Mission to Mars

A little romantic skydancing never hurts a relationship.

(2000) Science Fiction (Touchstone) Gary Sinese, Tim Robbins, Don Cheadle, Connie Nielsen, Jerry O’Connell, Peter Outerbridge Kavan Smith, Jill Teed, Elise Neal, Kim Delaney, Armin Mueller-Stahl, Robert Bailey Jr., Patricia Harras, Lynda Boyd, Jody Thompson, Lucia Walters Pamela Diaz. Directed by Brian De Palma

The human nature is to explore, to find out what lies beyond where we have already been; to ask questions and then find answers. We explore without; the world around us, and someday, the worlds beyond our own. We also explore within; who we are, where we come from and where we are going. Hey, it keeps us busy.

Mission to Mars looks at that aspect of ourselves. Set in 2020, it posits the first manned mission to the Red Planet. Tragedy dogs the mission even before it leaves; its commander, Jim McConnell (Sinese), withdraws following the death of his wife and co-commander of the mission.

At first, the mission seems fairly routine; to discover the feasibility of colonization. However, the new mission commander, Luke Graham (Cheadle) discovers an anomaly, one which quickly turns deadly. When it becomes clear to mission control that something has gone wrong at Mars Base, a rescue mission is mounted, led by Woody Blake (Robbins), his wife Terri (Nielsen) and mission specialist Phil Ohlmyer (O’Connell). Blake insists that McConnell accompany the team, as he is the one who wrote the mission plan for the original expedition, including a possible rescue situation, and knows more about Mars than any other astronaut. It takes some convincing of the still-grieving McConnell but he eventually realizes that he could save lives so he assents.

The rescue mission also meets with unexpected tragedy after a micrometeorite shower holes the ship. The rescue party has to use all their resourcefulness in order to make it to the planet. There, they find the object of their mission … and a puzzle for them to solve. It explains why the first mission had to die … and a whole lot more. Think of this as a junior 2001: A Space Odyssey with better special effects and a director who is more of a storyteller. That, perhaps, is the biggest problem with M2M; rather than leave the mystery pretty much unsolved, letting the audience come to its own conclusions as Stanley Kubrick did with his film, director Brian de Palma makes sure that everything is explained in nice, neat little packages. That takes away from the grandeur of the mystery, and leaves us feeling like Peggy Lee; is that all there is?

Visually, there are some stunning moments, particularly late in the movie during the Martian Head scene, and during a cataclysmic accident. Sinese and Robbins are solid actors who never disappoint; Sinese is particularly excellent, playing an astronaut for the first time since Apollo 13 and comporting himself as a complex man, switching between mourning his wife and achieving the dream they both shared. Cheadle is an actor whose stock in Hollywood was on the rise when this was made; for me it cemented his standing as an actor whose every role was worth seeking out, a place he occupies to this day.

It makes for an odd switch; I’m usually more forgiving of the excesses of sci-fi flicks than Da Queen, but she liked this movie better than I did. That it got a one-hanky recommendation from Da Queen is telling enough; that she found it thought-provoking should be recommendation enough for anyone. For my part, I give it a mild recommendation; certainly, it’s worth seeing for the scope of its vision as well as the performances of its solid cast. I also give the writers props for avoiding cliché characterization and action for its own sake.

Still, I’ve seen 2001, I’ve enjoyed 2001 (although I didn’t love 2001), but this ain’t 2001.

WHY RENT THIS: Some spectacular effects sequences. Solid performances from Sinese, Cheadle and Robbins.

WHY RENT SOMETHING ELSE: Explains too much – a little more mystery would have gone a long way. Could have used more depth in characterization.

FAMILY MATTERS: There is a bit of violence, some bad language and a few disturbing images.

TRIVIAL PURSUITS: There is a “hidden Mickey,” seen here when the Mars Explorer lines up with Mars, the rotating circular hub of the spacecraft and antenna dish form the iconic image of Mickey Mouse. Of course, Touchstone is a division of Disney, and “hidden Mickeys” are notoriously placed throughout all of the Disney theme parks as easter eggs for their guests.

NOTABLE HOME VIDEO FEATURES: There is an animatics to finished scene comparison that is fairly interesting. The making of featurette also shows the input of NASA into the finished film making it a little more interesting than most.

BOX OFICE PERFORMANCE: $111.0M on a $100M production budget; the movie’s ambitious budget outpaced it’s decent box office and so it was unprofitable during its theatrical release.

COMPARISON SHOPPING: 2001: A Space Odyssey (in case I didn’t make it clear in the review)

FINAL RATING: 5.5/10

NEXT: Skyfall

Super 8

Elle Fanning can't believer her eyes. Neither can we.

