Film, 1984
Director: John Carpenter
Story
After a Voyager space probe is intercepted by aliens they send one of their own to planet Earth to check us out. Things don’t go so well though as its spacecraft is immediately shot down over North America (where else?). This alien then clones a body from the DNA of a dead man and enlists his widow’s aid in getting to Arizona where it can make a rendezvous with its comrades and go back home. Along the way the Starman will learn about the gamut of human emotions, from fear and hate to joy and… love.
Review
Sometimes you come across a movie that’s not good, but not bad either. It’s… okay. Starman is one of those movies. I was mildly entertained for two hours but at the end of the day couldn’t claim that I had just seen something special. On the plus side this film has some great acting, especially from Jeff Bridges as the titular alien. Watching this guy you really will believe that he’s from another planet. Everything, from his curiosity and attitudes to his gradual grasp of English will seem completely realistic and exactly like what would happen if an extraterrestrial were to visit our planet.
In addition, there are quite a few laughs to be had at Starman’s misunderstanding of Earth customs, which means that this film never gets *too* somber. Karen Allen does a good job too, ably portraying a woman who sees an alien morph into her dead husband right before her eyes, freaking the fuck out and then gradually learning to accept and even love the strange being that is dragging her halfway across the country on a road trip that is as far from normal as you can get outside of a Hunter S. Thompson novel. Special effects are generally very good (including the aforementioned morphing scene) and don’t overpower the story, as some 80s sci-fi flicks are wont to do.
Unfortunately, this movie completely lacks subtlety… everything is in-your-face and obvious – as is the norm for most Eighties movies. The US Government is EVIL as they attempt to track down Starman and capture him for medical experimentation or worse. I hate it when movies do this. If we did encounter a being from a civilization more advanced than our own, wouldn’t we want to be more diplomatic in case they would take violent offense to our actions? Watching this you clearly know who the good guys and bad guys are. Everything else is obvious too. You can definitely tell when you’re supposed to cry or laugh or go “aww.” The religious symbolism is hamfisted as well. Okay, I get it, Starman is Jesus – could we move on please? The romance is pretty sappy and obvious too, but most movie love stories are.
I guess my biggest beef with Starman is that it doesn’t feel like a John Carpenter film. Most of his movies you can watch and tell who the director is (and not just because he puts his name before the freaking title for every one)… he’s a very individualistic director who usually makes (or made, I haven’t seen any of his latter-day movies which aren’t supposed to be that good) unique and entertaining celluloid gems. But Starman just seems like your average 80s Hollywood movie. Carpenter has said that he made this film so that he could continue to work in Hollywood, but couldn’t he have put a little more effort into it? Come on, man, you made Escape From New York! Oh, and the music score is bland and forgettable – and in a movie called Starman they didn’t even include the David Bowie song anywhere in the movie. What’s the problem guys, too obvious for you?
In the end I can only recommend Starman for someone who is a John Carpenter completest or someone who wants to watch one of the best acting jobs of Jeff Bridges’ career (just behind, you know, his Academy Award winning performance in Tron). Oh, or anyone who want to see either Karen Allen in her panties or Jeff Bridges in the buff.
Well, that's my Valentine's Day post. Don't expect another romance movie post for a long time, because I can only take so much Hollywood lovey-dovey sugar in one year.
No comments:
Post a Comment