15 of the Apocalypse

nMUSINGS OF A SCI-FI FANATIC FIVE POST APOCALYPTIC FILMS:

nPut quite simply, these are films that I have enjoyed the apocalyptic hell out of on more than one occasion. These are not perfect films by any measure, but I always enjoyed them because more often than not they presented strong ideas and concepts or delivered on a fully realized vision of the apocalypse. 

n
n

n

n

nReign Of Fire didn’t win any awards [though it was nominated for a Saturn Award], but it is far more effective than your average thriller. Bowman implements special effects in just the right doses, while providing a washed-out, charred-out, burned-out depiction of England, post-dragon apocalypse and a rag tag band of Brits. The landscape is littered with the cold, hard reality of earth and barren rock. There is little evidence of life abound, all but destroyed by the dragons. To find a green, growing plant to sustain the survivors is near impossible. Finding proper nourishment appears a life and death struggle for adults and their children alike as the community takes refuge inside the safe confines of non-flammable, historic, stone castles. It makes sense. 

n

nReign Of Fire was bolstered by strong performances from three big names, at the time up and coming Christian Bale and Gerard Butler, along with the well-established Matthew McConaughey. The film is loaded with good bits including an appearance by Alice Krige [ST:TNG’s Borg Queen], a guest role for Alexander Siddig [Star Trek: Deep Space Nine], a little character scene paying homage to Star Wars, gritty landscapes, big performances by men who look like they’ve spent the day inside a chimney, loads of internal conflict between one another and external conflict with the delicious dragons. There’s almost a throwback quality to the film even if the effects are CGI-driven. It feels like a more contemporary version of those monster films we loved as children. The set piece of the downed dragon is particularly breathtaking in terms of tangible effects and the production on that entire sky sequence is a thrill-a-minute. 

n

nOnce the dragons were disturbed during work on the London Underground, war with man ensued. A fight of fire [dragon] versus fire [nuclear] hastened the end of humanity. The year is 2020 and the dreary and dismal future of Reign Of Fire’s apocalypse is more than believable filmed on location in Ireland’s Wicklow mountains. Despite being critically panned by a majority of writers [40% splat at Rotten Tomatoes], the film itself may be stronger and more fun than it has any right to be. Bowman delivers the dragon apocalypse to terrific effect and it is one scorching, hell of a good time. Break out the hot wings and beer.

n

n

n

nDamnation Alley is an imperfect film set in the aftermath of a nuclear holocaust. Holes in logic permeate its tale. The survivors head to Albany, NY. Like anything would be left of New York after a nuclear showdown. Never mind a lush, picturesque Albany two years following nuclear annihilation. I just don’t think so. The film’s strengths lie in solid performances by Jan-Michael Vincent, the wonderful George Peppard [The A-Team], genre character actor Paul Winfield [Star Trek II: The Wrath Of Khan, The Terminator, Babylon 5, Star Trek: The Next Generation] and a young Jackie Earle Haley [Valley Of The Dinosaurs, The Bad News Bears, Wait Till Your Father Gets Home, Breaking Away], who would land a massive performance in Zack Snyder’s Watchmen [2009], but in Damnation Alley he feels like a cast off from Miri [Star Trek: The Original Series]. French model, Dominique Sanda, is thrown in for good measure. The surviving men, woman and child, ironically, put the nuclear back in nuclear family. It is their refuge that is central to this new existence following a global nuclear holocaust. 

n

nOf course, as a child, logic was irrelevant, because the other major star of Damnation Alley was the all-terrain Landmaster [gloriously able to cross oceans too], a metallic, rotating, twelve-wheel beast of a machine complete with missiles that would act as a home on wheels for our band of survivors throughout their journey from California to the East Coast. America is leveled to an essential wasteland, yet, apparently and miraculously, upstate New York is the place to be. To get there you must survive damnation alley. In truth, holes in scientific credibility aside, Damnation Alley is an old-fashioned, thrilling survival tale helmed by that vehicle to end all vehicles, the Landmaster. 

n

nThe Landmaster was custom-built especially for the film and should not be confused with the similar vessel used in Ark II. For the film’s stars getting upstaged by a lifeless craft [two in the beginning] is never a good thing, but it is central and symbolic to the film’s theme of gritty survival. This massive base on wheels was a sight as a youngster. Of course, I’m a fan of just about anything with multiple wheels. Throw in some tank treads, i.e. Thunderbirds, and now you’re cooking with king corn oil. That’s my kind of vehicle. The film is a hodge podge of fun. Mix up a nuclear holocaust, mutant hicks, rubber killer cockroaches and blue-screened scorpions, Lost In Space-inspired wind storms and radioactive skies [think Red Skies by The Fixx] and you have yourself a reasonably solid B-movie classic that throws at you everything but the kitchen sink. Add a few good actors into a fairly streamlined, linear narrative structure and you have Damnation Alley rolling its big ass truck straight into your living room. 

