Riverworld

well, guys, i don't know how to start this one as i wasn't fascinated with this movie, but not entirely disappointed with it either. the main point is that the story got me enough to want to read the books. had i read them beforehand, perhaps i wouldn't have liked the movie, but as i haven't - for me it was an OK movie. the fact that it was made for TV explains a lot about the budget and acting. let me share a few words about that: firstly, i guess - maybe i'm in just a good mood, or maybe i accept that not every movie can have a Transformer/Terminator/StarTrek visuals; in the end, if you're a grownup sci-fi fan and have seen it all, perhaps you can accept the lack of effects. now the acting is somewhat more bitter an issue, irritating at times, but like i said, i'm a forgiver this time and will blame it all on the director and writers. there were a few attempts to create more sensible moments, but they rather failed to touch. i'll stop here and just say - you maybe disappointed, but its not a horrible movie, its made for TV, so the standards are low; the story is developed enough for a person not familiar with the books to get interested and keep watching to the end.

6/10

If you are just visiting from another planet, then you need to know that the the one thing the Canuck film machine loves more than any other project is ... sci fi. Some of the best and the worst sci fi in recent history has come from the Great White North (remember Eureka?). This effort is well-intended but ultimately only for fans of the original author or viewers with eclectic tastes.

For those that stick out this odd 2-parter you will see some of the best and the worst acting you have ever seen in your life.

On the plus side we get to see if pretty-boy Tahmoh Penikett can carry an entire film on his back? The answer is ... yes. Peter Wingfield makes a great villain. Whether this is acting or just being a Brit ... hard to say.

And the beautiful Jeananne Goossen (Olivia Munn's long-lost twin, separated at birth?) is worth the price of admission.

On the downside, and there is lots of downside, much of the remaining cast is just terrible. And the direction is ... bizarre. At the 1:15 mark for example a woman is being burned at the stake (terrible acting ... she deserves it) and the scene takes forever. Clearly to make the drama work the laws of physics were temporarily suspended.

If you suspend critical judgement you may enjoy this. Maybe.

God bless the Canadian tax system.

Another Syfy channel abomination. Why do they keep making films when they have no feel - or respect - for the genre? I wonder why they didn't put a giant boa in the film & call it Boa vs Riverboat. Maybe they wanted to but thought that it would cheapen the product. Phillip Jose Farmer's Riverworld books (starting with To your scattered bodies go, which this thing palimpsests) are not flawless; but they had stories which made made sense & exotic character details which entertained. They - he - didn't deserve this travesty. It isn't a film: it's a cheat sheet of the least interesting bits mangled through a malfunctioning food processor. & to think that Robert Hewitt Wolfe once wrote some of the best ST:TNG & DS9 episodes. He must'ave had some great EPs at Paramount keeping him in line

A bunch of people get blown up. Then they resurrect. Or not. The film spins around on the alive/dead question so many times you get dizzy. The movie makes a habit of never being clear on anything, an apparent excuse to make up stuff as it goes along. This coyness act to maintain audience interest soon becomes annoying. Random stuff appears. For example, what was up with the TV dinner dispensary?

Making occasional visits are two beings with Avatar Blue Man Group faces and Obie Wan Kanobi style robes. These Jedi Ne'vi, or whoever they are, play hide and go seek, and make lame responses to inquiries. But they love to hang around and bug everybody; it reminded me of that whiny nitwit "Q," from Star Trek Next Gen. There's one fight after another, but the film's own dialog seems to be saying none of these events matter anyway. It carelessly hints at being a conglomeration of philosophy, science, and faith issues, but then never earnestly addresses any of these issues. Characters are drawn to illustrate differing people groups, personality types, and even historic eras; yet they still lack dimension.

It should be noted that the cast are the film's greatest strength, making the most of the weak scripting. Jeananne Goossen as the Xena-type Samurai made this over-the-top caricature believable, and Mark Deklin as Mark Twain was suitably amiable.

The ending? "We don't need no stinking ending!" No, just a deliberate set-up for a sci-fi/soap opera TV series. Sorry SyFy channel; one night of this was enough.

The books I have no read, but according to the Wiki page for them, this series has almost nothing in common with them. I have seen the 2003 Riverworld film and I vaguely remember that the idea annoyed me, but the movie was reasonable. The 2010 miniseries... it just sucks! People play badly, the scenes are ridiculous in both acting and directing, the script makes no sense and whenever there is a little bit of suspension of disbelief, there comes a sequence of scenes that skip whole portions of the story, like someone was too tired to do the whole film. And the lines... here is an example: "a sequence of choices leads to a consequence". Ugh!

The only good part of the film is Jeananne Goossen. She is just too cute, even if her character makes no sense at all. Bottom line: a sad and horrible thing to watch. Avoid it.