DavidBarak Reviews

Bottle Shock (2008)

Grade B, seems "made for TV"

[3/10 · 4 March 2022]

Not a terrible movie, but not good by any means. At least the music was good.

Interesting observation: Chris Pine with long blonde hair would make an excellent David Lee Roth in a Van Halen biopic.

T2 Trainspotting (2017)

This sequel works!

[10/10 · 28 February 2022]

Very few sequels work, either as a continuation of the story or as a standalone film. T2 succeeds either way. There are just enough details from the first film brought forward to this one to make a viewer think, "Yep, I remember that and it was great!"

It's not often I praise a film, but this one deserves it.

The Interview (II) (2014)

Slapstick and Farce are the Enemies of Satire

[3/10 · 25 February 2022]

Toilet and cheap sexual humor prevailed in this film. This was slapstick. This was farce. This was not satire, although the subject matter could have made for great satire.

Thumbs down for any thinking film fan.

Falling from the Sky: Flight 174 (1995 TV Movie)

Mayday, Mayday, Mayday

[1/10 · 17 February 2022]

There are good movies.

There are bad movies that the creators know are bad.

There are bad movies that the creators think are good.

This is the latter.

It might be entertaining if you know nothing about aviation, but if you do know anything about the subject I have a simple message for you:

"For your convenience, a bag has been placed in the seat pocket in front of you, should you experience symptoms of motion picture sickness."

Salvador (1986)

Heavy-handed morality play

[5/10 · 20 January 2022]

I have to counter most of the reviews here. Salvador is heavy-handed, obviously pushing a message - too "on the nose" as the saying goes in filmmaking. It's worth a watch but you have to prepare yourself for the "sermon" the film is intended to be.

Delirious (2006)

Ordinary

[3/10 · 24 November 2021]

This is what you get when Tom DiCillo needs the money - ordinary drivel, junk, twaddle, fluff, flavorless, already-been-chewed, boring, beige, plain wrap.

The Pledge (I) (2001)

A stellar cast, gone to waste

[3/10 · 22 November 2021]

I have a strong feeling all the big name stars in this film participated reluctantly, doing a favor for director Sean Penn. (If Penn reads this he's likely to punch me.)

Rather than two hours, this could easily have been cut down to 90 minutes just by slicing out all the poetic imagery. There was a lot of potential here, but unfortunately the film leaned on tired old tropes.

I wanted to like this, I really did, but I don't.

The Sum of All Fears (2002)

Competent but nothing special

[6/10 · 1 August 2021]

I hate to say it, but this is a typical Hollywood film that plays loose with reality. The sudden elevation of Jack Ryan from low level think tank staff member to trusted advisor in the CIA is silly, and his ability to break the rules in a world where procedures are set in stone specifically so the rules _can't_ be broken is also silly.

Watch the film as popcorn and Milk Dud entertainment, but don't watch it as an example of a peek at reality, 'cause it ain't.

The Vast of Night (2019)

Very good!

[8/10 · 31 May 2021]

I have to admit it, I almost blew it.

Well over a year ago I started watching this and gave up five minutes or so into the film. Those first few minutes consist of the two main characters and a menagerie of secondary characters walking around and talking about the usual mundane things one might have talked about in the late 1950s. The dialog was spot-on (not that I was around then, but it sounded about right) but the story wasn't advancing.

Shame on me.

I gave it another try tonight, stuck it out through those first minutes, and was rewarded. Those first minutes lent color, texture and authenticity to the film and they ultimately proved to be important to the rest of the film. The film could have skipped all that but it wouldn't have had the richness.

Okay, moving on to the rest of the movie.

The filmmakers know how to build dramatic tension. I'm pretty jaded when it comes to movies and I recognize the cheap tricks used on audiences. I didn't feel that here - the drama was real as we the audience uncovered detail and detail with the characters. Those kinds of stories, done well, draw me in.

The craft of film was stellar all the way around - writing, directing, acting, cinematography, art direction, sound editing.

In the end, I was rewarded for my patience.

For All Mankind (1989)

Great at conveying the emotions of lunar missions, but...

[7/10 · 28 May 2021]

The filmmakers used some spectacular footage I've never seen before and seem to have done a fine job of conveying the emotions astronauts felt as they flew lunar missions.

However, this film should NOT be taken as a historical document. They mixed footage from various Apollo missions as well as earlier Gemini missions to creative a loose mission timeline. In one case that I noticed, the audio from one mission was used with video from another mission, and I'm sure there were other cases. Again, the goal of the film was to convey the emotions rather than a completely factual recounting of the program.