n

nThe film was finally made available on DVD and Blu-Ray in 2011. In 1977, 20th Century Fox had two science fiction films planned. Damnation Alley was the intended blockbuster. Star Wars [1977] was the other film. Yes, the rest is history as they say. As apocalyptic films go, Damnation Alley is certainly not complex in its ambition, but it does remain true to the spirit of those vintage post-nuclear tales of global devastation despite entire lapses in sound science, radiological logic and its effects on the environment or human tissue. It also gives you that nostalgic 1970s film stock and quality missing from today’s CGI-heavy doomsday experiments. It generates fond memories similar in spirit to a film like Them! [1954] – an American vision of nuclear terror and counterpart to Gojira. Damnation Alley tanked it at the box office, though I somehow managed to see it, has certainly risen in cult status as a favorite of 1970s science ficiton. It’s a little disjointed, pretty raw and lo-tech, but good fun with its atmospheric post-doomsday approach. It’s not about the effects, but if Mel Gibson’s Mad Max Rockatansky could deliver apocalypse in the form of a Ford XB Falcon Hardtop black Pursuit Special, than the late George Peppard damn well deserved his ass-kicking Landmaster. Through that rig, Damnation Alley powers a nostalgic unnerving tour [minus de force], so lower those expectations and prepare for an unsettling glimpse of the end of the world as we knew it in the 1977.

nTitle: MAD MAX 3: BEYOND THUNDERDOME (1985) 

n

nDirector: George Miller/ George Ogilvie. 

n

nA Dystopian/ Post-nuclear Apocalypse. It would have been easy to pick Mad Max [1979], and its thoughtful, spare look at society breaking down or even the more vicious savagery of The Road Warrior [1981], for our discussion, so I opted for a look at its much maligned third counterpart in the George Miller trilogy, Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome [1985]. Perhaps it was the chemistry between director George Miller and late producer Byron Kennedy that completely focused and tapped into the world weary vision of Mad Max for those first two films. There was indeed a synergy to that relationship that presented an epic vision for those first two beloved, cult classics that stands apart from the Hollywood sheen of the third. Tragically, Kennedy was killed in a helicopter crash in New South Wales in 1983. Only the spirit of Kennedy would oversee the proceedings of the final film. 

n

nTwo years after Kennedy’s death, and four years following The Road Warrior, Mad Max, Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome arrived to thunderous excitement. In retrospect, unquestionably, the film has been treated with the least respect of the trilogy. Was it too talky? Was it the lengthy segment with the “Tomorrow-morrow land” children that smacked of cutesy Ewoks and three-quel syndrome a la Return Of The Jedi [1983]? Was it George Miller’s loss of partner Kennedy and his new partnership with George Ogilvie that altered the focus from the previous two? One could legitimately imagine a third Kennedy-Miller Production might have arguably been a little different. 

n

nFor all of the complaints about Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome, I’m here to defend it as a success, as a minor classic and as the tent bearer of one of film history’s best third installments. A recent viewing cemented that opinion for me. It had all the trappings, details and feelings of a big finish. Upon its arrival in theatres it felt like a Star Wars event, a Richard Donner Superman and maybe that was part of its problem. Unlike the two previous unheralded films, this one felt a little more polished, a little more Hollywood and propped up in expectations. The whole thing felt a little less the-land-down-under in terms of the spirit of filmmaking. Its post-apocalyptic vibe, now fully ensconced, was indeed filmed in Australia like the others, but the budget was nearly three times greater than the previous entry building the perfect beast of a film, the sweep and magnitude of which is highlighted and underscored by two bold, magnificent music selections by Tina Turner in We Don’t Need Another Hero and One Of The Living and compositions by Maurice Jarre. 

n

nFor me, this final film in the trilogy felt very much like the product of a natural evolution that built upon the previous two. Certainly there are moments and scenes that reminisce of The Road Warrior, but on a grander scale, particularly in its third act a la the train sequence. The weathered and weary Max Rockatansky looks a little older, a little wiser from his efforts to survive in the uncivilized landscape of the first films since losing his family and source of joy years earlier. This is indeed a man in survival mode searching but not knowingly so. 

