The Brain Eaters.

Review #2433: The Brain Eaters.

Cast: 

Ed Nelson (Dr. Paul Kettering), Alan Jay Factor (Glenn Cameron), Cornelius Keefe (Sen. Walter K. Powers), Joanna Lee (Alice Summers), Jody Fair (Elaine Cameron), David Hughes (Dr. Wyler), Robert Ball (Dan Walker), Phil Posner (the Sheriff), Orville Sherman (Mayor Cameron), and Leonard Nimoy (Professor Cole) Directed by Bruno VeSota (#1202 - Invasion of the Star Creatures)

Review: 

Okay, I wanted to pick a movie a bit out of left field that happened to have a catchy title. It isn't exactly a movie filled with noted names (save for one very brief appearance) or even a big director, but sometimes you get lucky. This was a production that had oversight by who else but Roger Corman, who left himself uncredited as executive producer, but not to worry for this American International Pictures movie, you've got a credit for producer and also lead star in Ed Nelson, who for whatever reason is billed as "Edwin Jackson". Two other key actors must've loved the credit game, they also have alternate names with "Alan Frost" (Alan Jay Factor) and "Jack Hill" (Cornelius Keefe). The movie was directed by Bruno VeSota, who actually had been involved in Chicago television in writing and directing since the late 1940s. He did a variety of acting parts (small or not) in the 1950s, most notably with Dementia [1955] (which may have had co-direction and writing from VeSota, as he later claimed), but he got to direct his first feature film with Female Jungle (1955), which had been distributed by AIP in its "American Releasing Corporation" days after they basically rescued it from being stuck in limbo. VeSota directed one further film with Invasion of the Star Creatures (1962). The movie was written by Gordon Urquhart, although the resulting script seemed a bit similar to the 1951 novel The Puppet Masters (which also dealt with slugs and mind control), as written by Robert A. Heinlein. He sued for plagiarism and got a settlement, although he did not want a screen credit in any shape or form.  

This was a movie that was the B-side of double features with Earth vs. the Spider, if you want to use that as a barometer for the quality. Of course, this is a movie that has a creature made of wind-up toys, fur, and pipe cleaner. For a movie that has a character at one point shoot a gun into a giant metal cone to go along with trying to use the telegraph (hey, at least they didn't try pigeons), it sure is one hell of a boring time. It lacks polish that seems particularly amusing given a runtime of a mere 60 minutes. It has a few tiny eerie moments, mostly in the sequence where the mayor is engaged in a tense standoff with some of the key characters because it actually feels like a movie is going to actually break out before one eventually sinks back into narration (worries over needing the plot to be clear to John Q. Public, 60 Year Old At Large or a trick to get over having poor sound quality - you be the judge) and a general malaise that seems to only move forward when it feels like doing so. You get the yammering from Keefe ("action!"), a middling cast*, the shambling around from doctors about doctor doctor things and the eventual rundown of what the beastly things plan to do. Well, I take that back, they aren't alien, they actually came from underground that want to make a utopia even with the whole putting toxins in the nervous system thing, (as explained by Nimoy and his voice, because he doesn't actually stand up for the one scene he is in). As a whole, it is quite an accomplishment to make Earth vs. the Spider look better on a double feature but it is almost as interesting to have a poster that exceeds the quality of the movie. If you really need to watch something from the old days that you haven't seen yet, you might get something out of it. Or not.

Overall, I give it 5 out of 10 stars.

*At least some of the cast saw better days. Joanna Lee changed course after appearing in four movies to become a television writer, even winning an Emmy Award for writing an episode of The Waltons. Of course, Nelson later became noted for his role on Peyton Place and taught acting in his later days. Keefe was in his last film after plenty of roles in silent films and such. And Nemoy, well....

Redux: Star Trek (2009).

Redux Review #009: Star Trek.

