Another Earth

Sad Professor

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJoXfTxOEuw

Kind of intriguing, no?

helimachoptor

Looks good but will prob be terrible

Sad Professor

It seems it got a good response at Sundance. Obviously not a mainstream film though. Hopefully it'll pop up in the IFI at some point.

Richard Dower

Most of the budget probably went on the compositing....i doubt this movie is upto much, a premise to draw you in but little substance, it's not Sci-fi.

Richard Dower

Richard Dower wrote: »

Most of the budget probably went on the compositing....i doubt this movie is upto much, a premise to draw you in but little substance, it's not Sci-fi.

It's amazing that your indepth analysis of the film is very opposite to most of the critics who are calling it "A gripping, intimate story to which science fiction adds a provocative, philosophical context."

There is nothing worse than when someone starts criticising a film without first having the decency to watch it. And while there are films you can easily judge based on the trailer, Vampires Suck and any other entry in the series but to judge a film such as Another Earth on a few minutes of footage and proclaim that it isn't up to much is a bit ludicrous.

Mickeroo

Interesting, I can't decide if it actually looks good or if the Cinematic Orchestra have tricked me into thinking it does.

Boo Radley

Sad Professor wrote: »

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJoXfTxOEuw

Kind of intriguing, no?

Looks very interesting. Cheers for posting.

Mickeroo

Mickeroo wrote: »

Interesting, I can't decide if it actually looks good or if the Cinematic Orchestra have tricked me into thinking it does.

It's certainly one of the more interesting films of the year, I did'nt watch teh trailer as I've been waiting to see if for awhile and the current trend to give away all the twists in the trailer means that I no longer watch them if I can help it.

expectationlost

watched, thought it was exceptionally good

FortuneChip

Yeah, very good movie. When you consider the grander concepts in the movie, it's great that they just made a very human story.
To help write and star in the movie shows that Brit Marling is a bit of a talent. I've read some interviews regarding the movie, she seems a very intelligent girl altogether.

Fishooks12

Safe to say this blew me away.

Stylistically it reminded me a lot of Primer, but with a more emotive vibe. Bit more simplistic plot wise too but just as powerful and gripping.

Really loved everything about it and It might take a day or two and perhaps a re-watch to get some decent critique

johnny_ultimate

Right, so I'm going to be the voice of dissent here: thought this was an exceptionally middle-of-the-road movie, and that's being generous.

This is a film where a few ill-fitting bursts of stylistic invention and a tiny handful of moderately interesting ideas mask what is a predictable and hollow core. This is an indie film by the numbers for 90% of the running time - a tired old plot (

guilty person emotionally connects with their victim - sigh

), some overused cheap tricks (

ENOUGH WITH THE STEALTH VEHICLES ALREADY!!!!

) and an eye-rolling ambiguous ending, the sort that seems mandatory to get funding in America these days (at least there is scope for some interpretation here). TBH, the narrative was about as unexpected as a romantic comedy. Brit Marling was excellent, and nice to say that lad from Lost in a meatier role. But otherwise the opening credits were the best part, and that's not exactly the nicest compliment one can give a film. Aside from some later pretty visuals breaking up the otherwise handheld gloomy, indie cinematography this is a film that is far less poetic than it thinks it is. A sci-fi premise with a subdued delivery is rife with possibility, and even the basic concept of an alternative Earth is simply full of poetic potential - potential IMO this film completely failed to live up to.

I was approached by an unusually disgruntled fellow viewer as I left the cinema and asked what I thought of the ending. I gave him my interpretation that it was probably

meant to reflect how the 'other' Rhonda went through the same thing on her Earth, but made a different decision in the end

. Or something. He responded with a rant about how much he hated it and that it was a case of the emperor's new clothes. While I thought it was far too ho-hum a film to get any way worked up about, I think he had a point.

dominiquecruz

Interesting; just flicking through a selection of reviews online, and it seems that the film has had a pretty divisive reception. For the most part, I enjoyed it. I thought the premise was hugely intriguing and whilst its execution was far from perfect, it delivered what I expected.

I actually thought the ending was the best part; the only ending that could fit. Hollow and predictable would definitely not be my adjectives of choice. Don't get me wrong, it's not film of the year, but theres enough substance there to make it worth watching imo.

johnny_ultimate

I don't know - it just felt to me like every plot and character development was overly signposted. There were only a small handful of incidences where it caught me off guard. It just felt as if I'd seen this story many, many times before, and the coat of paint didn't cover that up particularly well.

That said, the budget was a mere $200,000. It's very impressive what they achieved for that - given so many Irish films work on two, three, four times that budget and provide much lesser results (technically and artistically).

Goldstein

Science fiction. Not dead yet.

Yes, a lot is telegraphed, some borrowed (Doppelgänger 1969 anyone), there's some very convenient coincidences and you need to forget everything you know about physics...However, despite any and all attempts to find faults either consciously or unconsciously whilst watching it, the soul of this film shines through undeniably and uncompromisingly as speculative fiction true and true. You can tell it was made by ones who obviously have a passion for and knowledge of the genre, as well as a love of astronomy and film. I found myself smiling at the end so well done lads, another gem we can be proud of.

