PDA

View Full Version : Film review: Black Hole



Geophyrd
22-Jun-2006, 01:11 PM
This should NOT be confused with Black Hole, the excellent graphic novel that I reviewed by Charles Burns or the David Brin novel Earth which are both must reads.

This flick (Black Hole starring Kirsty Swanson and Judd Nelson) (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0433883/) is a must skip. In fact, this film should not be confused with anything even mildly connected to the word excellent.

It was an embarassing mess.

It starts promisingly. In fact, it starts very similarly to David Brin's great novel Earth. A black hole is artificially created and stabilized (in the book by Brin, they were looking for a power source and deliberately created the hole. In this addled movie, they were doing quantum research and wound up with a surprise, actually two)

So, with the black hole comes a creature. No one understands the creature (including myself having watched this piece of crap) or its motivations other than it likes electicity and hates loud noises. Somehow its affiliated with the black hole which looks like a miniature hurricane and moves just as ponderously, wiping things out in its path.

First about the acting...its terrible but I know Nelson is capable of better. The script is to blame and some of the lines are real howlers. Nelson seemed embarassed the entire time and had NOTHING to do until the end, when he saved everyone. There's a half arsed plot line that he's divorced and his exwife and daughter finally see his value as he's saving the world. Of course, there's another jarring plot line where he's either in love with Kristy Swanson or had an affair with her or something. Boy, its ridiculous.

Swanson looks good. She's never been a brilliant actress. In fact, the only movie I can recall where she impressed me was Higher Learning and that was only because I dug her plotline as a bicurious chick seducing Jennifer Connelly.

Last, the physics. A black hole would not sit on the surface of the planet if it was released there. In fact, what is most likely is that it would sink immediately into the earth and orbit the core, eating the planet from within, a place we can't get to. That was the plot of Brin's novel (among many other plots) and it was much better than either this addled flick or (for that matter) most other hard scifi novels. Next, whatever the creature was, I don't know why they felt the need to make it humanoid. If there are creatures that live in black holes (black rabbits maybe?) then I doubt they need musculature, faces or would need to tap electrical power lines. What was it eating before it popped out of its hole?

Skip it. Its worth neither the time to watch nor the effort to write this review. Spend the time either reading Brin's book (Earth) or getting the graphic novel (which is science fiction but nothing like you'd expect). Click below for links to those.

Brin's novel (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/055329024X/qid=1150981421/sr=1-1/ref=sr_1_1/002-0565147-7544013?s=books&v=glance&n=283155)
The graphic novel (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/037542380X/ref=cm_pdp_review_teaser_product/002-0565147-7544013?n=283155)

Eyebiter
22-Jun-2006, 03:17 PM
Most of the scifi features are of similar quality, following in the footsteps of B Movie director Roger Corman. Snakehead Terror, Boa vs. Python, SS Doomtrooper to name a few. They aren't great, but can be fun for the kids.

To get more enjoyment from these B movies kick back with a case of beer and rip on them MST3k style for laughs.