n

nSurprisingly effective is the film’s ability to convey a world reorganizing, making efforts to reestablish civilization. It still has some truly stunning moments like the Thunderdome itself. It symbolically paints a portrait of an upside down, apocalyptic Rome complete with a hunger for the gladiatorial games of the day. The battle between Max and Master Blaster overflows with the kind of original suspense and excitement not yet encountered in the series. I remember being completely sympathetic and almost troubled at the unveiling of Blaster’s helmet. The disturbing revelation was of a man-child living with Down Syndrome clearly beloved by his dwarf Master. It was a truly moving moment in the film for me and filled me with genuine emotion and sympathy for this enemy of Bartertown. Can you imagine pulling off a sequence like that today? I’m not sure it would happen. In the hands of George Miller he pulls off such a sensitive moment with genuine virtue that a lesser film maker might completely mishandle. 

n

n

nLike the previous films, the third entry is populated by some intriguing characters and Aunty Entity, played by Tina Turner, is no exception. The casting of Turner had to be a risk, but she pulls off the heavy with credibility and relish as her firm hand seemingly holds together the fragile construction of Bartertown. Master Blaster, too, is the kind of physical embodiment of the film’s two visual dichotomies that would culminate in a third act. The character is part diminutive dwarf and circus strong man – Blaster being Master’s protector from Entity. And of course, there’s Mel Gibson, a giant among men when it comes to art and craft of performance. He is the rock, the talented core that threads the trilogy’s success. Still, the third film says something of Miller’s imagination that he mines a kind of fertile science fiction reality with such epic flair. Miller’s visuals are both glorious in their beauty and stunning in their decay and they are often in juxtaposition. This third film benefits from three distinct, stimulating acts and feels different when contrasted to the visually linear look of those first pictures. 

n

nLike the initial films, there are many striking images at play in the third and final outing too. Max’s horse ride out of Bartertown, following a round of “bust a deal, face the wheel” [the film loves catchphrases and is filled with some classics], resulting from a Gulag sentence comes to mind. 

n

nSo many trilogies stumble. The original Star Wars trilogy is arguably one of the best ever made. The first three Alien films are also very close. Others have stumbled in their third attempt. If Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome stumbles at all it is generally with the perceived allegorical use of the children within its tonal shift, not only within this film, but within the franchise. The second act of the film becomes a cinematic version of Miri [Star Trek: The Original Series] as the kids represent innocence and hope entirely absent from the second film. The Feral Kid was an uncompromising symbol of survival in The Road Warrior. He was a representation of innocence lost as much as the world had become paradise lost. The inclusion of these sweet children presents a shift in mood and in spirit within the franchise. This is the film’s greatest issue for some. John Kenneth Muir ponders this shift eloquently in his own look at the film noting that tonal symbol as embodied in the “crockery-wielding tykes.” Rather than stick-waving bears we get a clan of desert-based Lord Of The Flies survivors but with a “terminal” case of the “cutesies.” The segment does establish a more reflective tone and becomes decidedly less menacing. Despite lacking the uncompromising grip of its predecessor, it’s easy to embrace this segment. This is indeed a different film and Max is a different man. The potential for new life exists. Not only does the film present an entirely new chapter in this incredible story, but at this point it’s one we’re willing and ready to invest in. It presents a glimmer of hope through the nobility of man and our reluctant hero leading the future of man. Perhaps, seeing it recently, as a family man, has shed new light on the film’s virtues. 

n

nIn retrospect, it’s oversimplifying to simply dumb down the disagreement with the third film as a riff on Return Of The Jedi. There’s much more going on here psychologically than the fantastic escapades of bear-clothed little people and biker scouts. It’s just left of center enough to be morally complex and differentiate itself from the land of the teddy bears. When Max punches one of the females to keep her from walking away back to the loving arms of Bartertown you know this is the school of hard knocks for children coming-of-age. Sure, there’s a captivating magic to the children’s stunted learning post apocalypse where record players are new again. I was reminded of one “bonk, bonk on the head” without the creepy, but an overly fuzzy case of the Ewoks this is not. These kids are hopeful and looking for guidance. Max inadvertently finds his hope in the process. 

n

n

nRoger Ebert went so far as to call the third film, “more visionary and more entertaining than the first two.” That is entirely fair to say and the film has plenty on offer to make that argument. 

n

nIt may feel a little jarring with the first two acts juxtaposed against one another, but the final act is the moment the film bridges segment one surrounding Bartertown with segment two, the kids of Captain Walker. It’s the ugly, nasty reality of civilization building meets the hope of children born into a world with wide-eyed optimism and curiosity untainted by the vile politics of Bartertown. The fusion is striking, but also a bold work of film. The kids are the future and Bartertown represents the cancerous ways of the past. These Peter Pans of never never land or “morrow morrow land” have what it takes to bring the vitality of their thriving, green water hole, a symbol of rebirth and new life, to the rest of the dead planet. 