Cast: 
Chris Pine (James T. Kirk), Zachary Quinto (Spock), Leonard Nimoy (Spock Prime), Eric Bana (Captain Nero), Bruce Greenwood (Christopher Pike), Karl Urban (Dr. Leonard "Bones" McCoy), Zoe Saldaña (Nyota Uhura), Simon Pegg (Montgomery "Scotty" Scott), John Cho (Hikaru Sulu), Anton Yelchin (Pavel Chekov), Ben Cross (Sarek), Winona Ryder (Amanda Grayson), Clifton Collins, Jr. (Ayel), Chris Hemsworth (George Kirk), and Jennifer Morrison (Winona Kirk) Directed by J. J. Abrams.

Review: 
On December 20, 2010, I covered Star Trek (2009). As is the case with any of the reviews from Season One, while I do feel the rating is probably still accurate to what I feel now as opposed to then, it does feel appropriate to revisit this film, since it has been ten years since its release on May 8, 2009. Hope you folks enjoy - live long and prosper.

It goes without saying that Star Trek is a cultural phenomenon. It has endured for over a half-century in part because of how entertaining it has proven itself to be with a balance of adventure and intelligence throughout its several incarnations. While the original series was cancelled after just three seasons in 1969, it proved to be a hit in syndication, leading to an eventual feature film and a subsequent film franchise. From 1979 to 2002, ten films were released into theaters, six covering the original cast and four with the cast of the third Star Trek show, Star Trek: The Next Generation, which began in 1987. From that year onto 2005, there was at least one Star Trek series on television, with four series coming and going before the cancellation of Star Trek: Enterprise. That, alongside the previous failure of Star Trek: Nemesis (2002) led to a pursuit for a different direction of the franchise, with Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman (writers of Mission: Impossible III alongside J. J. Abrams) brought in to help write a new film, with Abrams initially being brought in as producer. However, he subsequently accepted Paramount Pictures' offer to serve as director, owing to how he felt about the duo's script, describing it in an interview as "...so emotional and so relatable". It is evident to see that Abrams has a passion for entertainment, even if he described himself as someone who was not a particularly a big fan of the original show. He wanted to make a movie that any sort of fan can be interested in without becoming a shell of itself or becoming too absorbed in references. The idea of making a prequel wasn't new to Star Trek, since plans for an Academy Years film was thought up after the failure of the fifth film in 1989, although it was soon scrapped, and the aforementioned Enterprise show was set a century prior to the original. This film tries to have a balance with its time travel aspects and its usage of Nimoy to bridge the past into making a new, somewhat familiar future, which works itself out more often than not.

Undeniably, the film hinges on the dynamic of Pine and Quinto and their characters, with the film building itself up towards them being in the film together. I found myself more interested in the sequence with a young Spock and Sarek than the part with young Kirk, since it felt more impactful to the nature of the plot dynamic, seeing how the former is one of two worlds where the other has had better moments. By the time the plot kicks in, one does get a hold for most of these characters without too many objections (whether fan or not). Pine, trying to not find himself playing a shadow of the original Kirk played by William Shatner, comes off as fairly charming to be around with, fitting right in with the adventure and delivering some of the heroic qualities one would expect, as brash and confident as one can be. Quinto, who has the interesting proposition of trying to fit themselves in as a character while being passed the torch by the previous actor, proves quite capable. He delivers a measured performance, as calm and logical as per the standard while maintaining both human and alien nature that plays off well when with others like Pine, where the seeds of a friendship get well cultivated by the film. When Nimoy appears (feeling as a mix of fan-service and a way to deliver exposition), it does sure feel nice to see him back again, seeming just as in-step with his calm exterior and logic as ever when he is on screen. Bana makes for an okay villain, but he feels underscored when compared to the things around him. His ultimate plan never really seems to come into focus as much as it should. It is clear to see that they want to make a villain just as threatening as Khan from the second film, but they can't quite make someone worth being around. Greenwood carries his weight for the first half quite nicely, encouraging and reliable at once. Urban does well with recreating the abrasive yet amusing nature of his role without too much trouble, feeling right at home for his time on screen. Saldana proves to be a fine match to go alongside the others, as is the case with Pegg, Cho, and Yelchin, who each get their little moments into shine without seeming lost in the background. Instead of a 1960s take on how the 23rd century would be with regard to space travel, now it is a 2009 take, with plenty of lighting choices to go around alongside other things. It certainly is an interesting movie to look at, having plenty of interesting effects (and enough lens flare to point out and likely stair or make fun of) that makes this a well-done spectacle while having enough of a grip with a capable if not flawed plot (in the age of the Internet one could have a bit of day with its usage of black holes); it manages to have a strong foundation while lingering forward in its middle and closing out strongly enough to make a winner. It sets out to please both fans of the original and curious newcomers and does well with its intentions, finding a middle ground that inspires some joy, a little bit of laughs (mostly intentional), but also a pursuit to see where it could go from there, maintaining the spirit of curiosity and wonder from before without being lost in spectacle or technobabble. It works as a recommendation for newcomers and fans looking for a new frontier to set their eyes on.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1978).

