Red Planet

Note to readers: This review contains spoilers. While I do not believe the revelation of certain plot points will compromise the viewing experience, those who wish to see Red Planet without having previous knowledge certain story elements would do well to bail out now and return after they have seen the film.

I want to propose a resolution that Hollywood should immediately adopt: No more movies about Mars. (And I'm not referring to the Roman god of war.) 2000 has now seen two of them (the other being Bottom 10 contender Mission to Mars), and, between the films, there's ample evidence that no more should be produced. For those determined to cast an optimistic gaze in Red Planet's direction, here's the most positive refrain I can offer: it's better than Mission to Mars.

It seems to me that there could be an interesting story about the first manned mission to Mars, but no one wants to make it. There are so many challenges and inherent dangers that, with the right script, some real characters, and a strong director, such a film could be gripping. Consider Apollo 13. That kept viewers on the edges of their seats because of the human element. Unfortunately, wishing for this kind of motion picture is probably a pipe dream. The closest we're likely to get is something like Red Planet, in which cliches (of which there are many) overrun original ideas (of which there are a few).

The first problem with Red Planet is the lack of character development. Each of the protagonists is introduced via a chatty voiceover. They represent a six-person crew on the way to Mars to determine why a terraforming project has gone awry. It's the near future (some time between 2025 and 2050), and, with Earth's atmosphere poisoned to the point where it's unreclaimable, humanity needs a new home. Mars is the planet of choice, and efforts are underway to give it an atmosphere. But, when something goes wrong, our intrepid sextet is sent to investigate. The party is comprised of Commander Kate Bowman (Carrie-Ann Moss), hotshot co-pilot Ted Santen (Benjamin Bratt), "janitor" Robby Gallagher (Val Kilmer), medical officer Bud Chantillas (Terence Stamp), and two civilians -- Dr. Quinn Burchenal (Tom Sizemore) and Chip Pettengill (Simon Baker). For the most part, they're stereotypes, which greatly reduces the need for serious personality building. We know who these people are the moment we meet them, because we have encountered them hundreds of times before in other movies.

After a few perfunctory scenes on board the spaceship during its 182 day trip from Earth orbit to the Red Planet (Chantillas and Gallagher talking religion, Bowman standing around naked in front of a nonplused Gallagher), the action starts. There's an accident - something to do with a solar flare - and, in the aftermath, most of the crew ends up shipwrecked on Mars while Bowman is fighting fires in the badly damaged orbiter. Of course, Mars isn't uninhabited (it never is in the movies), and, to spice things up, a watch dog robot called AMEE has been damaged in the crash and is now intent upon wiping out Mars' small group of visitors.

Once the setting switches from outer space to the planet's surface, the movie starts to have a low-rent Star Trek feel. However, instead of addressing the kinds of real problems that a wrecked group of colonists might have on Mars, screenwriters Jonathan Lemkin and Channing Gibson take things in a different direction, piling on the contrivances as fast as the bad dialogue. In addition to the insane killer robot and the Martian cockroaches, we get a couple of B-movie staples: the countdown to disaster and the traitor-in-our-midst. Red Planet might have generated more tension if the resolution wasn't so obvious. Everyone on the planet except Gallagher might as well be wearing a red shirt (Star Trek fans will understand the reference). The question isn't whether they will die, but when and how. Meanwhile, up in the spaceship, Commander Bowman decides that the best wardrobe for making repairs is a tight fitting white top. (Maybe this is intended as a nod to the scene in Alien when Sigourney Weaver goes into combat in her underwear.) As for the film's science - it doesn't stand up to close scrutiny, but at least it's not immediately laughable.

Red Planet's production values are good. The special effects are strong without being ostentatious, especially during the crash-landing, which is the picture's high point. The cinematography is also impressive, although it should be noted that, even using red filters, the action never really seems to be happening on another planet. The landscape in Sergio Leone's spaghetti westerns often appears more alien. Atmosphere is critical to the success of a film like this, but first-time director Antony Hoffman (who comes to feature films from commercials) fails to generate it. One thing that good science fiction delivers is a sense of awe, even in the face of incredible danger. We never get that from Red Planet.

The film's approach to its cast is a textbook example of how to waste actors. As a result, Terence Stamp has virtually nothing to do, Val Kilmer ends up as an action hero (not a role he is well-suited for - see The Saint and the third Batman movie for examples), and Carrie-Ann Moss (who everyone remembers from The Matrix) spends most of her limited screen time interacting with a talking computer. Of all the performers, Moss is not only the most charismatic but the most convincing. How much more intriguing would this film have been if she and Kilmer had swapped places? (Not to mention that allowing her to interact with her male counterparts might have rescued the movie's underlying sexual tension from the vacuum it's trapped in.)

As a human interest drama, Red Planet is more thin than Mars' atmosphere. As an action-adventure flick, it's too obviously scripted to generate much real tension. And, as a science fiction effort, it's trapped in a decaying orbit. Overall, Red Planet can be seen as a "almost" movie - it almost does a lot of things, but, in most cases, it falls short. This is reflective of a skewed mentality about science fiction - is it supposed to be serious and thought-provoking like 2001 or purely escapist like Star Wars? In trying to answer that question, Red Planet opts for a path down the middle, and ends up being vaguely dissastisfying as a result. Hey, but at least it's better than Mission to Mars.

© 2000 James Berardinelli