n

nWhat people have missed with the children in the third film is they ARE innocent. They haven’t been exposed to phonograph players, clocks or airplanes. They are indeed new to the world. There is a major disconnect there for them. Fans of the first two movies were not open to the positive influence these kids represented within the trilogy preferring to look for more of the same. Today, the film resonates more powerfully than ever. 

n

nAdditionally the end of Bartertown suggests Max is prepared to accept something better. Its dissolution is a symbol of Max letting go of the devolved, violent and cancerous civilization he rejected internally, but settled for as a matter of course. After all, he was a law enforcement officer. 

n

nMad Max: Beyond Thunderdome is artistically far better than some of the harshest critics would have you believe. Most films wish they could be this complete, this imaginative, and this fully-realized in presenting their ideas and themes. Maybe expectations, following two great films, were just a little too high. Maybe people imagined how they would write the story visually and it simply did not connect with that vision. I don’t know what people were expecting, because the third and final picture in the series is exceptional. It rounds out one of the finest character sagas and depictions of apocalypse ever committed to film. 

n

nGone is the Sex Pistol-ish punk spirit of the leather clad Mad Max and the fiery, roguish warrior of a warrior on the unmerciful road with a car oozing relentless cool. Yet, this film has its unrelenting moments. Like the character, the film is a pensive, contemplative, weary nomadic warrior attempting to make sense of a mad world while finding hope and beauty in the most barren of places. This film, too, still has its heart and humanity in the right place. Like the graying in Max’s hair, this is an aging, wiser, softer warrior slowing down [by contrast], “the raggedy man,” even in a savage land and that makes striking sense. This indeed remains a distinguished, underrated classic and an ultimately satisfying conclusion to the apocalypse. 

n

nTone is a big issue in shifting the film. While Miller may pay homage to himself for the railway chase, landing in the familiar tanker chase territory of The Road Warrior, the train works as a symbol of innovation into the frontier. Those who have worked the railroads have often said that our land was built on steam. It speaks volumes about the future for Max and these children. Perhaps a kind of family has come full circle for Max, the post-modern, post-apocalyptic family. 

n

nIn the end, Max earns Entity’s respect when she spares the life of the “raggedy man” and the “soldier.” In that single moment, we know Entity comprehends the future requires men like Max. We are rewarded in his survival and in knowing as Turner sang that he is one of the living. If there’s any hope for the future Max and the children are part of that survival. Those final moments underscore that human compassion may have hardened but it still exists. 

nTitle: FINAL FANTASY: THE SPIRITS WITHIN (2001) 

n

nDirector: Hironobu Sakaguchi/ Moto Sakakibara 

n

nThe Alien apocalypse. I couldn’t tell you the first thing about the video game that inspired the film, Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within [2001]. I also have not seen Final Fantasy VII Advent Children [2005], a film that more closely resembles the video game. Fans of the video game were certainly more relieved with the latter computer animated deliverable. The animators learned a lesson following the financial failure of Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within, but did not make a mistake in delivering a spiritually strong, philosophically-connected and satisfying science fiction story. 

n

nFinal Fantasy: The Spirits Within invests in a journey for protagonist Dr. Aki Ross [voiced by Ming-Na Wen of Stargate Universe] that sometimes proposes questions without the answers. The Japanese-American collaboration was the first photo-realistic computer animated picture. It certain wasn’t a first in the mold of collaborations when you consider kaiju eiga classic like Frankestein Conquers The World or King Kong Escapes. For sci-fi fans the computer-driven film is a refreshing departure from the family-friendly fare of Pixar. The animation, while arguably dated today, still looks stunning particularly in its science fiction landscapes and mechanical designs. These images are something to experience and behold in their own right. Character designs are distinct if just slightly unrefined by today’s standards. Ultimately, it was the story that let the film down in theatres as some critics found it nebulous and vague. Personally, I found the collaboration to be a beautiful mix of Japanese animation with science fiction sensibilities that harkened back to rewarding classics like Blade Runner and Alien for its quiet approach, innovation and room for interpretation and analysis. The film never condescends or spoon feeds the viewer and leaves the kind of space good films allow for returning. 

n

nTerrific action segments aside, and a few standout, mainstream American audiences tended to reject its philosophical and spiritual underpinnings more accustomed to the mind-numbing action of the automatic American movie experience. Released in the summer of 2001, folks were not looking for the space odyssey Square Pictures [Squaresoft/ Square Co., Ltd.] had gambled upon. The film cost 137 million [budgeted originally at 70 million] and earned back about 85 million, crushing the company’s future hopes and forcing it to merge with competitor Enix Corporation establishing Square Enix in 2003. In fact, the only other project Square Pictures had completed outside of the unfortunate disaster that was Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within was a short called Final Flight Of The Osiris [2003], an animated prequel short to The Matrix sequels [the Computer and Technology Apocalypse]. That rousing little short remains one of my favorites assembled for The Animatrix collection. Sadly, Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within would be the company’s final flight too. 