Review #1132: Invasion of the Body Snatchers.

Cast: 
Donald Sutherland (Dr. Matthew Bennell), Brooke Adams (Elizabeth Driscoll), Leonard Nimoy (Dr. David Kibner), Jeff Goldblum (Jack Bellicec), Veronica Cartwright (Nancy Bellicec), and Art Hindle (Dr. Geoffrey Howell) Directed by Philip Kaufman (#892 - The Right Stuff)

Review: 
It would only make sense for a science fiction novel such as Jack Finney's The Body Snatchers to have multiple adaptations into film. With Invasion of the Body Snatchers (1956), there was an intent to make a competent and intelligent horror sci-fi thriller, with a consistent message on the nature of conformity and autonomy for the time it was made, being made on a budget of less than half of a million dollars (with the budget for this film being roughly three million). Studio heads butted heads with director Don Siegel over the nature of the ending and other aspects that you might say conformed to the standards of the time - for better or worse. I enjoyed the film for its elements mentioned above, but I can't say I'm too surprised that a remake was released 22 years later. If you have an interesting idea to update the story and make something watchable out of it, naturally you should try to make that into a film. It is easy to say that this film represents the decade it was made in, updating itself in its structure and tone that makes for a gloomy but reasonably intelligent experience. It certainly amps up the effects and implications involved with conspiracy and paranoia, especially considering the setting being San Francisco instead of the small-town setting from the earlier film and the novel. It comes off as a brilliant decision that highlights how easy conformity can spread and not have many people notice, where a person can lose themselves in a big town and all the complexities that can go with it - such as self-help psychiatrists for example. If you thought a small town could lead to a threat like pod people encircling everyone quickly, a city will certainly make it seem quicker to conform.  

In that regard, Sutherland does pretty well in the main role, handling the situations thrown at him capably enough that makes him someone worth watching. It's hard to who exactly is the better lead, but I do find myself leaning a bit towards Kevin McCarthy, particularly when he makes an appearance in one scene. Perhaps it is the style that the film used to dictate its story and the way that McCarthy rolls with it that proves the difference. In any case, the scene with him is certainly a shocking surprise, resembling the scene from the original. Whether it is just a homage or a continuation of the events of the original (doubtful) is up to you, although it should be noted that the director of the original film (Siegel) also appears in the film as a cab driver. Adams is fine, having a range of concern and will that makes her watchable alongside Sutherland, and they have a decent amount of chemistry together. Nimoy is interesting to watch, skeptical and calculating that works to the film's advantage, particularly near the last third. Goldblum is quirky as one can be, showing the neurosis of his character without becoming annoying or too offbeat when shown with the other characters. Cartwright is okay, but she doesn't particularly stand out as well as the others in any substantial way, especially when compared to the other four. There is a helpless feeling of terror and conspiracy all-throughout the film, alongside moment of horror, such as the scene with the pods trying to form duplicates of the group, showing the details of the process pretty satisfyingly (through the effects-work by Russel Hessey and Dell Rheaume). The opening sequence involving the pods coming through space and coming to Earth on a dreary day is also a pretty interesting one. A good share of the credit for the film's good moments goes to Kaufman and screenwriter W. D. Richter (who later directed The Adventures of Buckaroo Banzai Across the 8th Dimension) in making something that stands out in its own way.