(2011) Sci-Fi Adventure (Paramount) Kyle Chandler, Elle Fanning, Joel Courtney, Gabriel Basso, Noel Emmerich, Ron Eldard, Ryan Lee, Ryan Griffiths, Zach Mills, AJ Michalka, Glynn Turman, Bruce Greenwood, Michael Giacchino, Dan Castellaneta. Directed by J.J. Abrams

There is an age that is magic, when the possibilities of life are endless and unimaginable. At that age, summer stretches out like a magic carpet, taking us anywhere and everywhere. Some of those places are places we might not necessarily want to be.

Young Joe Lamb (Courtney) is mourning the death of his mother in a steel mill accident. His father, Deputy Jackson Lamb (Chandler) has some anger issues, blaming town drunk Louis Dainard (Eldard) for his wife’s demise.

Joe’s best friend is Charles Kaznyk (Griffiths), a movie made husky kid who is making a zombie movie for a film festival, on Super 8 stock. Oh, did I mention that this is 1979? It is. Anyway, they want to shoot at the train station and Charlie has decided to add a love interest for his lead actor Martin (Basso) and into the picture comes Alice Dainard (Fanning), the daughter of Louis. She is drawn to Joe, who does the make-up and sound, whose melancholy draws her like a moth to a flame. Neither of them realizes the issue between their fathers, or what Louis’ role in the death of Joe’s mom is.

While filming at the train station, they witness what appears to be an intentional derailment of the freight train by a pickup truck which, to their shock, is driven by their science teacher (Turman) who warns them to tell nobody. When military types led by the hardnosed Colonel Nelec (Emmerich) swoop in, they believe their teacher may have been right.

Soon it becomes apparent that there was something aboard the freight train that wasn’t supposed to be there, something terrifying and angry. People disappear, dogs disappear and property is damaged. The military is covering it up. It has something to do with a creature that was captured on the young filmmaker’s camera, and some strange cubes. When the military insists on evacuating the town, the kids – including pyromaniac cameraman Cary (Lee) will find out the truth, and risk everything to rescue one of their own.

Director Abrams has crafted a loving homage to Steven Spielberg’s early works (and Spielberg produced this under his Amblin banner) especially E.T. and maybe Poltergeist with a heaping helping of The Goonies for good measure. Setting this in 1979 was a good move; it places it squarely in Spielberg’s golden era and adds that nostalgic sheen to the movie.

The juvenile actors in this movie do a really whiz-bang job. Fanning, who up to now has been overshadowed by her sister Dakota, pulls her best performance yet as the lovely but shy Alice, who is the object of affection for Joe. She is both kind and sweet but with a tormented side which shows from time to time. It’s a bravura performance that is nearly matched by Courtney, who is the hero here and a boy who is coping with overwhelming grief and a father who is distant from him and was so even before his wife died.

Now, I’ve made it pretty clear that I’m not big on the “kids saving the day” types of movies. They tend to be insulting to the intelligence of both kids and adults. Still, this one is better than most, harkening back to some of the best movies of the 70s and 80s with 21st century flair and awesome creature effects. What’s not to like?

REASONS TO GO: A really great creature feature, E.T. meets Cloverfield.  Some fine juvenile performances.

REASONS TO STAY: Kids saving the day syndrome.

FAMILY VALUES: The creature can be terrifying and there are some scenes that might be disturbing for the very young. There’s also some language.

TRIVIAL PURSUIT: The name of the town, Lillian, is named for director J.J. Abrams’ grandmother.

HOME OR THEATER: Definitely big screen. This is a popcorn movie all the way.

FINAL RATING: 7.5/10

TOMORROW: Frozen

Departures (Okuribito)

A symphony for an appreciatively silent audience.

(Regent) Masahiro Motoki, Tsutomu Yamazaki, Ryoko Hirosue, Kazuko Yoshiyuki, Kimiko Yo, Takashi Sasato, Taro Ishida, Yukiko Tachibano, Genjitsu Shu, Sanae Miyata, Toru Minegishi, Tetta Sugimoto. Directed by Yojiro Takita.

Death is a part of life that is completely inevitable. We all die. You will die. I will die. Someone we love will die. As a far different sort of movie once opined, how we deal with death is at least as important as how we deal with life.

Daigo Kobayashi (Motoki) is a cellist in a symphony orchestra that plays before half-empty houses in Tokyo. His perky wife Mika (Hirosue) thinks he’s a genius but then again she’s kind of a live action Hello Kitty figure. That’s when the bad news hits – the orchestra is being disbanded. Daigo is going to have to find a new job and he comes to the realization that as a cellist, he is second rate.

