|
With
Gary Sinise, Tim Robbins, and other fine actors directed by Brian De
Palma, Mission to Mars promised a strong interpersonal drama
supported by special effects and space adventure. With the trailers and
hype, there was the additional promise of at least quasi-spiritual
exploration of the origins of life, perhaps along the lines of Contact
or 2001: Space Odyssey. Both of these promises were, sadly,
unfulfilled. The dramatic situations seemed forced, almost sappy and
melodramatic. In one scene, a wife floats in space weeping for what
seems like an eternity as her astronaut husband floats just out of
reach. She is just barely torn from her desire to save him at the cost
of her life, the mission, and her duty as an astronaut. Sure, such a
situation has a certain poignancy, but it makes us question the logic of
sending a married couple on such a long and dangerous space mission.
Besides such disappointments,
Mission to Mars delivers a documentary style depiction of near
future space travel. The mission set in 2020 takes off from a space
station with a two-year goal of reaching and returning from the red
planet. The ship, space suits, Mars colony, the space stations seem
real. We thought the quarters and command modules on the space ship
convincing with all the new technology gadgetry in place. Frankly, Mission
to Mars is the first recent SCI-FI film that arms its ships with
digital command panels. Surely, if we are to send ships through space,
they ought to be outfitted with something much better than massive and
clunky buttons and levers. We have learned that this verisimilitude had
been derived from actual NASA mock ups with even the correct logos.
However, in one amusing intrusion of product placement, a Mars vehicle
carries a Kawasaki label and a notice that it is was lubricated by
Penzoil.
One of the problems of Mission
to Mars comes from little or no character conflict, and a slim
establishment of Jim (Gary Sinise) as the protagonist. Jim doesn’t
even take over the action till half way into the movie. However, even a
bigger problem is constituted by too many obvious logic holes. We would
spoil the movie by listing them all, but with a Sagan or a Kubrick, we
are not left wondering why the computer didn’t detect a fuel leak or
why a super advanced civilization didn’t keep dirt off of the symbol
they intended as an invitation for us to visit them. There were many
more of these kinds of questions irritatingly popping up and distracting
us from the mystery and development. In a fast paced, slam bang action
story, or one filled with horror and monsters, inconsistencies may slip
by and be overlooked, but they cannot be excused in a movie that is
supposed to be realistic. We note that there are a slew of writers on
the credits. This is usually an indication that there was trouble
pulling the story together, and in such circumstances, logic and
coherence are often sacrificed.
Still, Mission to Mars
builds powerful visual poetry. We learn the history of life on Mars and
its origins on Earth from a long Holographic presentation that
transcends the need for language, even that of mathematics, to explain
the facts, emotion, and spiritual significance of our evolution.
Realistically, the source of disaster for both the human space flight to
Mars and the destruction of the planet’s capacity to sustain life came
in the form of asteroids and meteorites, not wars, evil forces, or
monsters.
All in all, Mission to
Mars is an interesting film, even enthralling at times, but one with
insufficient dramatic or logical development to become an enduring
metaphor of what and who we are.
E-mail
us!
BACK TO
TOP |
|
DIRECTED
BY:
Brian De Palma
WRITTEN BY:
Jim Thomas
John Thomas
Graham Yost
CAST:
Gary Sinise as Jim McConnell
Don Cheadle as Luc Goddard
Connie Nielsen as Terry Fisher
Jerry O'Connell as Phil Ohlmyer
Tim Robbins as Woody Blake
MPAA RATING:
PG
RUNNING TIME:
167 Minutes
LINKS:
Now Available:
|
