Review II
Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000 (2000)
If you haven't heard about this film, I'm not surprised. The only thing going for it is that it has been dubbed one of the worst films ever made. If you hate watching bad movies, though, you would definitely stay clear of this. It was directed by Roger Christian and stars Barry Pepper, Forest Whitaker, and John Travolta. If you didn't already know, John Travolta is a scientologist, and he is outspoken about his beliefs. For this reason, he decided to help finance and produce a film adaptation of a L. Ron Hubbard (founder of Scientology) novel. What was produced was only half of what the novel consisted of, but a second part would never be made because of the bomb the film was at the box office. The film in question was Battlefield Earth: A Saga of the Year 3000, or simply Battlefield Earth for short.
The plot is set one thousand years into the future and revolves around an alien species that has taken over Earth for that amount of time. Human beings (known as "man-animals" by the aliens) are going extinct, but one alien in particular, Terl (John Travolta), believes the "man-animals" can help them mine the gold they want. He thus decides to teach one man, Jonnie Goodboy Tyler (Barry Pepper), the language of the alien race and the lost information of his ancestors. Soon, however, the aliens meet their match when the human beings decide to take a stand and take back Earth as their own.
I honestly didn't think this film was that bad. In fact, I thought it was funny. I realise it wasn't aiming to be a comedy, but John Travolta's acting was perfect for a good laugh. Not to mention that Terl (Travolta's character) is a complete dolt for teaching a human being all the knowledge of his ancestors, as well as the language of the Psychlos (the aliens). He makes a big deal out of explaining that in the original fight between the humans and the aliens, the fight lasted nine minutes because the humans were no match. However, and I'm going to spoil the film in this sentence, the humans take down the Psychlos' planet, yes their planet, in a short amount of time by seizing the aliens' equipment. I never read the novel, so I don't know how accurate the plot is to the original story. If this is L. Ron Hubbard's writing, then the plot holes come from his novel, not the screenplay writers. Still, the idiocy of the plot adds to the hilarity of the film, and I legitimately found myself laughing more often than I do in most comedy films. Not to mention that some things took ages to happen, and other times, a plot point would pop out of nowhere, ignoring everything that was already there.
The film was two hours long when it could have easily been a lot shorter. I didn't actually watch the film in two sittings so maybe that's why I didn't think it was too bad. I could imagine, though, that in the theatre, it seemed very lengthy. It was, but I didn't see much of a problem with the length. Still, I don't feel I can properly judge the film on its length because I didn't watch it the whole way through.
Everyone also complains about the dutch angles throughout the film. I'm not a cinematographer, so maybe that's why I wasn't bothered by the dutch angles. I mean, it was strange that everything was tilted a lot of time since dutch angles are used for specific reasons in films (for tension or to show the delirium of a character, for example), but, again, it was something to laugh about. There was also a very strange use of slow motion. I'm not a fan of slow motion because most people do it wrong. Here, it is used for no reason it seems.
Overall, I would give the film a five out of ten. I found it funny, and it was entertaining throughout the film. However, everything I found funny is what is wrong with the film - the acting, the plot, even the way it was filmed. Maybe if it had just come out, and I had no idea what to expect, then I would be mad, but I watched this filming knowing it was bad. I knew everything that was wrong with it, so I didn't expect anything. Not to mention it is a film based on a novel by L. Ron Hubbard. No offense, but with just that information, I would not be expecting anything. Although the film does not promote Scientology, it is still based on a novel written by the man who created it. If you're interested in the film, don't go into it expecting anything. If you do, you'll be very disappointed.
No comments:
Post a Comment