There are also more than enough fabulous and satisfyingly subtle moments to dilute and offset the flaws -

To name a few - The Wii boxing scene was just beyond surreal, the Russian cosmonaut tale superbly spun and the letter tracing moment poignant.

Not just great character based science fiction (It's not all about aliens and spaceships), but great film making to boot and an impressively immersive score.

Asimov would appreciate the nod.

johnny_ultimate

A more considered perspective, after a few hours of reflection. Minor spoilers within.

I wanted to like Another Earth, I really did. I like the concept of an Earth doppleganger (people included) and the poetic possibilities that suggests. I love the good intentions behind a sci-fi film devoid of aliens, ray guns, space travel and all that other nonsense. I like that the filmmakers made a unique, technically impressive film for $200,000. I like co-writer / lead actress Brit Marling, who from the evidence has an exciting future ahead of her in both screenwriting and acting. And, most of all, I always like to cheer on the underdog from the sidelines.


It is, then, with a note of genuine disappointment that I sadly admit my apathy towards the film. Things start well: very well in fact. The prologue is a vibrant, provocative piece of work - even the credits pulsate as our seventeen year-old protagonist Rhoda introduces herself and her worldview. It establishes a brave new cinematic tone, and I eagerly anticipated where the film would go as Rhoda stared out of her car window at a newly discovered distant planet.

Then there's an 'unexpected'

stealth car crash

- one of cinema's most overused tricks in recent years, and a personal pet peeve - and my eager grin transformed into a frown.

Early hints of a bold stylistic direction are all but abandoned thereafter. There are some gorgeous compositions scattered throughout - the frequent shots of Earth-2 hovering in the sky are certainly arresting - and some inventive editing slips in at random intervals. But these segments feel out-of-place with the grimy handheld cinematography - the kind you've seen in countless independent movies over the years - that comes to dominate the film. The story itself soon shoots off in directions that I can only describe as predictable. After the

car accident, we're whisked four years into the future where Rhoda has just been released from prison as a result of her role in the accident.

She chooses a janitorial job in a local high school as opposed to rebuilding her shattered dream of attending MIT. Racked with guilt and confusion, she drifts aimlessly from one day to the next. Eventually, she decides to attempt some sort of reconciliation with the sole other survivor of the accident (played by William Mapother, who it took me a frustrated half hour to recognise as the mysterious Ethan from Lost). Unable to bring herself to admit the truth, she lies about her identity and soon ends up trying to connect with her fellow lost soul. But we all know her big secret can't stay hidden forever.


And therein lies my biggest problem with Another Earth. I always felt a few steps ahead of the writers and the characters. I'm not trying to sound pretentious or arrogant here - I honestly felt that every plot beat, character development or narrative twist was either excessively signposted or eerily familiar. In many ways, the narrative structure is reminiscent of a romantic comedy of all things. This is the traditional three-act structure in action: to a fault. Of course that particular storytelling standard is there for a well-established reason (it works, basically) - but Another Earth's consistent refusal to truly spread its wings was, in this writer's opinion, frustrating. The delivery is never less than competent, and there are a handful of moments and scenes that are genuinely poignant (Marling passionately retelling an old tale about a Russian cosmonaut nicely summarises the film's themes). Personally, however, the steadfast predictability consistently undermined any dramatic potential or tension. At very worst, it can feel preachy, sentimental, self-important and over-serious - only on a few occurrences, granted.

Of course, Marling and her co-writer and director Mike Cahill do have that one big trick up their sleeve - Earth-2 (one clever exchange reflects on the human arrogance of determining the identical planet to be second best). There's so much inherent poetic possibility that the writers barely need to comment on it. They focus on one aspect - the possibility that the characters Earth-2 doubles may have had different experiences or made different decisions. It's a curious suggestion constantly burning away in the background, especially with the hints that the timelines of Earth-1 and 2 only deviated from each other on that fateful night four years previously. While the considered subtlety of the sci-fi elements is certainly to be admired, the problem is that it's perhaps too subtle.

Blasphemy, you possibly yell - that understated sci-fi is, after all, what has helped Another Earth enjoy everything from hyperbolic enthusiasm to unconvincing vitriol. While Another Earth's occasional fixation with another Earth certainly provides a unique selling point, it ultimately feels overwhelmed by the core character study (which takes up a vast majority of the running time). It has the unfortunate side-effect of making the explicitly sci-fi scenes feel out of place and, dare I suggest, under-explored. What we're left with is a ho-hum indie drama on one hand and a half-baked arthouse sci-fi movie on the other. Combined, they certainly resonate with each other in curious ways, but it always feels as if there are many further insights that the film-makers are simply glossing over or outright ignoring. Comparisons with Solaris or the recent Melancholia are warranted, but Another Earth cowers beneath their powerful shadows.