n

nCost overruns and bad luck aside, Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within remains a thoughtful science fiction picture more in the tradition of the science fiction classics than the non-stop, action-based nonsense often released and passed for science fiction in theatres today. The year is 2065 and the Earth is infested with a real phantom menace, not the nightmare George Lucas hoisted on an unsuspecting world. The alien apocalypse comes by way of ghostly Phantoms [perhaps my least favorite design in the film, a nemesis that could have been better]. Civilization has created barrier cities to avoid their lethal touch. Eight spirits or life forms have been determined to negate or neutralize the phantoms that are literally killing the Earth. 

n

nAn opening sequence, in old New York City, begins with the search for the sixth spirit, a plant, and Ross is accompanied by a military extraction team called Deep Eyes to find it. They infiltrate difficult zones in two of the most incredible mecha designs I’ve ever seen. The Boa is a major delivery ship, robust and powerful. The Copperhead is a slicker, faster insertion craft to deliver the teams. Even some of the sci-fi techniques utilized to drop Deep Eyes into the city are impressive, landing them in a kind of dissolving gelatinous sac. It’s truly fantastic. Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within has its necessary action moments, but it’s the more pensive and reflective pieces that work just as well. It’s an imperfect film where the narrative meanders and sometimes certain facts within the story’s logic are never made clear, but it’s a film about ideas and schools of political thought that asks you to reflect for yourself. I’ve always been a fan of stories that make me think and consider the possibilities rather than simply provide the answers like an exact science. 

n

nFinal Fantasy: The Spirits Within took four years, roughly 200 people and 960 work stations to render images for the film. Square had planned on designing the beautiful Aki Ross as an ongoing computer-animated actress [Maxim voted her in their sexiest females list], but with Square’s demise, so came the death of the dreams of another actress beauty and her computer-animating creators. 

n

nThe film was accompanied by an extraordinarily thrilling and beautiful score by American composer Elliot Goldenthal [Alien 3, Heat, Michael Collins]. The soundtrack continues to be a prized joy in my own collection, and unlike the film, was met with near universal acclaim for its classical-based compositions. Numbers like Race To Old New York are as breathtaking as the maligned film’s images. Like the delightful The Dream Within, and the soundtrack itself, the film is first rate from start to finish too. 

n

nThe film was not received well. The reaction was probably one of befuddlement to a certain degree. Rotten Tomatoes [43% splat] had some interesting contributions. On the positive side, John Venable accurately reflected that the story was “well-written and incredibly smart, but probably a bit too spiritual for Western audiences.” That’s true when you consider part of this survival tale is renewing Earth’s soul or gaia. One writer noted it engaged the “heart and mind.” Of the negatives, Eric Lurio dubbed it “very complicated.” It’s fair to say this is a challenging film, but not overly complex, too obscure or too overambitious for a thoughtful viewer. Christopher Smith offered up the dichotomous nature of the film. “It’s a paradox—it’s at once exhilarating yet exhausting, thrilling yet boring, masterful yet banal.” Scott Weinberg humorously noted, “If humans were made up entirely of eyeballs, this would be an instant classic.” Roger Moore unfairly likened the film to Tomb Raider and The Phantom Menace naming it “moronic.” That is a completely incongruous analogy that makes no sense to me. Roger Ebert, on the other hand, gets it right with his trademark “thumbs up” noting its tradition draws from an era of “Asimov… and Heinlein” [note the villain’s name in the film is Hein]. He called it a “milestone” and “revolutionary,” a film that exists as “the first citizen of the new world of cyberfilm.” All of these interesting assessments aside I disagree with those who found the film derivative or unoriginal. Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within is surprisingly refreshing in its approach to the genre. There’s nothing commonplace of the sort. It received kudos aplenty on the technical side, but some found the excessive exposition [not uncommon for some Japanese artists] left much unexplained with too many plot holes. It’s funny, but Henry G. Saperstein, a man who often purchased and edited Japanese kaiju eiga pictures in the 1960s for the US market, told Stuart Galbraith IV in Monsters Are Attacking Tokyo! that Western “audiences do not have the patience” [p.102]. While I don’t necessarily subscribe to that generalization, and it is indeed a different time, there is some truth to that and it could easily apply here today. 

