"Sunshine"...

[MinionZombie]

Well, I went to the cinema today for a double whammy...the second film was "Hot Fuzz", which I'd only seen on a sh*tty CAM missing the start, and it was great on the big screen (the intro was nifty to see as well)...but by crikey, it was F*CKING LOUD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! BEYOND BELIEF - bloody hell, turn it down a bit mate! If you can feel the concussion of the shotgun blasts (or whippy/crashy montages) in your chest, then it's TOO F*CKING LOUD!!!

Otherwise, it was bloody marvellous seeing it on the big screen - BRING THE NOISE!!! (as long as you dial it down a couple :rolleyes: *strokes headache incurred as a result).

Anyway, onto the point - Danny Boyle's "Sunshine".

Closest thing to a spoiler in 'ere is mention of one scene which is very vague, mentions no names, nor when it appears, how it appears or anything - the rest is my personal reaction, and just generalisations about the film that you'd find in any usual review.

Simply put - it's a thinking man's Armageddon ... minus the cheese, minus the "Harry I love you!!!"...

It was beautiful beyond belief, it had me spell-bound and featured perhaps the most beatiful death scene ever committed to film in the history of cinema - and it's beautiful in the sense of 'seeing the silver lining to tragedy', at this stage when it happens (and when you watch it, you'll know which scene I mean) you should be 'on the same level' as the protagonists, whom you remain with throughout the film - thus putting you 'in their shoes', connecting you with the last chance for humanity itself. 6+ billion lives depend on this crew and their payload 'star within a star' creating-bomb that's the size of Manhattan...yes, you could say that's a bit daft, but believe me, it isn't...you genuinely get sucked into this movie, you feel right there with the protagonists, who do a superb job of acting (especially Cillian Murphy who is astonishing ... his performance is powerful to say the least). The protagonists know the importance of what they're doing, so you don't get any of that usual bleeding-heart-liberal bollocks, the clarity of vision for these protagonists is refreshing, and helps further cement the importance of their mission.

My only grievance is that perhaps there's maybe a bit too much of the 'let's go have a look at the sun reflecting off the solar-panel-shield-sail-thing' moments ... but it's easy to overlook.

The film is beautifully shot, the music is SPOT-THE-F*CK-ON - especially in the scene I waxed lyrical about earlier (it captured my breath and held it throughout, it had my eyes welling up with emotion as I was completely transported into that astonishingly beautiful moment), the performances are also spot on, there's clarity of vision, there's belief in abundance, you feel for these characters and you most importantly respect them.

Now yes, my review is inspired by my own personal experience of this film, but I got completely sucked into it and I "got" it, it had me spell-bound throughout and it perhaps the most beautiful film I've ever seen. The simple beauty of life itself, encased in the sheer power of the Sun itself just leaves you in awe, the Sun truly is our actual and tangible God and it's a thing of power, menace, beauty and awe in this film.

Absolutely superb, highly recommended, it will be leaving an impression on me for some time.

*one more time*

BEAUTIFUL

[capncnut]

Thanks for that MZ, I will go to see this on Friday. F**kin' A man! :thumbsup:

[MinionZombie]

Another thing I wanna add - if you get sucked into the film, it's kinda like a religious experience ... but for Athiests. :cool:

Obviously, don't go in expecting to see the film how I saw it, but it's definitely a film with power on the big silver that would be/will be mostly lost on the small screen - best viewed BIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIG.

The key to going to a film and enjoying it is not expecting anything from it, so then what you do get out of it is all the more powerful for it. I had no idea what to expect from Sunshine anyway, but I freakin' loved it. Boyle nails another genre - the space opera.

It's a science fiction drama with a snifter of action ... if you wanna get genre-headed about it. :)

[Cykotic]

I saw Sunshine yesterday and all I saw from start to finish was one of the best sci-fi films of the year. The acting was near perfect, the story was gripping and the Special Effects... outstanding.

Plus, the new trailer was 28 Weeks Later.... amazing!!!

[Danny]

to be honest im still kind of on the fence cus a lot of reviews say it goes a bit too event horizon at the end but on the other hand its danny boyle, you know what your getting is gonna be a great piece of cinema regardless.