He decides to go back to the town he originally came from and live in the house he inherited from his recently deceased mother, whose funeral he missed because he was touring with the orchestra. She had used the ground floor of the house as a café, a holdover from the time before his father abandoned them when he was six years old. Daigo has lived the rest of his life resenting his father for his actions. His hatred for his father is the simple, straightforward emotion of a child who can’t understand why his parent doesn’t love him enough.

Needing to find work, Daigo answers an ad in a newspaper that is headlined “Departures.” Thinking that this is a travel agency, he answers the ad only to find out, to his horror, that the company is more concerned with the final departure. In the Japanese tradition, families at one time prepared the bodies of loved ones for the undertaker to cremate but that responsibility had been passed on to the undertakers who, in turn, had subcontracted the job out to other businesses. The process, called encoffinment, is considered very low on the Japanese totem pole and those who practice it are regarded with contempt.

However, the job pays well and Daigo is drawn to the business owner, Mr. Sasaki (Yamazaki), a bit of a throwback to the wise sage and mentor known primarily in the United States as Mr. Miyagi in The Karate Kid. He hides the nature of the job from his trusting wife who is overjoyed at the salary her husband is making, especially as they are being paid in cash.

Daigo has some problems acclimating. His first job is to pose as a corpse in an instructional video, and his first actual job concerns a corpse that had not been discovered until two weeks after the death of the deceased. However, as he sees the care and almost loving respect shown the bodies by Sasaki and the effect of that concern on the families, he comes to realize the importance of the ritual in the process of grieving. Although his wife is angered and ashamed at his newly chosen profession when she eventually finds out and in fact leaves him, he still continues with what has clearly become a calling to him. It is a calling that will enable him to confront his own feelings of loss when the time comes in which Daigo is forced to deal with them.

This was the 2009 Academy Award winner for Best Foreign Language Film, in a bit of an upset over much higher-regarded and better-distributed films. Although I haven’t seen all of the other nominees yet, I can tell you this is a movie clearly deserving of the honor. Director Takita and writer Kundo Koyama take no stance as to what happens after death – that is left for other forums. This is about the effect of death on the living, and how we deal with it. There is some humor here – this isn’t a downer at all, despite the subject matter. However, there are some moments of genuine pathos, as when a taciturn husband, who berates Sasaki and Daigo for arriving five minutes late, breaks down at the sight of his wife, beautifully made up by Sasaki.

The film is well-cast. Hirosue is elfin and beautiful, but also maternal and loving. She is the ultimate Japanese wife – respectful and submissive but with a mind of her own as well. Yamazaki is expressive with his concern and care, yet capable of a sly sense of humor. Motoki plays Daigo as conflicted at times but with a good heart. The characters all have hidden compartments of pain that serve to elevate them from stereotypes into human beings.

This is a quiet movie, meant to move the viewer to contemplation of difficult subjects. The cello dominates the soundtrack, giving it a mournful edge but the movie itself isn’t mournful. It is more of a celebration of life and the role that death plays in it. I wouldn’t say it is a heart-warming, uplifting movie – there are far too many tears for that – but it does have moments that are joyful.

The northern Japan landscapes are beautifully photographed, and the glimpses into Japanese culture are engrossing. This is a movie that stays with you long after the end credits roll. You are forced to confront the losses in your own life so be aware of that before renting.

In some ways this isn’t an easy movie to sit through. Anyone who has lost someone dear to them is going to be taken right back to those emotions but in a good way. Death is definitely the elephant in every room. We know it is with us always, and we are aware that sooner or later we are all going to make our own departure. Movies like this one may help to make those moments a little less frightening, particularly for those left behind. After all, death is more a concept for the living; the dead aren’t really concerned with it all that much.

WHY RENT THIS: A beautiful movie that offers a glimpse into Japanese culture, as well as giving an insight into grieving and loss. Well acted with characters that are more human than stereotype.

WHY RENT SOMETHING ELSE: The subject matter makes this a difficult movie to watch at times, particularly for those who have lost someone dear to them recently. It is subtitled, which is a deal breaker for some moviegoers.

FAMILY VALUES: The subject matter may be a bit too much for less mature children, but some parents may wish to use the movie as a place to start discussions about death, especially in terms of making it less terrifying.

TRIVIAL PURSUIT: The Japanese title is translated as “the sending away people” but the word “okuribito” is rarely used in Japan.

NOTABLE DVD FEATURES: None listed.

FINAL RATING: 9/10

TOMORROW: Sherlock Holmes