Mission Mars

This is a strange oddity of a film. It's poorly made in all respects, some scenes have the cinematography and production values of a porn film, yet Darren McGavin and Nick Adams both wound up in this doing the best with what they had. It was shot at the *very* cramped Sagitarius studios in Miami, sometime in late 1967 in someone's attempt to make a "Miami Hollywood" area in Florida. Adams was in a career slump at the time and had personal problems(divorce and custody battles which ensued) which probably led him to accept a role for any money he could get. He apparently got a severe sun burn during his mini-vacay stay in Miami which is why he looks red as a beet in several scenes(not from embarrassment) Sadly this was also Adam's last film he made, before his untimely and mysterious death in Feburary 1968-he never got to see it. It was the second time in his career he would play an astronaut-the first was the superior Toho film MONSTER ZERO(Kaiju Daisenso, 1965 which was released in the US in l970,also after his death). McGavin must have also needed money too for a couple of mortgage payments,or wanted a Florida vacation, or someone knew him and he did a favor. He looks closest to the age of his character Kolchak which would be five years in the future. The FX work is very cheap, it is rife with NASA Apollo footage(easy and cheap to get at the time). Some attention was paid to the miniature Martian landscapes and at least they hold some accuracy and detail. The rest of the miniatures such as the alien "Polarites" and the aluminum foil alien device, look badly done and,like the best efforts of 8mm home made SF films some of us did in our youth.

The year: 1968. The movie "2001: A Space Odyssey" sets new technological and intellectual standards in the SF genre. Likewise 1968: The movie "Mission Mars" sets new standards of daftness and technological incompetence in the SF genre. The unsuitable, excruciating title song "No More Tears", sung by Sturg Pardalis (sic!) and played by "The Forum Quorum", already makes you fear the worst. The film introduces us then to the personal and family problems of three astronauts who are chosen to fly to Mars. After this long (very long) intro and lots of Nasa stock footage the movie really gets nonsensical. The "spaceship" is nothing more than a slightly altered tin-can, the helmets of the space suits are open beneath the chin, and the scenes on "Mars" were shot on a very small sound stage without the illusion of a horizon. While Darren McGavin carries this whole nonsense with remarkable seriousness, Nick Adams seems not to be very happy with his part in this trash. "Mission Mars" is a low budget movie better suited for the 50s, but without the charm of most of the SF movies of this period. It's theatrical, third-rate and was already very dated when it was produced.

A top notch film with great handling of a tiny budget to show that it is not always the case that you need to spend a fortune to create interesting if not flash special effects.Also a first rate cast of B movie actors,and a catchy theme score. Ok it is easy to pull this film to pieces but if you take it at face value it is very entertaining.

Greetings And Salutations, and welcome to my review of Mission Mars; here's the breakdown of my ratings:

Story: 1.25 Direction: 1.00 Pace: 0.75 Acting: 1.25 Enjoyment: 1.25

TOTAL: 5.50 out of 10.00

Mission Mars is your atypical B-Movie on a budget: And a severe one at that. There is much to dislike, especially if you're looking for flawlessness. But should you be like me and a tad more forgiving and understanding, then some of the film's downfalls may find a warm place in your heart and memory. For me, it was the rocket ships. I'll get into that in more detail later.

The plot is your basic race-to-the-stars storyline. Man still had yet to land on the moon when this picture came out. But here, we find the race between the Russian Cosmonauts and the American Astronauts is to get from the Earth and to Mars first. What usually drives a story such as this is characterisation. Since we are to spend a lot of time with these space explorers, it's the ideal way to get to know them. And once we relate to them and their situations, when the action and mysterious events begin, we find ourselves in their corner and cheering them on. And the screenwriter Michael St Clair does an admirable job of this. We get to know the crew, Col. Blaiswick - an easy leader of men - a thoughtful problem solver, Nick Grant - a geologist who is unafraid to put himself above the mission and his colleagues, and Doug Duncan - Second in command and as logical and practical as his commander. Luckily, these three have a good relationship, which makes the long journey to the red planet an easy star trek. Their conversations are credible and believable. Most hold a hint of humour and warmheartedness, which propels a positive feeling toward the audience. In this day and age of bleakness, it was nice to feel upbeat watching a movie, and it's the main reason I'm reviewing older films - they're not as dire as today's box office. Sadly, due to the low budget and monetary hindrances in filmmaking, it would have been advisable to make the story as strong as possible. Had St. Clair carried his individual characteristics into the unknown and possibly deadly alien orb, it would have added more power to the Sci-Fi tale. Sadly he doesn't, and the story begins to falter when it should become intriguing.

It doesn't help that the special effects are shoddy due to the lack of budget. As I said above, the spaceships are fantastic, but for the wrong reasons. As a kid, I watched Blue Peter, and I remember a section where they put together a couple of Space Rockets. These were cobbled together from washing-up bottles and the ubiquitous sticky-backed plastic. And the ships in Mission Mars look precisely like Blue Peter's creations. So I had a tinge of nostalgia every time I saw them. But better yet, was the Mars landing vehicle, which appeared to be a Campbell's soup can - enter remembrances of Andy Warhol. However, I cannot reminisce about the alien orb. The first time I saw it, it didn't look too awful. I even liked the abstract shape of the orb's security monitor - at least the special effects team was getting inventive. However, later in the movie, when we watch Grant walk into the sphere, it's less impressive - The special effects crew swapped the crystalline orb for a fluffy white ball with a painted black oval, representing an open doorway. And worse comes when Grant reaches the alien object, for we realise the sphere isn't as large and ominous as previously thought. No! It's not much taller than Grant as he needs to duck down to enter. And let's not get started on our astronaut's spaceship's controls or fittings. Nevertheless, even with the poor special effects, the director, Nicholas Webster, does the best with what he's given. His strongest scenes are the ones containing the performers. He knows how to frame them for the best results and appears to know how to get the most from them.

The cast is the best thing about this movie. Darren McGavin, who went on to portray Kolchak, gives a strong performance as Col. Blaiswick. He adds power, drive, and conviction to the role. And the rest of the cast is just as believable and credible in their performances.

I wouldn't highly recommend Mission Mars to anyone. At best, it's a Lazy Sunday Afternoon flick - a movie you can doze off while watching and not regret missing anything. And if you stay awake, you should enjoy it enough to realise it was worth your while. But it is only for the Sci-Fi fans that like and prefer Ye Olde Space Travel Movies. And should anyone out there remember the Blue Peter washing up bottle spaceships, give Mission Mars a look-see and let the nostalgia wash over you.

Now, fire up those boosters, and let's get off this damned red planet because you have to check out my The Final Frontier list to see where I ranked Mission Mars.

Take Care & Stay Well.

Don't let poor reviews scare you off any movie. All movies have some value to someone. For example, this was one of my childhood memories. I'm 46 now and have waited almost 40 years to find this and finally I have it. I am thrilled. Any poor effects or dated look or whatever are inconsequential to me. I was really excited to see it again. And I feel the same way about several other movies, and I'm sure everyone has movies they feel that way about. Don't take it all these movies so seriously! Some are just plain fun, and certainly a reminder of more innocent times. So enjoy, no matter how silly it may seem by today's standards.