n

nDespite the fact Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within was a box office bomb and destroyed a company’s dreams, it remains an intelligent picture that may not go far enough, but I am still mesmerized by it on many levels. It delivers something of a feast of visual details. New information is acquired with each viewing in the spirit of science fiction like Blade Runner. Many wonder, including Ebert himself, if one day they might be fooled or tricked by computer animation to have the human eye believe what is on screen is real. I never understood that, because if computers generated something that completely real the character would be called flesh and blood actors. What would be the point? It’s that sense of otherness and oddness about the images that makes something like Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within so startling and so striking. And honestly, the mysteries of life, death and spiritual rebirth or renewal aside, the apocalypse has never looked more beautiful. 

nTitle: EVANGELION: YOU ARE (NOT) ALONE (2007) 

n

nDirector: Hideaki Anno/ Masayuki/ Kazuya Tsurumaki 

n

nThe Religious-based Post-Apocalypse. Evangelion: You Are (Not) Alone [2007] is an easy recommendation as a film experience to newcomers and old of the original TV series, Neon Genesis Evangelion, that inspired it. Since we’re talking about apocalyptic films, Evangelion unconventionally fits the bill. It’s not only post-apocalyptic in tone, but pre-apocalyptic in its tale that is both a work of art and genius. Fans of the original series, myself included, will likely refer you to the more comprehensive and detailed character journey that is the twenty-six episode series. I firmly believe it’s arguably the best anime series ever made. 

n

nEvangelion: You Are (Not) Alone is essentially an abridged version of the series first six episodes. The film is the first in a planned tetralogy [four films]. Of course, there has been discussion of the third and fourth films merging into one final picture, but that has yet to be determined. Compression aside, the film captures the spirit and vibe of the series rather efficiently within its short, but effectively implemented, span of time. It’s like a giant, vibrant, thrilling anime rush. 

n

nAs it stands, this first film opens with vivacious, beautiful stills of Tokyo-3, a city undergoing both rebirth and disrepair following the apocalyptic Second Impact. The story gives us a magnificent sense of place despite its Japan-based isolation. Tokyo-3, like the one depicted in the series, is like a character unto itself. The overgrowth and vegetation weaves through the wreckage and dilapidated buildings surrounding parts of the city that have been renewed following the devastating Second Impact. Its survival is symbolic of man’s last stand. The crux of the film is that a secret organization, NERV, based underneath the city in a geofront, and a handful of fourteen year old pilots maneuver bio-mechanoid giants dubbed Evangelions against the relentless attack of monstrously powerful, near impenetrable Angels. The creatures are the creators handle on Toho’s kaiju eiga. 

n

nWhile the film may not be as painfully hand-crafted on the details as those found in the original series, the result of digital animation supplanting hand-drawn , it still however shines more often than not in its meticulous and colorful glory. Six twenty-five minute episodes, originally assembled in 1995, are condensed and repainted with today’s latest technology and computer animating techniques into an exquisitely breathtaking and updated presentation. Nothing can replace the lovingly crafted hand-drawn affection felt in every frame of that original series, but this film is by far and away one of the strongest examples of the possibilities of digital animation outside of anything you’ve seen by Hayao Miyazaki. It is simply flawless. 

n

nEvangelion: You Are (Not) Alone is the brainchild of Hideaki Anno for Studio Khara, which is a splinter studio off the normally original Studio Gainax [Gunbuster, The Wings Of Honneamise, Gurren Lagann]. After all, Anno is revisiting an original work for this film even though it’s his own. What Anno has achieved is not the story of the clichéd teenage pilot and robot, but something much more personal. It is a story of isolation, belonging and ultimately the need for love in a seemingly loveless world. As the title would suggest both, you are alone and not alone. It is a choice. It is the gift of free will. 

n

nWithin a sporadic run of exhilarating Evangelion and Angel combat throughout the film is the complex weave of a myriad of wonderfully designed and now beloved characters. It should tell you something about the quality of the initial series and its ongoing popularity for Anno to return to it over a decade later. It’s a money maker, but it’s also damn good viscerally, intellectually and emotionally. It has all of the hallmarks of traditional mecha anime, designed and animated exceptionally, but its superior visuals are built upon a foundation of religious, philosophical and social questions that infect us with an alluring fascination. There’s always something new to discover. 

