moriarty@fluke.UUCP (Jeff Meyer) (12/03/84)
*Sigh*
The Christmas season is one holiday which still seems to keep a bit of that
childhood feeling of anticipation. This is probably due more, these days,
to Christmas movie releases than to anticipation of presents ("Clothes
again, Ma..."). Lately, local papers tend to be running the trade journals'
word-of-mouth rumors about Xmas movie chances at the Box Office. STARMAN,
John Carpenters new film, was one of those which had garnered good marks
from the "in the know" people; it was supposed to have everything in it to
make it a big holiday hit.
Well, folks, it DOES have several things which could add up to a success: a
couple of actors very capable of romantic chemistry; a basic premise that
has already been proven an attraction; and a plot that has already been
test-driven for reliability about 30 times. The problem is, the ingrediants
were piled in -- but they weren't stirred, and nothing else was added. This
movie, about an alien being on earth trying to get back home (yes, like THAT
movie -- but with one (perhaps two) great difference(s)), has not one
original bone in its storyline; I should know, I was struggling to find one
throughout the entire show. The movie was so predictable (and so slow) that
I could concern about 70% of my attention on identifying where different
bits of the movie had been taken from. This movie is BARREN of original
ideas; it is as if a Hollywood studio meeting produced it, but left it in
rough draft condition.
The actors involved try, to various degrees (only four are drawn out at
all). Karen Allen looks terrific, and is able to display a certain amount
of tenderness, but with the script given her, it was a forlorn hope. The
only time one feels for her character is when something particularly
repugnant is done to her by the government (the villains); nemisis, in
STARMAN, was apparently derived after repeated watchings of BILLY JACK
movies. Jeff Bridges, as the alien in human form, again tries (he has, of
late, been cast to play romantically against the most beautiful of Hollywood
actresses, Rachael Ward and K.A. (your opinions may vary :-) )) to bring
across a character from nothing; but the jokes are strained, and his very
capable acting talent (e.g. AGAINST ALL ODDS, WINTER KILLS) has nothing to
amplify, or sketch out. Charles Martin Smith blows a role which could have
been fantastic, even given the weak lines he is provided with. And Richard
Jaekel (sp?) plays the same CIA hardass he's been playing on the screen and
TV for the last 15 years.
In short, it has two people falling in love (guess who?) set against a
background of a chase scene, where the enemy are terribly stereotyped and
very stupid. The helicopter scene at the end was particularly badly done,
reminding one only that you had seen it before in APOCALYPSE NOW and
CAPRICORN 1. I cannot reccomend this even marginally; I wish I could, as I
had hopes for it, but it makes me angry to see something done with little
effort to make it interesting, prefering to sell the movie on its potential,
rather than it's actual, worth.
"History is made at night. Character is what you are in the dark."
Moriarty, aka Jeff Meyer
John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc.
UUCP:
{cornell,decvax,ihnp4,sdcsvax,tektronix,utcsrgv}!uw-beaver \
{allegra,gatech!sb1,hplabs!lbl-csam,decwrl!sun,ssc-vax} -- !fluke!moriarty
ARPA:
fluke!moriarty@uw-beaver.ARPA