One area in which the filmmakers failed was with the landing of Apollo 11's lunar module, Eagle, carrying Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin. The actual landing was much, much more dramatic and suspenseful than was shown in the film. In fact, the crew was literally less than a minute from having to abort the landing because of their fuel state. The landing area picked out by the automated system was pockmarked with craters, making it dangerous for a landing, so Armstrong had to take over, choose a different landing spot, and handle the whole thing manually. The filmmakers skipped over that, and I believe that was a major mistake. For anyone that's interested, actual footage and audio from that landing drama is available on YouTube.

The film's intent was fairly narrow and it succeeded in that, but it played loose with the details. See it but don't take it for gospel as a historical record.

Defiance (I) (2008)

An average movie, hence an average rating

[5/10 · 30 April 2021]

Decent, but that's all. Certainly no classic that will make the AFI's Top 100. However...

So, Eddie Zwick, why do the bad Jewish guy and the bad Russian guy have scarred faces and rotting teeth while everyone - aside from dirt - is pristine? Your audience is smarter than that and we don't need the nightmares of cosmetic and oral surgeons to tell us these two characters are not nice. We can kinda' pick that up from what they say and the way they act.

In the wise, immortal words of Forrest Gump, "That's all I have to say about that."

End of review.

Stowaway (I) (2021)

Visually stunning, logically stunned

[5/10 · 24 April 2021]

Stowaway is a great-looking film. End of review.

Okay, just kidding, that's not the end of the review. When a film relies on technology as the backbone of the plot, especially technology that's supposed to be based on the real thing, then the filmmakers had better get it right. Sorry, but you don't shed the first stage of your rocket in the first 30 seconds or so of launch, you don't reach Earth orbit in four or five minutes, and you don't get close enough to Mars to see its shape in a matter of a week or two. And launching a spacecraft with a launch engineer accidentally stowed-away? Not happening. They're going to make absolutely sure that anyone who was in the spacecraft during final preparations is going to be OUT of the spacecraft before launch.

What about the characters? First of all, nobody who's prone to bawling when the going gets rough is going to be selected and trained to be a mission commander. Second, what self-respecting astronaut is going to refer to their launch as "take off?"

Story? Kinda' flat. You know, hitting all the expected marks - plot point A to plot point B, etc., with no surprises. I knew that one of the crew members was going to die, and it was just a matter of who - the guy who wants to redeem himself after being an ass, or the woman who's dedicated her life to saving people?

Flat story, faulty logic. Watch it for the incredible set and costume design, but don't watch it for any other reason.

How It Ends (2018)

How it Ends: Not with a bang, but with a whimper

[3/10 · 10 April 2021]

I'm coming to the realization that any movie Forrest Whitaker is in from now on will feature him as an active duty or retired military officer. It's a law in Hollywood, punishable by, well, punishable by being forced to watch this film.

This is a flat story. Drive, encounter bad guy or bad guy group A, drive again, encounter bad guy or bad guy group B, drive some more, encounter bad guy or bad guy group C and so on. Along the way, our "never fired a firearm" lawyer main character learns to fire one (although it's really not that difficult) and he even learns to make handbrake turns in a car. Stunt driving after having lived a comfortable life in the city, impressive! Anyway, climax of the film comes and...

Yep, that's it. Little tidbits dropped here and there about what the mysterious disaster is but ultimately nobody in the film knows, nor did the director or writer apparently. Without having the characters confront the core problem directly makes this just another difficult road film. It could be about anything - a groom having to get to his wedding on time after being stuck half a continent away for instance. That would have been a lot cheaper to produce and likely would have resulted in a better film with real characters we care about.

Funny thing, as soon as disaster struck, the film's "look" immediately shifted to hazy yellow just like any rotten apocalyptic film does (except for those taking place in icy conditions - those are always blue). It's a law in Hollywood, punishable by, well, never mind.

What a waste of viewing time. No wonder I kept having to fight the urge to check my email, and no wonder I kept looking at the playback timeline to see how much longer this mediocre film had to go. I gave this three stars only for the production value.

Journey's End (I) (2017)

Excellent filmmaking

[10/10 · 21 February 2021]

It seems so rare these days to find a _good_ film, and thankfully Journey's End came along to break my spell of watching bad movies. it was easy to forget these were actors; the raw emotions are what I'd expect after weeks of waiting for battle, not knowing if you'd survive the month or not. Kudos to the cast, crew, and everyone else involved with this.