[MinionZombie]

Oh get off the fence you jaded monkey.

The reason for the 'event horizon' thing is just because of (minor spoiler, might have been mentioned in reviews):

The protagonists are on Icarus II, Icarus I didn't get there, the mission was f*cked up, they find Icarus I again as they make their final approach - of around 55 million miles, hehe - to the Sun. They go on board and that's what is 'event horizon' about it.

But Event Horizon was a good flick, and it's not like Event Horizon was original, it doesn't hold the copyright on 'people investigate abandoned vessel' content. :rolleyes:

And now for a bit more spoiler type stuff:

The captain of Icarus I went mad, he was consumed by the power of the Sun, just like one or two of the crew on Icarus II are doing, it's awesome power is a thing of beauty and menace...anyway, the captain of Icarus I goes mad and believes himself to be talking directly to God in the Sun's presence - the athiest's God anyway - and he believes that he has to stop the mission and all of mankind has to be brought to Heaven at last, so it's a crazy captain who's got the worst sunburn you've ever seen.

Comparing it to Event Horizon is pretty arbitrary, so stop flip-flopping like the jaded monkey you are and bloody well watch it. *sheesh!*

[Geophyrd]

I knkow some poeple didn't like 28 Days Later but I really liked the movie. I don't compare it to Romero's movies. Just the balls to shoot it the way he did and make what was a pretty slick little film.

I also liked The Beach (and still listen to the soundtrack a lot), A Life Less Ordinary (ditto on the soundtrack), Shallow Grave and so on. This guy's been entertaining me for years!

I've been looking forward to seeing Sunshine since I first heard about it and will see it on the biggest danged screen I can find it on!

[MinionZombie]

Big screen - hell yeah ... I was balled over and sucked in on a normal cinema screen - just imagine it (for those who've seen it) if it was on an Imax screen! :eek: That'd be glorious...shame it's only in fahkin' lahdahn ... tha greedy gets!

[bassman]

But Event Horizon was a good flick, and it's not like Event Horizon was original, it doesn't hold the copyright on 'people investigate abandoned vessel' content. :rolleyes:



You could compare it to "Alien", if you wanted. There's thousands of flicks like that.

[MinionZombie]

Bassman - indeed, there's plenty of flicks with that kinda content in them, but the key point here though, is that in Sunshine it isn't the main thrust of the movie, it's a part of the film, and it's far from the point of the film too.

[capncnut]

Big screen - hell yeah ... I was balled over and sucked in on a normal cinema screen - just imagine it (for those who've seen it) if it was on an Imax screen! :eek: That'd be glorious...shame it's only in fahkin' lahdahn ... tha greedy gets!
Don't live far from it either, you know that's where I'm going. Fahkin' expensive though.

[MinionZombie]

*bumping this for anyone who ain't seen it, all these damn old-ass threads gettin' bumped, blocking my genius prose! SHOCKING! I AM SHOCKED!!* :D

[Tricky]

I wasnt too keen on the idea of this,i had visions of steve tyler singing about not missing a thing etc,but if its actually good then i may venture out to see it :D

[MinionZombie]

lol, ah mate, it's so far from Armageddon it's untold. This is basically science-fiction-drama.

It has heart and soul, the acting is superb almost entirely (Cillian Murphy is astonishingly good), it's beautifully realised, the music kicks balls, it's just a fantastic movie - Boyle nails another genre! :cool:

[Danny]

Oh get off the fence you jaded monkey.

The reason for the 'event horizon' thing is just because of (minor spoiler, might have been mentioned in reviews):

The protagonists are on Icarus II, Icarus I didn't get there, the mission was f*cked up, they find Icarus I again as they make their final approach - of around 55 million miles, hehe - to the Sun. They go on board and that's what is 'event horizon' about it.