n

nThe film was the fourth largest money maker in Japan in 2007. But like most subcultures, anime gets very little attention by mainstream writers in America as evidenced by a handful of reviews at Rotten Tomatoes. International pop culture circa Japan is of little concern to film critics, but at least two critics had some relatively positive points. Kevin Thomas of The Los Angeles Times thought the plot was hard to follow but “pulls you in.” I would expect that might be true to those unfamiliar with the series, which did precisely the same thing. So it clearly works for the uninitiated as Thomas notes. Someone with only a cursory familiarity with the series will likely embrace it. Mike Hale of The New York Times called it “just another robot movie,” illustrating a genuine lack of understanding and real ignorance, but then I rarely expect much from The New York Times. This is hardly true. The film offers a thrilling world that embraces the journey of one boy’s coming-of-age not only amidst a physical battle but a psychological war of his own. There’s nothing banal about that and, by the way Mike, that Evangelion is not a robot. If he knew the first thing about Evangelion he would have landed that basic fact right of an extraordinary science fiction. Aaron Hillis of the Village Voice called the film “entrancing” even though he never fully embraced it. I suppose you could credit these writers for giving it a shot. In most cases, writers clearly opted not to see it in their select venues or write about it. 

n

nEvangelion: You Are (Not) Alone remains mostly faithful to the initial six episodes for which it is modeled upon,a genuinely faithful adaptation of one’s own work. Interestingly, the second film, Evangelion: You Can (Not) Advance, diverges significantly from the series creating a kind of alternate vision of the original series as it spirals toward the next apocalypse. For fans of the series, these films are a treat, particularly the second picture, but fans of science fiction and all things apocalyptic will be enthralled by the first film and the pure imagination of its creators to generate such a positively innovative tale establishing Evangelion somewhere between the post-apocalypse and the potential for another. The images and animation literally burst and explode from the screen. There’s no reason the end can’t be this gorgeous. 

n

nRADIATOR HEAVEN’S FIVE POST APOCALYPTIC FILMS: 

nTitle: A BOY AND HIS DOG (1975) 

n

nDirector: L.Q. Jones 

n

nBased on the Harlan Ellison novella of the same name, this film begins with the end of the world courtesy of World War IV. It is 2024 A.D. and Vic (Don Johnson) and his intelligent telepathic dog Blood (voiced by Tim McIntire) wander the desolate wastelands scavenging through ramshackle dwellings and avoiding marauding gangs. The film’s vision of a post-apocalyptic alternate future is Social Darwinism at its most primal with people killing and raping indiscriminately. Not surprisingly, food is the most prized commodity and has replaced money as the common currency. A Boy and His Dog features a grungy, lived-in aesthetic that is as much a product of its times as the low-budget it was made for, which certainly adds to the authenticity of this bombed-out future world. Science fiction films don’t get much more nihilistic than this one, right down to the pitch-black punchline that it ends on.

nTitle: TESTAMENT (1983) 

n

nDirector: Lynne Littman 

n

nWith the nuclear arms race and the Cold War reaching a climax in the early to mid-1980s, the threat of nuclear war was prevalent on most people’s minds. Two made-for-television movies, The Day After (1983) and Threads (1984), tried to address, in graphically realistic fashion, the implications and ramifications of nuclear war. Testament (1983) wisely goes for a more personal, intimate take on the subject by focusing on the dynamics of one family. Director Lynne Littman spends the time to let us get to know the Wetherly family and the dynamics between all of its members so that we become emotionally invested in them and care about what happens later on. The entire cast is excellent with Jane Alexander delivering an especially deeply moving and heartfelt performance that grounds the film. She provides the film’s emotional core. Look for Kevin Costner and Rebecca De Mornay in early supporting roles. Testament downplays the more sensational aspects of post-nuclear life in favor of a compassionate portrait of a family coping with the unimaginable. This is quietly powerful film still holds up after all these years.
n

nTitle: THE QUIET EARTH (1985) 

n

nDirector: Geoff Murphy 

n

nIf you want to see where the first ten minutes of both 28 Days Later (2002) and the first episode of The Walking Dead come from, look no further than The Quiet Earth, a thoughtful meditation on the post-apocalypse genre. Zac Hobson (Bruno Lawrence) is a government research scientist who wakes up one day and begins to realize that he may be the last man alive on Earth. He drives around town and discovers that he is literally alone – there are no signs of anyone. It is like they all just suddenly and collectively disappeared. Initially, Zac tries to figure out what happened and reach out to others but over time gradually goes mad. Bruno Lawrence delivers a soulful performance in this fascinating last-man science fiction film. He has to carry it all by himself for more than a third of the running time, conveying the arc of Zac’s gradual mental breakdown. The Quiet Earth’s climax takes on a breathtaking metaphysical vibe a la the films Andrei Tarkovsky or the finale of Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), which means it poses more questions than it answers. 

