The year sci-fi struck back

The sci-fi genre, like any, has seen quite a few ups and downs. From the early, cheesy B-movies of the 40s and 50s, to the rise of the space opera in Star Wars, to the fusion with horror in the Alien quadrilogy starting in 1979. Now, 30 years later, at the end of the first decade of the 2000s, the film release gods aligned the stars for a spectacular slate of sci-fi films spread across 2009. There were also the Star Wars prequels and two Terminator sequels, which raked in the millions but weren't so satisfying to series fans on many levels. What the sci-fi genre needed was something different, something innovative, something willing to push the conventions of what sci-fi could accomplish as a genre. And thanks to four very different films, that's exactly what happened.

First was JJ Abrams Star Trek reboot, blasting off into theaters in mid-May, and taking in just over $250 million domestically. Add to that the hugely positive response from critics and audiences alike, Abrams reboot became more than just 2009's Iron Man 0f sorts. Boasting snappy editing, and young, fresh-faced cast (with best-in-show honors going to Zachary Quinto as Spock), slick special effects, and quite a few genuinely emotional moments amid the flashing lasers, the film stands as a great achievement not only because it breathed new life into a franchise long on life support, but was also totally accessible to those who have never seen an episode of "Star Trek" before. The humor wasn't always executed sharply, and the final act wasn't as thrilling due to a ho-hum villain, but overall this hip, modern, reboot of the classic franchise deserved every penny and rave it got. Even after seeing it three times, it's still a blast.

Bottom Line: The movie that showed us that not only is sci-fi cool again, but that in the right hands, any franchise can bounce back.

Then we have the midsummer psychological thriller Moon, starring Sam Rockwell. What makes this one different from all of the others? It's *gasp* totally an art house movie. Sci-fi has for decades now been associated the big, the flashy, and the expensive. So for Moon to rank as one of the year's best films, and star the most criminally overlooked performance of the year from Mr. Rockwell, is something special, even if it didn't light up the box office. Duncan Jones' debut feature is an elegant psychological thriller, starring Rockwell and, really, ONLY Rockwell (in dual roles, no less) as an astronaut on contract to oversee a mining station on the moon. In his two roles, Rockwell shines, never leaving the audience begging for something more. It's truly a one man show and Rockwell takes command of it, and the results are excellent. The film itself has a few problems, mostly from hinting at trying to take on something grander, but never actually going there. On the whole, however, Moon stands as a stellar achievement, bolstered by impressive debut direction and Clint Mansell's haunting score.

Bottom Line: The film that showed us that sci-fi could not only work in "art house" territory, but also be driven by performances instead of spectacle.

August isn't exactly the high point of the summer movie season, but along with Inglorious Basterds, August brought us a genuine sci-fi wonder: Neill Blompkamp's District 9. The best part of the film was its premise: aliens have landed on earth not as bringers of peace or destruction, but as lost refugees. Add to the fact that the mothership was stranded over Johannesburg, and not a traditional city like New York, and the parallel's to apartheid, and what you get is a non-stop thrill ride, centered around a surprising performance from unknown Sharlto Copely. Even more impressive is the seamless way in which the effects blend in with the environments, and this is in a film shot for only $30 million. The use of faux documentary and security tape footage throughout helps up the intrigue, and despite the villains being too easily swayed to doing nasty things, the overall result is a charge of energy packed with gritty thrills and a heart-wrenching story.

Bottom Line: The movie that showed us that there are still unique sci-fi ideas out there.

Last is Avatar, which I've already talked about in my review, and still need to see a second time to settle my thoughts on the screenplay and acting (the same is true for Nine). The true star, as I've said, are the special effects, and they are indeed special. The best part of Avatar is simply getting to experience the creatures and vistas all generated from nothing, and how real they feel. The myriad creatures that inhabit Cameron's world are impressive and there were even times when I wished the film had simply been nothing more than a full faux documentary about Pandora. Where Cameron's world comes alive is when the least is said; the epic battle, the soaring flight sequences are all evidence of this. Like a sci-fi equivalent of Moulin Rouge!, sometimes it's not the story you tell, but simply how you tell it, that can make it great.

Bottom Line: The movie that showed us what special effects were capable of, and that motion capture can actually look realistic.