The Perfect Host (2010)

A gem

[10/10 · 21 February 2021]

I try to watch a couple of movies a week and for someone that loves movies that's a daunting task - most of what's out there is, well, let's say my term for them is unprintable. Imagine my giddiness when I actually find something I can devote a block of time to without feeling like I cheated myself.

The Perfect Host is one of those movies that make searching through all the garbage movies worthwhile. This movie is smart, funny, clever and good all around. It's rare a movie elicits an out-loud laugh from me, but this one managed that trick. In short, this is a movie that I not only enjoyed, but I _appreciated_. Top notch!

The Capture (2017)

Needed salt

[5/10 · 19 February 2021]

This was like a proficiently-cooked meal that was ultimately unsatisfying. There as nothing special about it. Don't get me wrong, the acting was fine, the directing was fine, the writing was fine, cinematography and sound, both fine, but all those together didn't add up to more than the sum of its parts. Great films have something - and hopefully more than one thing - that will make them memorable. This had none of that. Hopefully the cast and crew will work their way up to bigger films that take greater chances. The Capture played it safe - no surprises, no "wow" moments, just a heavy, unseasoned meal that will leave you anxiously awaiting your next meal (movie) in the hopes that it'll satisfy.

Shock and Awe (2017)

Dreck, Disguised as a Lesson, Disguised as an Editorial, Disguised as Cinema

[2/10 · 14 February 2021]

Well THAT was interesting.

It only took 15 minutes for us to learn Rob Reiner and team had a HUGE axe to grind. This wasn't a movie, it wasn't even a movie with a message, it was a message wrapped around a movie. (See notes at the end.)

Sometimes Rob Reiner is a great filmmaker and sometimes Rob Reiner isn't a great filmmaker. With Shock and Awe, Reiner failed. Every three or four minutes he found some way to hit us over the head with his moral compass (ouch). That's certainly his right, but he did it with no subtlety whatsoever, and nobody likes being force-fed someone else's opinion. When a parent teaches a child that stoves are hot, the parent doesn't put the kid's hand on the burner. Instead, the parent illustrates the heat by showing its effects on something else - a pot of boiling water, maybe, or possibly even bringing the child's hand close to the burner. But Reiner didn't do that - he put the audience's hands directly on the burner and held them there for 90 minutes. I don't know about you, but I don't like being lectured, especially for an hour and a half.

If it weren't for the profanity I'd swear this was a TV Movie of the Week, including the gentle, bittersweet music underscoring various scenes. Seriously, this played just like a made-for-TV movie. Shock and Awe was technically proficient, but that was its ONLY saving grace.

If you watch Shock and Awe, please don't mistake it for serious, skilled filmmaking. It's neither.

NOTES

1. I don't dispute Reiner's opinion of what the Bush administration did and didn't do, and the facts bear that out. I have no quarrel with Reiner in that regard.

2. I worked in the newspaper industry for many years and I can say that the general tone of the newsroom scenes, at least at times, was inaccurate. At other times, it was spot-on. There tends to be a good deal of sarcastic humor floating about newsrooms, but it's kept in check when appropriate.

3. I'm a Navy veteran, for whatever that's worth. I only mention it so my dear readers (both of you) will have a better understanding of where I'm coming from as I write this review.

Ares 11 (2016)

An admirable attempt

[5/10 · 14 February 2021]

There are lots and lots of really, really bad science fiction films out there. With many of them it's apparent the filmmakers really didn't care - all they wanted to do was get a film made, regardless of the quality. I sense that that's not the case here. Although the film falls short in some respects,

I do have a good deal of respect for the filmmaking team, most of whom are fairly inexperienced. For instance, at the time I'm writing this, writer/director/producer/cinematographer has three IMDb credits as director. That's not many, and two of those were shorts. (I need to point out here that I don't know Mr. Goodman.) Realize this: one of the world's most famous director's first go at making a feature film wasn't as successful as Ares 11 in my opinion. I'll mention the famous filmmaker at the end of the review.

As for the acting, I have to say that it's all solid. The cast doesn't really have much to show their talents, but none of them come across as phony. This isn't the kind of film where the actors can "chew the scenery."

So for some more specifics...

