Oh. Oh dear.
It needs to be said - in the same way that some movies quickly impress with a strong opening scene, the first several minutes of 'Firestorm' are profoundly disordered. Cacophonous sound design and zippy sequencing make me immediately doubt and begin to regret the decision to watch. While the film at large doesn't necessarily maintain the same level of bombast in its fundamental presentation, the storytelling is absolutely characterized by the same flailing disarray. There's a lot going on here, but I'm not entirely sure what all of it was. This movie was... an experience.
Semi-regular title cards or overlaid text indicates the setting for scenes, whether of time or place. Special effects and computer-generated imagery ranges from adequate to dubious. Costume design, and hair and makeup work, is rarely more than perfunctory. Dialogue and scene writing swings wildly from dull and underwhelming one moment, to senselessly overcooked the next - sometimes within the same scene. Acting absolutely follows the same pattern for all on hand, not least of all where lead Bentley Mitchum is concerned. In fairness, however, John Shepphird's direction is so flagging that it's easy to believe his guiding hand is responsible for the stilted, unconvincing, floundering performances and execution of scenes.
The broad strokes of the narrative are better than what a basic premise portends, and I think there are some very good ideas here. But the story falls apart in the details. There were multiple instances while watching where I was given pause, altogether questioning a story beat. Frankly, 'Firestorm' inspires skepticism more than anything else. I admire some of the filming locations, and set design, and there are some fine examples of lighting here and there. Some of the music is enjoyable. But if these are the most praiseworthy elements of a feature, let alone a sci-fi action-thriller specifically, then something is very, very wrong.
Granted, there's no mistaking that the production operated on a less than stellar budget. It has no illusion of being anything it's not, and deficient as 'Firestorm' is in far too many ways, there was no intent here except to tell a story and make a movie. The fact that the film's deficiencies prevent it from being fun is deeply unfortunate. I want to like this more than I do, and I feel bad being so critical - I genuinely appreciate the work that was put into it - yet no matter how you try to frame it, this is a troubled picture that needed a lot more financial backing, and a lot more care generally. True, there are still worse films you could watch, but save for the direly bored and the irrepressibly curious, there's just not much of a reason to check this out.
It needs to be said - in the same way that some movies quickly impress with a strong opening scene, the first several minutes of 'Firestorm' are profoundly disordered. Cacophonous sound design and zippy sequencing make me immediately doubt and begin to regret the decision to watch. While the film at large doesn't necessarily maintain the same level of bombast in its fundamental presentation, the storytelling is absolutely characterized by the same flailing disarray. There's a lot going on here, but I'm not entirely sure what all of it was. This movie was... an experience.
Semi-regular title cards or overlaid text indicates the setting for scenes, whether of time or place. Special effects and computer-generated imagery ranges from adequate to dubious. Costume design, and hair and makeup work, is rarely more than perfunctory. Dialogue and scene writing swings wildly from dull and underwhelming one moment, to senselessly overcooked the next - sometimes within the same scene. Acting absolutely follows the same pattern for all on hand, not least of all where lead Bentley Mitchum is concerned. In fairness, however, John Shepphird's direction is so flagging that it's easy to believe his guiding hand is responsible for the stilted, unconvincing, floundering performances and execution of scenes.
The broad strokes of the narrative are better than what a basic premise portends, and I think there are some very good ideas here. But the story falls apart in the details. There were multiple instances while watching where I was given pause, altogether questioning a story beat. Frankly, 'Firestorm' inspires skepticism more than anything else. I admire some of the filming locations, and set design, and there are some fine examples of lighting here and there. Some of the music is enjoyable. But if these are the most praiseworthy elements of a feature, let alone a sci-fi action-thriller specifically, then something is very, very wrong.
Granted, there's no mistaking that the production operated on a less than stellar budget. It has no illusion of being anything it's not, and deficient as 'Firestorm' is in far too many ways, there was no intent here except to tell a story and make a movie. The fact that the film's deficiencies prevent it from being fun is deeply unfortunate. I want to like this more than I do, and I feel bad being so critical - I genuinely appreciate the work that was put into it - yet no matter how you try to frame it, this is a troubled picture that needed a lot more financial backing, and a lot more care generally. True, there are still worse films you could watch, but save for the direly bored and the irrepressibly curious, there's just not much of a reason to check this out.