The sound and music certainly help the film stick out in its own way, helping deliver striking moments of chills. Ben Burtt contributed Special Sound Effects for the film, while the film score was composed by jazz composer Denny Zeitlin, his only film score. Michael Chapman, cinematographer for films such as Taxi Driver (1976), does well at giving the film a panicked look, with occasional different angled shots that have their varying level of suspense. The length of the film certainly stands out, for better or worse. The original lasted 80 minutes, while this one lasts 115 minutes. The film doesn't border on boring, but it certainly has times where the length nearly becomes an anchor that could've been trimmed just a bit. It seems to linger a bit too much at times, but the climax is a pretty memorable one, having a fitting cold fear to it that works for the intent made by Kaufman. On the whole, I enjoyed the film for the most part due to it managing to justify its existence in terms of its narrative and most of its choices of style and casting. There are some who list it as one of the best film remakes ever. It isn't my favorite remake (The Thing (1982), which also has its share of paranoia, comes to mind), but I can say that this is a pretty good case for when a remake can go right. Instead of trying to just be different for the sake of difference or being an outright copy, a remake can stand-out for what it can cover in story and characters and make fine entertainment like this movie.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Hi. I decided to revise the image for the review. Here's the original image of review:

Movie Night: Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

Review #515: Star Trek: The Motion Picture.

Cast
William Shatner (James T. Kirk), Leonard Nimoy (Spock), DeForest Kelley (Leonard McCoy), James Doohan (Montgomery Scott), Walter Koenig (Pavel Chekov), Nichelle Nichols (Uhura), George Takei (Hikaru Sulu), Stephen Collins (Willard Decker), and Persis Khambatta (Ilia) Directed by Robert Wise.

Review
This review was delayed a week as other films took this film's place on the reviewing spectrum, that and Santa Claus Conquers the Martians sounded better to review on Christmas. Since this is a new year, it only makes sense to finally publish this review. Enjoy and welcome to the beginning of Season 4.

Out of the seven Star Trek films I've watched (#009 - Star Trek (2009), #225 - Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, #226 - Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered County, #246 - Star Trek: Generations, #299 - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, #337 - Star Trek III: The Search for Spock, #492 - Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home), Star Trek II was the best of them all, and for some, the first. Then there's this film, the first that started it all, and...the one with the nicknames. It is often called The Motionless Picture, The Slow Motion Picture, The Motion Sickness...and the names make perfect sense. The movie isn't awful, but it is so slow. The movie tries to hide the mediocre acting by showcasing many special effects (Along with some awful costumes that make them look more like yoga instructors then a space crew), which are fine and sometimes spectacular, but the effects can't save the movie from padding them out to the point where even 2001: A Space Odyssey would be merciful. Shatner does okay, but it seems like he's going through the motions, Nimoy is slightly better, it's usually fun to see Kelley and Nimoy bicker at each other. With 2001, I could forgive it because while it also took its time, it was an extraordinary film that was subject to much interpretation. The other Star Trek films (And to a lesser extent, the fifth one) were more subdued, more focused on the characters and their interaction along with the story. This film sticks out like a sore thumb, and it's no wonder why none of the events (along with throwing out the pale costumes) were ever mentioned again. It's an okay film.

Overall, I give it 6 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.

Review #492: Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home.

Cast

William Shatner (James T. Kirk), Leonard Nimoy (Spock), DeForest Kelley (Leonard McCoy), Catherine Hicks (Gillian), George Takei (Hikaru Sulu), Walter Koenig (Pavel Chekov), James Doohan (Montgomery Scott), Nichelle Nichols (Uhura), Jane Wyatt (Amanda Grayson), Mark Lenard (Sarek), and Robin Curtis (Lt. Saavik) Directed by Leonard Nimoy (#337 - Star Trek III: The Search for Spock)

Review

The fourth film closes out the arc left from the last two films, and it does a rather successful job of that, as Nimoy directs once again. For once, there is no clear cut villain, and it's a welcome approach, and it leaves a lot of room for the crew to have their own scenes, and it certainly works, because the film has a good deal of hilarity. Granted the story is...odd, but it certainly is unique, and it digs a way to be enjoyable. The acting is good, especially from Nimoy, who has his own chance to shine, but my favorite scene is when he's on the bus with Kirk and this punk rocker plays his loud music until Spock gives him a nerve pinch. The animatronics by ILM on the whales look really good, and the directing by Nimoy is excellent, and this is probably the best Star Trek film since the second one. It's a shame the fifth one (#225, directed by William Shatner) was so awful, but oh well, at least this one is a treat to watch. Countdown to 500 Reviews: 10, 9, 8...