But Event Horizon was a good flick, and it's not like Event Horizon was original, it doesn't hold the copyright on 'people investigate abandoned vessel' content. :rolleyes:

And now for a bit more spoiler type stuff:

The captain of Icarus I went mad, he was consumed by the power of the Sun, just like one or two of the crew on Icarus II are doing, it's awesome power is a thing of beauty and menace...anyway, the captain of Icarus I goes mad and believes himself to be talking directly to God in the Sun's presence - the athiest's God anyway - and he believes that he has to stop the mission and all of mankind has to be brought to Heaven at last, so it's a crazy captain who's got the worst sunburn you've ever seen.

Comparing it to Event Horizon is pretty arbitrary, so stop flip-flopping like the jaded monkey you are and bloody well watch it. *sheesh!*

hey i never said event horizon was bad, i really liked it, saw it when i was like 12 and it scared me in the middle of the day, now thats the sign of a good scary movie, though i was 12 at the time and still really into pokemon so i hadnt seen movies liek that THAT often.

[Neil]

I thought the film was rather average :(

The first half and build up was quite good, and then, just light 28 Days Later, for some reason the second half seems to collapse/descend into a weaker film. IMHO.

Pros:-
# The visuals were excellent
# The build up in the first half was good
# Acting was general very good

Cons:-
# Too much "Armageddon" physics at play. Once again we have gravity where there's none! And ships weighing billions of tonnes having no issue with stopping in a dime. People able to survive in the vacuum of space without a suit?
# These people are the best the world has too offer? They mainly just come across as a bunch of students!
# The "baddie" was just too weak. Seen it a dozen times before and done far better.
# The production/editing in the latter portion of the film seemed very scrappy eg: The visual effects seems to be thrown in all over the shop for no good reason and just got on my nerves. Infact this need to throw in too many effects popped up from time to time, eg: with those damn annoying subliminal images for example.
# The script generally had too many weak spots. (see below)

Spoilers/flaws:-
Why have a pointless window in the biolab/oxygen garden?
If the oxygen garden is so important, why only have one?
They're short on oxygen? Then why not use the hundreds of thousands of cubic metres of oxygen they happen to have in the payload section?
Only one person who can arm the bomb? That's putting the fate of the world in safe hands!


Summary: Enjoyable, but so easily could have been brilliant for the want of a better thought out script...

[MinionZombie]

*sigh*

Geez Neil, you're so freakin' picky ... and I duno what film you were watching, wasn't the film I watched. For one thing, I thought the protagonists were quite professional and adult about the situation, and not studenty at all.

[Neil]

*sigh*

Geez Neil, you're so freakin' picky ... and I duno what film you were watching, wasn't the film I watched. For one thing, I thought the protagonists were quite professional and adult about the situation, and not studenty at all.

All but a couple were in their early 20s and certainly didn't come across as being 'the greatest candidates from the planet earth'. ie: The kind of people you'd trust the fait of an entire planet with!

Sorry, when pin head turned up and we decended into basically a Hollywood slasher flick, that was a bit too much for me.

It started off well, but the script just got sloppy/lazy :( See the list above (Even Kubrick 40yrs ago managed to make films with proper space ships with realistic onboard gravity, or lack of!)

As I said, I enjoyed it, but it's a shame that with a stronger story/script, it could have been epic! IMHO...

[MinionZombie]

lol, you're on about realism? ... *ahem* ... they're rebooting the sun with a bomb the size of Manhattan! :lol:

If they're capable of doing that, they're capable of making some kind of gravity in space.

You're just too cynical, Neil. :p

[Neil]

If they're capable of doing that, they're capable of making some kind of gravity in space.

You're just too cynical, Neil. :p

That one was of the least of my issues with the script... It really did in many ways collapse similarly to how '28 Days Later' did... IMHO that had unecessary script flaws as well, especially in the latter parts...

The issue with the air was probably the biggest one! Too contrived, ill-thoughtout and therefore ultimately lazy! If I was writing a piece of fiction for this site, I wouldn't have been able to submit it knowing there were holes that big in it...

ps: In the final scene of the film, one more minor thing, if I recollect correctly...didn't the sun brighten and then the ground brighten from the horizon forward slowly? You could see the band of brightness coming towards you... Now again... How does that happen? It would just be instant?!

[MinionZombie]

*sigh* Again Neil, you're too jaded and picky.

