. From the acting to an anti-climatic ending, there is nothing to keep the viewer watching. Please don't waste your time.
This is a mediocre movie with a premise that's been done before. It would have been better as part of an anthology TV series than a movie. At least that way it would have only been 50 minutes and they could have skipped over the time killing techno-babble. If it had been part of "The Outer Limits" in the 90's, it would have been a reasonably good episode.
The movie has a few other problems as well. Some of the characters are typical stock characters. The way people act sometimes doesn't seem realistic. Sorry to pick on him, but David Hyland's acting is not very good. Even worse is Eric Bell, but at least has a very small part. (The rest of the cast is descent given what they had to work with.) It's set near Mars but has nothing to do with Mars. There is a back-story about an interplanetary conflict that contributes nothing to the actual story. And the ending is unsatisfying.
The movie has a few other problems as well. Some of the characters are typical stock characters. The way people act sometimes doesn't seem realistic. Sorry to pick on him, but David Hyland's acting is not very good. Even worse is Eric Bell, but at least has a very small part. (The rest of the cast is descent given what they had to work with.) It's set near Mars but has nothing to do with Mars. There is a back-story about an interplanetary conflict that contributes nothing to the actual story. And the ending is unsatisfying.