It's obvious the filmmakers researched and incorporated realistic technology and dialogue into the film. I'm personally not a fan of films like Star Wars because the filmmakers can invent anything they want to get characters into trouble and out of trouble. As a result, I don't really connect with those characters or stories. That's just me; I much prefer science fiction films that are grounded in reality (with some exceptions). Although Ares 11 is obviously centered around capabilities we don't yet have, none of it seems to be removed from future possibility. So yes, the filmmakers took old and current space technology and extrapolated it to a realistic and achievable future.

Despite my appreciation for the work the filmmakers have done, there are some areas it fell short in. Hopefully they'll be reading this and can consider my words as guidance, for whatever these words are worth. There are parts in the film, especially during the first third or so, with lots of techy dialogue filler that serves no purpose other than to add an aura of authenticity. I think some of that fat could have been trimmed. That would, of course, make an already short feature film a little shorter, but that could be fleshed out with more character development, a facet of the film that I feel was neglected. The characters all seem to have interesting personalities on the surface, but we don't get a feel for what drives them, what makes them act as they do and make the decisions they do. (Some of the best science fiction films also ignore character development,. like Alien, but there's more inter-character conflict and that serves some of the same purpose.)

As the plot takes it's most dire turn, the dialogue spoken by the mission control person is extremely unlikely. I don't want to give away details, but I will say that some of what was suggested by that character, if discussed at all, would likely have been mentioned in vague terms because of its sensitive nature.

Going back to some positives, some fairly minor plot points were well thought-out. Example: the discussion about what to do with the "man portable" (my term) weapons onboard the spacecraft. This is an angle that could have easily been overlooked when writing the screenplay, but including it added a bit of interest that would otherwise be missing.

There were hits and there were misses. My IMDb reviews tend to be shorter than this one, and I usually either review terrible movies (writing those is fun) or hidden gems. I wouldn't classify Ares 11 as terrible or a gem, but I see that a lot of heart (and perspiration, as per the trivia) was invested in the film, and I want to encourage the filmmakers to keep at it.

Ares 11 is more earnest than most low budget films out there, and heck, even most mega budget films aren't as earnest as this.

Is Ares 11 great? No. Is Ares 11 good? Well, so-so. But Ares 11 isn't _bad_.

Okay, so now for the reveal. What director completed at least three short films before making a feature, a feature that I don't believe matched the quality of Ares 11?

Stanley Kubrick. Yes, that's correct. Kubrick made Day of the Fight, The Flying Padre, and The Seafarers, all short documentaries, all before he made Fear and Desire. Kubrick disowned Fear and Desire. I'm a HUGE Kubrick fan, but even I have to agree that Fear and Desire wasn't an artistic success. I'm sure Kubrick gave as much to making that as the Ares 11 filmmaking team did, and I think the Ares 11 team ended up with a much, much better film than Fear and Desire. So... Goodman, Hyland, Storch, De Hill, James, Bell, and everyone else involved in making Ares 11 - DO NOT STOP MAKING FILMS. May I suggest going back to shorts for awhile? This will let you all hone your craft, giving you more opportunities to experiment and fail or succeed than making fewer features would. I think two or three more shorts might prime you all for much greater things. I truly do hope I see more from all of you.

OutPost 11 (2013)

I can't tell if it was good but weird or weird but good

[7/10 · 13 February 2021]

Spiders, sorta'. Amyl nitrate or something like it. Masturbation'. Exploding rabbit. Splitting headache. "James has eaten his own hand." "What new madness is this?" "No you're not. Spiders can't use the phone."

And that, my friends, is my review. Personally I think it's worth watching at least once, twice if you've got mind-altering substances.

Supernova (I) (2000)

STUPIDNOVA

[2/10 · 7 February 2021]

I was originally going to write a review panning this film. Don't get me wrong, it's terrible, but the blame really can't be placed on any one person. It seems that just about anyone with any visibility - the director and actors for the most part - ended up getting screwed by bad producing, bad luck, bad karma, bad juju. I won't comment on the acting since bad directing and editing can ruin an otherwise good performance. I won't comment on the directing, at least, um, not directly, since this had multiple directors and multiple other hand interfering with things. I'll just comment on general silliness.

Spacecraft interior scenes that rock like it's a sailing vessel? Sure, it could kind of be justified if everyone was weightless, but they've got artificial gravity so everything should be steady as a rock.

A stupid obviously-a-man-in-a-costume robot with a limp that looks like it came straight out of Metropolis.

A computer everyone calls Sweetie, for no apparent reason. Thankfully the computer is there so its reporting to the crew can fill in the gaps caused by too many people messing around with the script. Thankfully, too, the computer is there to count down the seconds to near-calamity.