It's a film, so it's for cinematic effect, it's for symbolism. :) You're just too picky. :sneaky::p

[Neil]

*sigh* Again Neil, you're too jaded and picky.

It's a film, so it's for cinematic effect, it's for symbolism. :) You're just too picky. :sneaky::p

What was the symbolism of the best brains on the planet missing a million cubic metres of oxygen a hundred feet from them before talking about killing people off? :)




It's a story that for any sort of emotional attachment/care, asks you to believe to some degree in what you see and what the characters do.

I suspect if Mickey Mouse had popped up as the mentalist nutter you would have complained? That would have pushed the believability too far?

The moment you get too many 'leaps of faith' and unrealistic behaviour/scenarios etc in a script people 'detatch' and therefore the spell is broken IMHO.

Now again, I enjoyed Sunshine and thought some aspects of it worked very well. But the reason I'm kicking up a fuss is that some lazy writing let it down. With a bit more consideration it could have been stunning! (Much like 28 Days Later could have been save some poorer areas of the script)


I still think one of my favourite scifi spacey films attempting to be based somewhere in reality is 2010! Apollo 13 was also an outstanding piece of film making, but that's sort of a documentary :)

[capncnut]

Oh, is this the old chesnut of MZ questioning your sanity because you didn't like something as much as him. Man, if I had a dollar, I'd be rich! :D


I still think one of my favourite scifi spacey films attempting to be based somewhere in reality is 2010!
Yes Neil, amazing movie. Saw it at the cinema three times. Overall not as beautiful or epic as it's predecessor but a damn good space yarn nonetheless. I thought Roy Scheider's portrayal of Heywood Floyd was just as good as William Sylvester's (shame he declined to appear though) and I think it ties in seamlessly with the original.

Apparently for the last 10 years Tom Hanks has been trying to get 2061 off the ground and has been long touted to play Floyd. It will be interesting to see because 2061 was my favourite of the four books.

[MinionZombie]

Hey Capn, how about ya kiss my chuddies - quit taking my text out of context. :rockbrow::sneaky:

I'm just kinda taken aback that Neil didn't like it, but it seems he's having the same reaction he did to 28 Days Later (from the same writing/directing team).

I just find it kinda funny to get bothered about the specifics of pushing air around, when you're fine with them being able to create a bomb the size of Manhattan and actually launch it. :)

I ain't bitching about squat, Neil's opinion is that, his opinion and he's totally allowed to have it. Can't I have a conversation?! Can't I try and understand where he's coming from a bit clearer?! Jesus-titty-f*cking-Christ, I might as well just run off to the hills and dance around with Nazi-dodging baby sitters if I'm not even allowed to have a conversation! Heaven forbid! :eek::stunned::rolleyes::p

[Neil]

Oh, is this the old chesnut of MZ questioning your sanity because you didn't like something as much as him. Man, if I had a dollar, I'd be rich! :D


Yes Neil, amazing movie. Saw it at the cinema three times. Overall not as beautiful or epic as it's predecessor but a damn good space yarn nonetheless. I thought Roy Scheider's portrayal of Heywood Floyd was just as good as William Sylvester's (shame he declined to appear though) and I think it ties in seamlessly with the original.

Apparently for the last 10 years Tom Hanks has been trying to get 2061 off the ground and has been long touted to play Floyd. It will be interesting to see because 2061 was my favourite of the four books.

Was that the Haley's Comet one?


I'm just kinda taken aback that Neil didn't like it, but it seems he's having the same reaction he did to 28 Days Later (from the same writing/directing team).

I've said a coupe of times I DID enjoy it! But felt let down by some of the doooofus scripting... And I felt 28 Days although great in some ways, again suffered from some unecessarily weak elements to the script... especially in the latter stages...



I just find it kinda funny to get bothered about the specifics of pushing air around, when you're fine with them being able to create a bomb the size of Manhattan and actually launch it. :)

The bomb I could believe in... A massive bomb doing something magical to the fusion process on the sun.. Sort of far-fetched but I could forgive that.

