This little attempt to transliterate a possibility that had been theoretically exposed by Carl Sagan himself falls completely short in this very low budget independent movie.
"Contact" it is absolutely not. If someone expects that quality and thrills in this iteration he might be heavily disappointed.
This movie walks and talks just like a staged play, rather than a true movie, and as such it should have been produced.
What is the saying of a well produced and conceived film? Show us, don't just talk about it.
The word "motion picture" is just reserved for films which have a swiftly moving and developing story and should only be applied when actual visuals are shown.
The beauty of it all is that in the opening titles there is the mention of visual effects, but.as far as I could see, these seem to be reduced to a very minimum and are indeed nothing special at all.
It is a very talky movie, but so badly delivered by all actors involved that it slowly becomes an academic exercise, rather than an interesting exchange of dialogues between true living people.
The taste of it is highly resembling a lecture, rather than an attempt to inform us through an entertaining time.
It is simply flat and boring.
And returning to the actors, having been myself a stage director, I must say that I have witnessed better actors under my own direction, who at times were indeed amateurs.
I don't know how or who the casting was done, nor do I wish to know, since the choice seems to have been done at random.
All actors and actresses are uninteresting and lifeless, just like stale puppets or statuettes delivering flatly lines which clearly mean nothing to them.
They just act by the numbers, but there is no true attempt at exploring who is who and where they all come from.
They are just presented to us as what and who they are and no attempt was made to flesh them out, either by the director of this flick, or by the actors involved in it.
It almost seems to me, that someone picked some random walking by people from the street and slammed them into this movie as actors. That's how bad they look.
I don't know how well trained the cast is, nor do I need to know it, since when we talk about movies, the least one could at least expect is a bit of charisma, some form of magnetism and chemistry among the players, but if you seek that you might be hugely disappointed.
I am really sorry to say this, but a wooden marionette could better come to life in the hands of a trained puppeteer, than the cast of "First Signal".
And believe me, I have watched many more independent low budget science fiction movies who could easily outmatch this poor attempt.
All it needed was a bit more imagination and a whole lot more of better acting by all.
And better acting is not as difficult as one may think, especially not in movies. One just has to better feel and understand the role he or she is put in and act upon it in a very natural way. And if the text is too difficult, then discuss it with the writer and the director and let them explain it to you, and allow them to express their intentions with it.
If the cast and the director/writer, Mark Lund, had sat down together and fleshed it out a little bit more and perhaps thoroughly rehearsed it before filming this empty and shallow film, it might probably have saved the day and allowed all of them to enjoy it a little bit more.
And pity for the musical commentary, which in itself reflects the intentions for a good movie, filled with true moving parts, but alas, falls short as well, since a good score rarely compensates for a stale action all around.
So, why did I give it 2 stars instead of just 1? Simply due to the effort put in it nevertheless. I know how difficult making a movie can be and how much work goes into it, no matter for the end result, and this is why I wanted to compensate at least the crew for it.
And therefore and in conclusion, would I recommend it to anyone? No, absolutely not.
And if you are interested in the work of Carl Sagan, you will have a much better time reading his writings and his excellent books, but stay away from this lecture movie, which means absolutely nothing and is going nowhere with the subject at hand.
"Contact" it is absolutely not. If someone expects that quality and thrills in this iteration he might be heavily disappointed.
This movie walks and talks just like a staged play, rather than a true movie, and as such it should have been produced.
What is the saying of a well produced and conceived film? Show us, don't just talk about it.
The word "motion picture" is just reserved for films which have a swiftly moving and developing story and should only be applied when actual visuals are shown.
The beauty of it all is that in the opening titles there is the mention of visual effects, but.as far as I could see, these seem to be reduced to a very minimum and are indeed nothing special at all.
It is a very talky movie, but so badly delivered by all actors involved that it slowly becomes an academic exercise, rather than an interesting exchange of dialogues between true living people.
The taste of it is highly resembling a lecture, rather than an attempt to inform us through an entertaining time.
It is simply flat and boring.
And returning to the actors, having been myself a stage director, I must say that I have witnessed better actors under my own direction, who at times were indeed amateurs.
I don't know how or who the casting was done, nor do I wish to know, since the choice seems to have been done at random.
All actors and actresses are uninteresting and lifeless, just like stale puppets or statuettes delivering flatly lines which clearly mean nothing to them.
They just act by the numbers, but there is no true attempt at exploring who is who and where they all come from.
They are just presented to us as what and who they are and no attempt was made to flesh them out, either by the director of this flick, or by the actors involved in it.
It almost seems to me, that someone picked some random walking by people from the street and slammed them into this movie as actors. That's how bad they look.
I don't know how well trained the cast is, nor do I need to know it, since when we talk about movies, the least one could at least expect is a bit of charisma, some form of magnetism and chemistry among the players, but if you seek that you might be hugely disappointed.
I am really sorry to say this, but a wooden marionette could better come to life in the hands of a trained puppeteer, than the cast of "First Signal".
And believe me, I have watched many more independent low budget science fiction movies who could easily outmatch this poor attempt.
All it needed was a bit more imagination and a whole lot more of better acting by all.
And better acting is not as difficult as one may think, especially not in movies. One just has to better feel and understand the role he or she is put in and act upon it in a very natural way. And if the text is too difficult, then discuss it with the writer and the director and let them explain it to you, and allow them to express their intentions with it.
If the cast and the director/writer, Mark Lund, had sat down together and fleshed it out a little bit more and perhaps thoroughly rehearsed it before filming this empty and shallow film, it might probably have saved the day and allowed all of them to enjoy it a little bit more.
And pity for the musical commentary, which in itself reflects the intentions for a good movie, filled with true moving parts, but alas, falls short as well, since a good score rarely compensates for a stale action all around.
So, why did I give it 2 stars instead of just 1? Simply due to the effort put in it nevertheless. I know how difficult making a movie can be and how much work goes into it, no matter for the end result, and this is why I wanted to compensate at least the crew for it.
And therefore and in conclusion, would I recommend it to anyone? No, absolutely not.
And if you are interested in the work of Carl Sagan, you will have a much better time reading his writings and his excellent books, but stay away from this lecture movie, which means absolutely nothing and is going nowhere with the subject at hand.