Like so many recent 'high concept' indie films, Another Earth ends ambiguously. The ending is actually curious, and open to many interpretations. But it's too little, too late, and a final example of the uncertain delivery and tone that holds the film as a whole back. The ambitions of Marling and Cahill can only be admired, and they have crafted an accomplished piece of work out of extremely limited resources. But it's because there's so much potential in Another Earth that the shortcomings feel so disappointing. Another Earth has a unique voice, but it's never allowed to sing.

Goldstein

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Comparisons with Solaris or the recent Melancholia are warranted, but Another Earth cowers beneath their powerful shadows.

Whoa! I thought it was good but let's not get carried away :pac:

It reminded me a lot of Code46 now that I think of it. Similar type of minimalist dual character focused low quay approach. I admit you do have to forgive a lot of contrivances but all things considered I thought it was one of the better movies I've seen in the last few months and the most accomplished proper sci-fis since Monsters. (That's not a very big sample these days unfortunately)

I admit I did not appreciate the crash set-up cliché either and it jolted me out of the narrative (For the wrong reason). It was like something out of a Final Destination scene.

Sad Professor

I really liked it. I'd agree with the some of flaws in the filmmaking that johnny_ultimate pointed out. But as a character drama I found it a moody and absorbing piece of work. I find this kind of low budget filmmaking inspiring.

Galvasean

Does the film at any point address the serious repercussions associated with another planet suddenly appearing in our orbit? Maybe I've been hanging out with Brian Cox too much, but when I heard of this I immediately thought, "Oh no, tidal waves!"

johnny_ultimate

Galvasean wrote: »

Does the film at any point address the serious repercussions associated with another planet suddenly appearing in our orbit? Maybe I've been hanging out with Brian Cox too much, but when I heard of this I immediately thought, "Oh no, tidal waves!"

Nope, nothing of the sort (and it would be very tonally out of place with the piece if they did). It would be fair to call this metaphorical fantasy fiction as opposed to sci-fi in some regards

Sad Professor

No, that's completely ignored. The film is more about the abstract idea of another Earth showing up in the sky than the scientific reality of it. Anyone going to the film expecting hard science fiction will be disappointed.

EDIT: johnny_ultimate beat me to it and said more or less the same thing.

Galvasean

johnny_ultimate wrote: »

Nope, nothing of the sort (and it would be very tonally out of place with the piece if they did). It would be fair to call this metaphorical fantasy fiction as opposed to sci-fi in some regards

I was thinking that myself. It doesn't sound like sci-fi to me at all.

expectationlost

because sci-fi is supposed to follow the rules of physics?

yet it does quotes a number of scientific theory's

Mickeroo

expectationlost wrote: »

because sci-fi is supposed to follow the rules of physics?

Technically yes.

Galvasean

I think I'll leave the thread - apologies for kicking up the science fiction / science fantasy debate

expectationlost

its called missing the point galvasean and mickaroo

Galvasean

expectationlost wrote: »

its called missing the point galvasean and mickaroo

Well actually if people insist on calling it sci-fi on thread when as it turns out it isn't actually sci-fi...

johnny_ultimate

Alright chaps, let us get back on topic and all of that. No-one ever wins when it comes to internet semantics.

ImpossibleDuck

Looks very, very intriguing...think I'll give it a watch

the_monkey

crap .....

shiity ending , director does the usual ****e and

leaves it up to the viewer ... bollixx..

nervous_twitch

the_monkey wrote: »

crap .....

shiity ending , director does the usual ****e and

leaves it up to the viewer ... bollixx..

I thought the ending was perfect.

the_monkey

nervous_twitch wrote: »

I thought the ending was perfect.

I can understand that, but im a bit tired of these open endings ...

I guess she was more successfull, the accident didn't happen on Earth II

But again who knows ? .

I was thinking that on Earth II

the girl and the guy were killed .... ...

nervous_twitch

the_monkey wrote: »

I can understand that, but im a bit tired of these open endings ...

I guess she was more successfull, the accident didn't happen on Earth II

But again who knows ? .

I was thinking that on Earth II

the girl and the guy were killed .... ...

I get what you mean; I think it worked here because the endings are never meant to be tied up.

What conversation did she have with herself? Had she made the same mistakes? Could the guy have been happy even if his wife was still alive, considering there must have been an Earth II version of himself? Maybe the Earth we were watching was Earth II all along?

I think you're meant to let your own experience inform your response to these questions.

I think Cahill purposely avoided getting mired in any real science, and the concept was only being used to anchor this one girl's story in a more interesting way.

The speech at the end seems to imply that

the second the planets first saw one another their alignment was broken, so I guess the accident didnt happen. Only problem there is, if the accident never happened, why did Rhoda II come to Earth 1, if she had nothing to redeem? Maybe just because she was going to MIT and had an interest in space, and wrote another good essay? Or maybe John told her what Earth I Rhoda was going through?

Bah, y'know you're right, a bit of further clarity wouldn't have gone astray

stealinhorses

I watched this a few weeks ago and thought it was good. Bit slow at times, but atmospheric and aesthetically appealing. The story was cool but the ending a bit of a let-down. I don't know why, it wasn't bad or anything, it just... kinda ended. I'd like to see more films like this though.