*minor spoiler*
However, the other problems were clearly down to weak writing. And the one we seem to be concentrating on (the air) - we have half a dozen of the brightest/best people on the planet, who we've entrusted with the lives of everyone on the planet, who are contemplating killing each other because they're potentially running out of air - While not 100ft from them is enough air for a football team for a year! :) Even if they just closed down a couple of rooms and used the air from them, that would have added on hours! But nope not one of these people even contemplates it...

[MinionZombie]

Ah but, that wouldn't make for much of an interesting second half though, just some people pushing buttons and going "whew! we can breathe easy now, and we'll get home, let's have some champers!" :p Without the deadline to get the job done by - due to the lack of air - in the second half of the film, it wouldn't really have enough drive to keep going...that's what I t'ink anyway. :)

[capncnut]

Was that the Haley's Comet one?
Sure was. The one where tycoon William Tsung realises that a large diamond sits on Europa and orders a group of renegades to hijack a spacecraft and crash land there. Great story.

The two new 'Time Odyssey' spin off's that Clarke has co-written with Stephen Baxter; Time's Eye and Sunstorm, are amazing btw. The third book Firstborn is out soon.

[Yorkie]

Went to see this yesterday, got to the cinema and found out my unlimited card was in my other bag (problems of being a girl I guess) :(

Was told that they can't look to prove that I have a card cos all info is stored at head office or whatever, but he could sell me a cheaper ticket :|

So went shopping instead :D will definately see it next week though

[Neil]

Sure was. The one where tycoon William Tsung realises that a large diamond sits on Europa and orders a group of renegades to hijack a spacecraft and crash land there. Great story.

The two new 'Time Odyssey' spin off's that Clarke has co-written with Stephen Baxter; Time's Eye and Sunstorm, are amazing btw. The third book Firstborn is out soon.

I've never read anything by Clarke that I didn't enjoy.. So what are these 'Time Odyssey' books then?

[capncnut]

So what are these 'Time Odyssey' books then?
The Time Odyssey series began last year and are modern representations of 2001 (the monolith has now been replaced by a sphere) and the story is set from many different perspectives.

The first book Time's Eye deals with the whole Dawn Of Man sequence and the second book Sunstorm continues the story from 2027. They are co-written by Stephen Baxter and the reviews are very good.

[Terran]

I thought the film was rather average :(

Pros:-
# The visuals were excellent
# The build up in the first half was good
# Acting was general very good

Cons:-
# Too much "Armageddon" physics at play. Once again we have gravity where there's none! And ships weighing billions of tonnes having no issue with stopping in a dime. People able to survive in the vacuum of space without a suit?
# These people are the best the world has too offer? They mainly just come across as a bunch of students!
# The "baddie" was just too weak. Seen it a dozen times before and done far better.
# The production/editing in the latter portion of the film seemed very scrappy eg: The visual effects seems to be thrown in all over the shop for no good reason and just got on my nerves. Infact this need to throw in too many effects popped up from time to time, eg: with those damn annoying subliminal images for example.
# The script generally had too many weak spots. (see below)

Spoilers/flaws:-
Why have a pointless window in the biolab/oxygen garden?
If the oxygen garden is so important, why only have one?
They're short on oxygen? Then why not use the hundreds of thousands of cubic metres of oxygen they happen to have in the payload section?
Only one person who can arm the bomb? That's putting the fate of the world in safe hands!


Summary: Enjoyable, but so easily could have been brilliant for the want of a better thought out script...


You forgot a couple major flaws Neil....


They seemed to "forget the fact that as the sun burns out, it will actually get hotter." (Im surprised you missed that one Neil cause Im sure you knew this already :D )
They seemed to forget the fact "the sun is powered by the equivalent of 4 billion H bombs exploding every second, which gives you a feel for what would be needed to replace its heat source if it were failing."
They seemed to forget the fact "that a replacement nuclear power supply would have to be delivered to the core of the sun, not the surface, and even then it would take about 30,000 years for the heat to percolate back out from the center to the surface of the sun."

The New Scientist magizine temporarily forgives these errors if Sunshine was at least a good drama, but they decide that it wasnt and go on to slam the characters.
It says that the makers of Sunshine have not managed a well-rounded or complex portrayal of the characters involved in race against all odds to save life as we know it.