"Moon" - REVIEW

An independent sci-fi movie. Not exactly what we expect in the Hollywood of today, is it? "2001: A Space Odyssey" aside, when someone mentions sci-fi, you probably think of blasting lasers, faraway planets, exotic alien races, and technology way beyond anything we have on earth. Sci-fi is not a genre that is easy to associate with "independent filmmaking", and the success of "Star Wars" and the recent "Star Trek" film only make it more difficult. The closest thing recently has been "Sunshine" (2007), but even that film, in its third act, moved into more conventional territory. So, for those of you hoping that somewhere out there is a worthy companion piece to your limited edition digitally remastered "2001" DVD that you bought despite already owning another copy, fear not. The film you're looking for is Duncan Jones' "Moon", and while it may not been the timeless classic that "2001" is, it's more than worth a look in a summer crowded with transforming robot aliens, teen wizards, and romantic comedies starring Katherine Heigl or Sandra Bullock (I'm not sure either of those two ladies would have film careers if it weren't for that genre).

Unfortunately, I have to be vague, because not only is "Moon" short (95 minutes, including the credits), but the story is also quite limited and moves based almost entirely on discoveries and twists. So, let's start with what I CAN tell you: set some years into the future (we're not told how long), mankind has found a way to harvest clean energy off of the Moon, and thanks to Lunar Industries, the Moon now helps supply a massive portion of the whole world's energy. The Sarang Station, Lunar Industries' HQ, is run by one astronaut at a time, on a three-year contract, after which the astronaut is sent home and a replacement comes. There's also GERTY (voiced by Kevin Spacey), the computer who helps keep everything running. The current human employee is Sam Bell (Sam Rockwell), who has only two weeks left in his contract and then he finally gets to return home to see his wife and daughter. Everything is going fine until Sam hallucinates while he is out picking up a container of Hydrogen from one of the mining vehicles, and gets into a crash. He wakes up hours later in the Sarang infirmary, with a bit of memory loss. Later, he goes out to look at a mining vehicle that seems to have broken down, and once inside, he finds...himself. Obviously, he panics. Is it just a hallucination? Has all of his time alone caused him to go crazy? The rest is best for you to discover on your own, but suffice it say that despite little actually "happening", there's plenty to keep you interested.

The smartest thing that Jones and crew have done with "Moon" is the way it is paced. Scenes are not dragged out endlessly just to fill time; we see just enough, and then it cuts, but does so without feeling over-edited (*cough*Wolverine*cough*). Details are established efficiently (we learn about Sam's family via a video message from Earth, as well as the company he works for) and despite the low budget, the effects are convincing enough to make us believe that Bell is indeed thousands of miles from any other humans. The mostly white set adds to the clinical, sterile, lonely, and impersonal nature of the station, which Sam does his best to brighten with some posters and pictures from home taped around his bed. Camera work is neither flashy nor lazy, mostly very calm, but briefly switching over to close-ups and handheld work when Sam has one of his most significant encounters with the bizarre. For a debut feature, Jones' direction is stunning assured, and quite commanding from the opening frames.

The biggest accomplishments though, are Rockwell's performance, and Clint Mansell's haunting score. Rockwell basically IS the whole movie, and while I'm not sure his work is the tour-de-force that it's been touted as, it's certainly very strong work. Surpriningly, Jones and the script never push Rockwell into manipulative tear jerking, in spite of his almost soul-crushing loniness. He never is forced to cry and scream awkwardly, but instead all of his performance feels very real, and un-flashy. However, while the script doesn't push Rockwell into maudlin hysterics, it also doesn't quite push him far enough in the other direction, robbing the performance of some power. He's never given the chance to be truly nuanced or devastatingly subtle as the later portions of the story would allow (which is strange considering the ethical dilemma confronted in the film). But, to back it all up, we have that other strong aspect: Mr. Mansell's score. Mansell has a history of doing beautiful, haunting music for films (Requiem for a Dream, The Fountain), and his work here is no exception. Though not as dynamic as the scores of "Requiem" or "Fountain", it does stick with you, and help drive the minimal story forward.

So, we've talked about the positives, but alas, we must move on to the negatives, other than the one already mentioned in the previous paragraph. Really, my only other complaint(s) is that there are times when the script puts too many discoveries/twists almost too close together. They aren't back-to-back necessarily, but when they popped up I couldn't help but think that maybe, just maybe, there needed to be more time, so that each one could breathe and fit into the story better. At the rate the film was going, a few more minutes certainly wouldn't have hurt at all. Then, there's the big ethical dilemma. Thankfully, there are no preachy moments on the subject, but a few scenes exploring Sam's thoughts on what was going on might have added another, very rich layer to the film that could have resulted in a much larger impact on the audience. However, these are not so glaring as to make me dislike the film or feel disappointed by it. I was more than pleased, and I look forward to seeing what Jones does next. It's just that, well, sometimes less isn't more.

Grade: B+/A-

New posters for "Moon" and "The Brothers Bloom" (click for larger versions)

Fantastic trailer for upcoming sci-fi drama "Moon"