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.

Review #337: Star Trek III: The Search for Spock.

Cast
William Shatner (James T. Kirk), DeForest Kelley (Leonard McCoy), James Doohan (Montgomery Scott), George Takei (Hikaru Sulu), Christopher Lloyd (Kruge), Walter Koenig (Pavel Chekov), Nichelle Nichols (Uhura), Judith Anderson (T'Lar), Robin Curtis (Saavik), Merritt Butrick (David Marcus), Mark Lenard (Sarek), John Larroquette (Maltz), Carl Stevens, Vadia Potenza, Stephen Manley, Joe W. Davis, and Leonard Nimoy (Spock) Directed by Leonard Nimoy.

Review
It has been a while since I've reviewed a Star Trek film (#299 - Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan), and it was pretty good. This is (obviously) the sequel to that film, so how is it is the main question. It's...alright. The one thing that Star Trek II lacked was a battle between the villain and Kirk, so Star Trek III has one between Kirk and the villain (with Christopher Lloyd, no less). But does that help the film be a good send up? In some ways, it is. Shatner and the rest of the cast do a fine job, and while Lloyd may not match the last villain and its themes, he is enjoyable enough. The plot is reasonably balanced and the effects are good enough (especially when the Enterprise is destroyed) to leave some sort of impression. It may have some sort of weirdness, but compared to the other "weird" Star Trek film (#225 - Star Trek V: The Final Frontier), this is some good stuff with good directing done by none other than Dr. Spock (Heh). Definitely not a bad odd numbered Star Trek film.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

Review #299: Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

Cast
William Shatner (James T. Kirk), Ricardo Montalbán (Khan Noonien Singh), Leonard Nimoy (Spock), DeForest Kelley (Leonard McCoy), James Doohan (Montgomery Scott), George Takei (Hikaru Sulu), Nichelle Nichols (Uhura), Walter Koenig (Pavel Chekov), Paul Winfield (Clark Terrell), Kirstie Alley (Saavik), Bibi Besch (Carol Marcus), and Merritt Butrick (David) Directed by Nicholas Meyer (#226 - Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country)

Review
Indeed it has been a while since I reviewed a Star Trek film, this being my 5th (#009 - Star Trek, #225 Star Trek V: The Final Frontier, #226, #246 - Star Trek: Generations) that I've reviewed here. Now I'll get to the main point. Is this film any good. Yeah. Real good. The main trio (Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley) do a wonderful job once again, especially with Shatner, who gives off a depth (for me anyway) not reached in his performaces beforehand. But by far the most important peformance is Ricardo Montalbán, as Khan. He reminds me of a Bond villian, only more suave. Speaking of that, the themes of revenge, death, and age are used to the fim's advantage. The directing is top notch, and the pacing is good as well. It's funny how the villian is so good even though the villian and Kirk never meet face to face, and yet it still doesn't hurt the film. The action is engaging, for the most part. The sets are good, showing off some good work done to make them. The effects are decent, but in the end the film really all boils down to how good it is. It has a hidden sense of depth with an useful plot with a whole lot of fun after 30 years. Countdown to 300 Reviews: 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1.

Overall, I give it 9 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.

Review #226: Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country.

Cast
William Shatner (James T. Kirk), Leonard Nimoy (Spock), DeForrest Kelley (Leonard McCoy), James Doohan (Montgomery Scott), Walter Koenig (Pavel Chekov), Nichelle Nichols (Uhura), George Takei (Captain Hikaru Sulu), Kim Cattrall (Valeris), Mark Lenard (Sarek), Grace Lee Whitney (Excelsior Communications Officer), Brock Peters (Admiral Cartwright), Leon Russom (Chief in Command), and Kurtwood Smith (Federation President) Directed by Nicholas Meyer.