They go on to say that Sci Fi films do not neccessarily need good characters because the genre after is the literature of ideas rather than human relationships. They refer to 2001: A Space Odyssey saying that "without a doubt, the characters were lacking in substance, but the film's theme of transcendence took center stage, what is the next step in the human evolution?".

They also mention how Close Encounters of the Third Kind and the film version of Carl Sagan's novel Contact presented situations that fired audiences imagination and conveyed a sense of awe.

They give Blade Runner A LOT of praise saying "there was a jaw-dropping depiction of a teeming, dystopian future Los Angeles, but the audience enaged with the love affair between Decker and Rachael ,an android, that posed the question: what does it mean to be human?
[Theres a lot more going on in that movie that just that but I suppose the other stuff was less revolutionary in movies. All the stuff about "god" and lifespan etc etc]



So the New Scientist Magizine concludes:


unfortunately Sunshine is redeemed by none of the ingredients of these other films. "If it enaged my sense of wonder it was for questions like, why are so many films with signifcant science content so bad? Why when it comes to depicting science, is human drama invariably vented through the airlock? What are people with a technical bent not depicted as real people, with all the fears and jealousies, rivalries, loves and hates of normal human beings?

And then there is the science. Why do film-makers need to bend plausible reality to breaking point and beyond for the sake of plot when there are so many real threats facing humanity that ripe for good drama? Science is pushing the envelope in every direction, questioning our certainties, posing moral dilemmas, illuminating what it is to be human. There is no need to trump up dodgy, nonsensical science. Science is absolutely bursting with stuff that can challenge the heart and mind of the cinema-goer. Is anyone out there in movie land listening?


A review in New Scientist Magizine slams this movie....Im pretty sure New Scientist Magizine is a british magizine....its my favorite magizine subscription always lots of great acticles and they write them in much greater scientific detail than I have seen in other similiar publications. Neil I think you would really dig the magizine....the articles arent dumbed down....but are still understandable to most educated or self educated people with interests in science.....

But anyway the article really slams this movie and a couple other Sci Fi movies ...."Why are so many films with science content so bad"

[Danny]

saw it, didnt like it, worst boyle film since the beach:dead:

[JohnoftheDead]

Bollocks, I guess I won't be going to see this until September, since that's when it freakin' comes out over here.

[Neil]

They go on to say that Sci Fi films do not neccessarily need good characters because the genre after is the literature of ideas rather than human relationships. They refer to 2001: A Space Odyssey saying that "without a doubt, the characters were lacking in substance, but the film's theme of transcendence took center stage, what is the next step in the human evolution?".

I think that's why I like 2010, the characters seem a bit more interesting :)

[capncnut]

They go on to say that Sci Fi films do not neccessarily need good characters because the genre after is the literature of ideas rather than human relationships. They refer to 2001: A Space Odyssey saying that "without a doubt, the characters were lacking in substance, but the film's theme of transcendence took center stage, what is the next step in the human evolution?".
I thought Bowman, Poole, Floyd even Hal were very fleshy characters. Kubrick just chose to keep his distance with them and that's what makes 2001's characterisation interesting. You see small snapshots into their lives, like Vidphone calls or Poole's birthday message. The way he calmly and unemotionally takes that message knowing that the probability of seeing his family again are nil... Not many people are aware that the Discovery's crew would be awaiting new technology to take them home after the mission and that it's pretty much a one way journey. It's coldly done and captures the isolation of the situation perfectly.

[Yorkie]

Finally I got to see this and I enjoyed it right up to the last 20 mins or so when I was sat there thinking I can't see what's happening and I hate that :(

Other than that it was pretty good, I wouldn't tell all my mates to go see it cos its fantastic or anything but worth seeing.

[Neil]

Finally I got to see this and I enjoyed it right up to the last 20 mins or so when I was sat there thinking I can't see what's happening and I hate that :(

Other than that it was pretty good, I wouldn't tell all my mates to go see it cos its fantastic or anything but worth seeing.

If only the script had been given a damn good kick, it coulod have been a scifi masterpiece!