So yeah, this movie should be avoided. I feel for everyone involved in this.

Involution (2018)

Chopped Salad

[4/10 · 31 January 2021]

Lots of good ingredients - cast, cinematography, sound, production design - all chopped up into cinema salad. I don't really know what it was about. It wasn't bad. It wasn't good. I just was.

Cell (I) (2016)

I forgot, which "escape from the mindless, murderous hordes" movie is this?

[3/10 · 31 January 2021]

What do you get when you take three former B+ list actors (one only in a cameo role) and have them perform in front of the camera for a director who last directed a film about six years ago? You get "Cell." (I think this film torpedoed the director's career.) I have to classify this as a B movie, only because of its complete lack of originality. If it had bad acting (instead of the no acting it has in it), bad special effects and bad costumes like the B movies of yore, then this would be a C movie simply because it's not even as creative as an old B movie. At least those old-timers tried to come up with something new. The folks that worked on this didn't seem to try. Seriously, there's nothing original enough in this to make it worth watching.

I'm giving this film three barely-deserved stars simply because it's technically acceptable - the cinematography, sound and all that are fine. The story not so much.

This is one of those films you can watch for the first 10 minutes and the last five minutes and get pretty much everything you need. I wish I'd done that, as I'm behind on trimming my nose hairs. (Yes, it takes at least an hour; I need new string for the weed whacker.) I had an almost overwhelming urge to check my phone throughout the movie, but given the plot I figured it would be a good idea for me to do that. I had to find some other way to occupy myself as the movie played, because the movie wasn't using up more than maybe 3.2% of my brain.

This is a move as original as all the other mindless, murderous hordes movies. This even includes scary, inhuman mouth agape screams from the not-zombies. (They're alive, unlike zombies, but they might as well be dead.)

To give you an idea of how... silly, I guess... this was, one of the songs heard that sort of lulled the non-zombies into a state of stupid non-zombie-ness was the "Trololo Song." You know the one - the freaky Russian guy singing/laughing his way through a song on some cheap Russian TV set. Yeah, they used that song. (My guess: it was free to use. More money to be spent on "hookers and blow" for the wrap party.)

Here's a great (as in, stupid) quote for you (the only one I remember): "Open up, we're Americans." Understandably that's something they'd need to clarify BECAUSE THEY'RE FRICKIN' IN AMERICA. It's like knocking on a door and in your deepest, most masculine voice you say "Open up, I'm a man." Gimme' a break.

An ice cream truck is part of the story. Seeing the characters drive around in it I was really hoping for jolly music or bells and a horde of non-zombie kids running after it, all wanting cold treats. You can't go on a mindless murderous rampage on an empty stomach. (I also don't recommend watching this movie on an empty stomach. They say to eat bananas if you think you'll barf because they taste the same coming up as they did going down. You're welcome.)

Another quote: "Ray, what's the around your neck?" I already knew. That question alone answered itself as long as you keep up on weird news. 'Nuff said.

There's ONE reason and one reason only to watch this movie. You will see a very, very minor character, the one with the Electrolarynx electronic voice box (what a strange, pointless thing to include in a film) that I SWEAR is proof that WALTER MATTHAU AND BILL MURRAY HAD A LOVE CHILD. I'm absolutely serious here. At first I thought, "Wow, a Bill Murray cameo." Then I thought, "No, not Bill Murray, but wow, that looks kinda' like Walter Matthau, although I know he's dead." Then I realized "It's Bill Murray AND Walter Matthau - the offspring of an unholy union between two great performers.

And now I come to the end of my review. So, dear readers, do you want to know what exactly caused cell phones to emit dangerous signals that turned ordinary distracted zombie-like people into non-zombies? THE THING THAT CAUSED ALL THE MAYHEM WAS...

And now you know just as much as I and all the other victims of this film know.

The Last Days on Mars (2013)

Bad... but good.

[6/10 · 30 January 2021]

Okay, this is a three part review...

###

Part 1 - The story

Simply "Zombies on Mars," with all the associated lapses of logic and reason:

• Why are the zombies violent? What are they after?
• If the bacteria is infecting a dead body, how does the bacteria know how to control a body so that it attacks and deals with obstacles?
• Why don't the bodies freeze solid (over some length of time, but certainly less than hours) in the sub-zero temperature of the atmosphere of Mars?

So for all these lapses and more, I wasn't keen on the story. It was just "people fighting something," Grade B entertainment.