Review
Two years after the bad reception of Star Trek V, this film would be released in time for the show's 25th Anniversary, but would it work better then the last one? In a word, yes. First off, the effects are good, a step up from the fifth one (Standout effect being the Praxis effect) While I find the Klingon blood a bit silly, it doesn't outright ruin the effects, which is a good thing. The acting is good, with the main trio (Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley) and Plummer doing a great job. The plot is more defined here, keeping you interested throughout. The film was directed by Nicholas Meyer, who directed Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (which is considered by many to be the best out of all the Star Trek movies), and it is a good thing that he returned to direct the last film for the Original Series cast (Except for Shatner, Doohan, and Koenig, who would return in Star Trek: Generations) Roddenberry would not live to see the release of the film, but he did get to see an early version of it days before dying. 21 years later, this film still holds up as a new generation of films would soon follow.

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.

Review #225: Star Trek V: The Final Frontier.

Cast
William Shatner (James T. Kirk), Leonard Nimoy (Spock), DeForrest Kelley (Leonard McCoy), James Doohan (Montgomery Scott), Walter Koenig (Pavel Chekov), Nichelle Nichols (Nyota Uhura), George Takei (Hikaru Sulu), Laurence Luckinbill (Sybok), and David Warner (St. John Talbot) Directed by William Shatner.

Review
Well, well, well. It's been a while since I have reviewed a Star Trek film. A really long while (#9 - Star Trek) Anyway, this is the fifth out of six Star Trek films based on the original series created by Gene Roddenberry (One thing I neglected to mention in the Star Trek review) You might wonder how I found the film. I'm channel surfing at night, and I just so happen to find this film, and I figured, "What could go wrong?" I realized soon after that I might just regret it. Guess who's writing and directing? Shatner, who else? The whole film is a mess, from beginning to end. Its story is lame (Premise in one line: Trying to find "God" at the center of the galaxy), the villain isn't as much a villain as in Vulcan Elvis, and is a disappointment overall. Shatner, Nimoy, and Kelley are a good trio, though, and they do have some fun moments, but at other times the film fizzles out. The effects are off at times, especially with the "Impenetrable Barrier" Shatner said this near the film's release, "Star Trek V is the epitome of my career, my experiences, my hopes and dreams. It is the quintessential me" After 23 years, it does represent the feelings I have: Shattered hopes, dull dreams, and reeking of Shatner all over. This nearly killed the franchise, which would have a sequel two years later to hopefully heal the wounds....

Overall, I give it 3 out of 10 stars.

Movie Night: The Transformers: The Movie.

Review #190: The Transformers: The Movie.

Cast
Judd Nelson (Hot Rod/Rodimus Prime), Leonard Nimoy (Galvatron), Robert Stack (Ultra Magnus), Lionel Stander (Kup), Peter Cullen (Optimus Prime), Frank Welker (Megatron), Susan Blu (Arcee), David Mendenhall (Daniel Witwicky), Eric Idle (Wreck-Gar), Neil Ross (Springer), John Moschitta (Blurr), and Orson Welles (Unicron) Directed by Nelson Shin.

Review
This film came after the show attracted kids everywhere with its premise and its usefulness. Anyway, the film may seem like a commercial for the upcoming third season for the show, but I find it is not so black and white as it seems. The voice acting is allright, with Orson Welles, the man who had impressed audiances everywhere 40 years earlier, entertains in his final role...as a planet. The visuals are impreesive, keeping you entertained in a typicalish run time of 84 minutes. I like that it doesn't stray from its themes of destruction fear. Though some might feel that it basically is a way to sell new toys, frankly I don't mind. I didn't grew up with these toys, I grew with Lego, so there ya go. Good visuals with good acting make a decent film. While the three films that would follow 20 years later might have been...whatever you might thnk (Reviews #57 and #58 are my opinions) It may not have been a big success whn it came out, but it at least is recgonized today for being more then meets the eye. Countdown to 200: 10...

Overall, I give it 8 out of 10 stars.