It's Man's First Expedition to Mars, and Something Has Gone Horribly Wrong
by: Michael Summers 3.30.00

Any fan of the science-fiction movie genre, even a casual fan, is exposed to a lot of really bad movies. It's no coincidence that most of the targets on "MST3K" involve alien invasions, beast-men, hostile planets, mad scientists, etc. I don't know why there are so many bad movies in the sci-fi genre. A full exploration of this phenomenon is probably the subject for another essay. Anyway, my standard for bad has always been a version of "Hercules" released in the mid-80s and starring Lou Ferrigno. Those of you who have seen it know what I'm talking about, and I'm also sure there are many people out there who have seen "Hercules" and don't think it's as bad as (fill in movie here). But for me, it makes a suitable measuring stick. If my sister (who saw the movie with me when we were younger, with our father) asks how a particular sci-fi movie was, and I say, "well, it isn't as bad as ÔHercules'" it's a good indication that, while it may not have been the worst movie ever, it sure wasn't that great.

"Summers didn't like it"

"M2M" isn't as bad as "Hercules." In fact, I liked elements of "M2M" very much. But it's not a great movie by any means. It belongs to a sort of sub-category of failure, the movies that seem to have tons going for them – interesting (and current) premise, great actors, noted director, big-budget studio backing, etc – and still blow it. It was frustrating for me to watch "M2M" and see it slip bit-by-bit into crap, one opportunity after another squandered by stupid choices.

The most glaring flaw is the dialogue. Close your eyes and listen to Tim Robbins' character try to convince the mission leader why the Gary Sinise character needs to head the expedition to save Don Cheadle, and you'll swear your listening to. . . well, any movie or television or radio show ever made. And that scene isn't the only culprit. Throughout the movie, most of the talk is techno-babble or exposition or the kind of action/adventure dialogue you've heard a million times before ("You've got to let him go. He wrote the book on Martian rescue missions. . ." "I don't know. It's risky. . ." "He's the only one who can get us out of there and you know it. . ."). Somehow, the actors' efforts to inject some life into these wooden cliches only make the words more boring and ridiculous. It was puzzling to me, since I think Sinise, Robbins and Cheadle are some of the finest actors out there, and a movie like "Jurassic Park" (for example) had plenty of techno-babble and exposition but still worked. In fact, I'd go so far as to say a sci-fi flick NEEDS a little techno-babble and exposition. But whatever the script magic that can give audiences the info they need without sounding like they're being lectured to, it's missing from "M2M." The dialogue sounds like the clunkiest, clumpiest 50s/60s sci-fi fare.

As I said above, there are some elements of "M2M" that I really liked. Director Brian DePalma skips the big "first man on Mars" scene, and that seems to me a wise choice for this particular movie; when man really goes to Mars, it'll be pretty exciting to watch, but for an audience that regards the launch of a new space shuttle as business as usual, and has seen all manner of extra-terrestrial landings depicted on the big screen, having to sit through another one might be too much to ask (though maybe it could have been depicted as a news cast? Just a thought). I also liked how the science remained SOMEWHAT believable. Of course, I'm no scientist; I'm sure anyone who knows anything about space travel had a whole bag full of bones to pick with this movie. But sci-fi requires a certain suspension of disbelief, and I found that for the most part I could maintain that suspension of disbelief without too much trouble. I appreciated the way the film-makers stuck with space travel as we know it. It takes a long time, people don't jump into a space ship and go flying off, and the movie seemed pretty consistent with that kind of thing. However, in other aspects, the movie blows it. Don Cheadle has been stuck on Mars, alone, for 6 months, looking at an (ahem) unearthed "giant face" structure. What would that do to you? When the rescue mission arrives, he acts a little goofy for a few minutes, then he's fine. Come on. . .

The movie's grand finale contains some of the hokiest special effects I've seen in a long time. Not only that, but the "answer" the astronauts find in the end is anti-climactic. The premise that life on Earth had extra-terrestrial origins is not particularly original. You've seen the same thing, done better, countless times. In fact, a lot of "M2M"'s best moments recall "2001: A Space Odyssey", and "M2M" suffers by comparison. I could probably check off all the scenes and elements of the movie that made me cash in my goodwill chips, but that would be boring. In the end, I was left with a profound sense of disappointment. As I said above, you've got a great cast, a noted director, and a timely subject, and that all goes to waste on a goofy story with stupid dialogue. I kept wondering if they really needed to discover proof of previous life on Mars to make this a good movie, or if they needed the effects extravaganza at the end. . .

The truth is, they didn't. "Apollo 13" had many of the same dramatic elements (possible tragedy as man takes first steps into the new frontier). The space ships acted like real space ships, and no drooling, toothy BEM or giant, glowing, bald Barbie doll popped up to devour the astronauts or take them home. It was also a true story. We KNEW the astronauts were going to make it back alive. Yet it was still an exciting, compelling movie. I see no reason why a good director and a good script couldn't do the same thing with a rescue mission to Mars. It's a great premise. But with "M2M" something went terribly wrong. And it wasn't a sandstorm.

Maybe the film makers don't believe that sci-fi fans are critical? Slap some rote story elements together with some flashy effects and they'll eat it up. But great special effects are a given these days. Considering the cast, the director, and the big budget behind "M2M," I expected more than great effects for my 8 bucks.