###

Part 2 - Acting

Competent, and secondary to everything else. This isn't a highbrow intellectual film, so fine acting isn't necessary. I'm not suggesting the cast isn't talented, just that their talent wasn't needed all that much.

###

Part 3 - The Look

This is where the film excelled. The cinematography was great, the effects really good, but for me the thing that really stood out was production design. It's obvious the art director and director spent a lot of time making things seem to be from the real world. Of all the fictional spacesuits I've seen in films, these are the ones that look most like they could have come right from NASA or some other space agency. The sets - top notch. The set decorating - top notch. Science fiction films don't get much love in the big film competitions, but if they did this film could easily have been at least a nominee, and very possibly a winner, for best production design for all the big awards - Academy Awards, Cannes, Sundance, etc. So although sci-fi is often shunned, I hereby present a virtual Oscar for best production design to the team.

ISRA 88 (2016)

In space, no one can hear you snore

[4/10 · 26 January 2021]

The good news: You don't have to pause the film for restroom breaks. The bad news: For the first 90 minutes you'll be praying for a weak bladder. The really bad news: Too much repetition.

The good news: The art direction. It's apparent that either a lot of attention was paid to make things look realistic as far as aerospace and science equipment. The bad news: The plot. Is there one? The really bad news: Too much repetition.

The good news: The cinematography. The bad news: Watching characters ponder things isn't very entertaining. The really bad news: Too much repetition.

The good news: The acting is good. The bad news: There isn't much acting. The really bad news: Too much repetition.

The good news: In one scene Casper Van Dien plays against type, 180 degrees out, and he nails it. The bad news: That was the only entertaining part of the film. The really bad news: Too much repetition.

The good news: It's only two hours long. The bad news: The ending. HUH? The ending was a bit abrupt and The really bad news: Too much repetition.

The good news: The movie ended. The bad news: The movie started. The really bad news: Too much repetition.

So much talent was wasted.

Alien Code (2018)

A Really Good Science Fiction Film - What a Concept!

[10/10 · 24 January 2021]

First: Don't let the title fool you. Such an ordinary title is one you'd expect on some cheesy sci-fi film. The title doesn't do service to the film itself; it deserves a bit of a more lofty, intriguing title. Anyway, that's not important. (I'm not sure why it's called "The Men" in some parts of IMDb - maybe it's a working title that never was changed.)

What _is_ important is the film itself. Its strongest feature is the cast, primarily consisting of four people: Kyle Gallner, Azura Skye, Mary McCormack and Richard Schiff. The actors bring a dimension to their characters that, for me at least, pushed "acting" out of the way and made the characters real. There were so many chances for the characters to end up cartoonish like you see in a lot of other science fiction films, but the cast (and writer/director Michael G. Cooney) managed to avoid that minefield, creating a character-based film (special effects are minimal, fight scenes non-existent) that succeeds.

Gallner as lead character Alex Jacobs turned in a (no pun intended) stellar performance as an unemployed cryptologist who eventually finds himself in over his head.

Skye as Beth Carter does a wonderful job as a cryptologist wearied by a looming fate.

McCormack took her role as shadowy government agent Rebecca Stillman and ran with it. It's a role that could easily have been two-dimensional, following along with all the other cheesy government agents you've seen in films. Some of the character's humanity comes through later in the film, but even before that, when she's hard-nosed and all business, she does a great job of making the character believable.

Richard Schiff as scientist (cryptologist? I can't remember) Miles Driskoll only appears in one extended scene, but his character's excitement as a scientist about what he's been involved in is convincing.

I have to give praise to the makeup artists, Analyn Cruz and Hugo Villasenor, for their subtle work in transforming healthy characters into sick characters over the course of the film. I have a feeling most people won't notice the transformation, but I tend to notice these kinds of things. They didn't succumb to the temptation of overdoing the makeup.

All in all, this is an excellent science fiction film, better than most mega-budget sci-fi films. Alien Code (or The Men) proves you don't need to throw money around like confetti (yes, Christopher Nolan and James Cameron, I'm talking about you) to make a great film, one that not only entertains but also makes you think (unlike some high-profile sci-fi films... yes, Nolan and Cameron, I'm talking about you).

One last thing, and this is the absolute truth. Until last night I'd never seen this film or even heard of it, but during one scene I had the strangest feeling of déjà vu. How fitting for the premise of this film. Perhaps the filmmaking team made a documentary film rather than fiction... ; )