nTitle: CHERRY 2000 (1988) 

n

nDirector: Steve De Jarnatt 

n

nWhen Sam Treadway’s (David Andrews) sex toy android Cherry 2000 (Pamela Gidley) breaks down, he enlists the help of an experienced tracker named E. Johnson (Melanie Griffith) to find another copy of his hard-to-find model in the notorious Zone 7, a post-apocalyptic wasteland. The first third of Cherry 2000 imagines a post-apocalyptic world with a shabby neon sheen reminiscent of Blade Runner (1982) and proceeds to mash it up with The Road Warrior (1981) for the other two-thirds. Once they make their way through the wastelands, the film adopts a western vibe as Sam finds Johnson in a post-apocalyptic version of a frontier town with Melanie Griffith’s character the equivalent of a hired gun. There is a nice contrast between the actress’ sexy, girly voice and her badass attitude and look. In a nice bit of casting against type, she plays a hard-drinking, straight-shooting action hero. It’s a good thing that Johnson is so interesting to watch because David Andrews plays Sam as a bland, blank slate, which is particularly evident in the first third of the film when he’s endlessly moping about his malfunctioning robot. Cherry 2000 picks up considerably once Sam and Johnson venture into Zone 7 and run afoul of Lester (Tim Thomerson) and his ragtag gang.
n

nTitle: HARDWARE (1990) 

n

nDirector: Richard Stanley 

n

nWhen her soldier boyfriend Moses Baxter (Dylan McDermott) comes home from a tour of duty with the head of a robot that he acquired from a nomad, Jill (Stacey Travis) decides to incorporate it into a sculpture/multi-media collage she’s been working on. However, the head re-activates itself and goes on a killing rampage. It turns out the thing is part of a new government project. Set in the 21st century, director Richard Stanley does a fantastic job establishing a world reduced to a radioactive wasteland by populating it with an awesome soundtrack of alt-rock bands like Public Image Ltd. Ministry, and Motorhead (whose lead singer Lemmy even has a cameo in the film as a grizzled taxi cab driver). Much like with Cherry 2000 only better, Hardware shows what you can do on a limited budget but with loads of creativity and a director with a vision. Stanley was way ahead of the curve in anticipating drone robots being used in combat situations. He also doesn’t skimp on the exploitation elements with a bloody, violent climax between Jill and the newly activated robot. The result is one of the best Cyberpunk films to come out since Blade Runner.

n

n

nTitle: 12 MONKEYS (1995)

n

nDirector: Terry Gilliam 

n

nIn a post apocalyptic future where decease has ravaged most of humanity, Bruce Willis plays James Cole, a prisoner who ends up working for the government, but what the government requires of him isn’t just any old job! You see he has to travel back in time to gather information about the decease that nearly wiped out all of humanity. Problem is that on this future, time travel isn’t a perfect science and so he is often times sent to the past without really knowing exactly what point in time he will be arriving in! And so James Cole ends up being sent in and pulled out of time through out the whole movie. My main attraction towards this movie is of course that it was directed by the one and only Terry Gilliam, one of my favorite directors. Every one of his films has this chaotic, unpredictable feel to it and 12 Monkeys is no exception. 12 Monkeys has many of the elements that make a Gilliam film special. His hatred for bureaucracy and systems, the individual driven insane by the system, the manic camera movements, the extreme close ups. This is a Gilliam film through and through. James Cole is a tool of the government; they use him for their purposes without any real concern for him; to them his just a guinea pig. This is one of my favorite elements of the film. There comes a point where Cole doesn’t know what’s real anymore, where he hits the borders of sanity. 

n

n

nThis future is a very dark place in which humans live underground because above ground a deadly decease has spread that is mortal to humans. Above ground animals rein supreme, apparently unaffected by the decease. So we get these fantastic images of wild animals walking through empty city streets while humans live below, in the dark, with their machines. I love the visuals that Gilliam concocted for this film. Also, this is one of Willis’s best performances, he isn’t phoning it in here; on this one we really feel his desperation, his madness; a truly great performance, so underrated. There is always a mystery on this film. Who are the 12 Monkeys? Are they responsible for what has happened to the world? Will Cole ever find out anything about the decease? Will he ever find his freedom? 12 Monkeys remains one of Gilliam’s most successful films at the box office, something kind of rare with this auteur of a director. The film also benefits from having Brad Pitt as part of his cast. Pitt also delivers an incredibly memorable performance as a mentally maladjusted individual that Cole meets while in an insane asylum; Pitt as it turns out plays a great loony! He’s actually played crazy people on more than one occasion, but this is one of his best ones. You might also want to check out La Jetee (1962), the French film on which 12 Monkeys is based on. 

n

nnTitle: WATERWORLD (1995)

n

nDirector: Kevin Reynolds/Kevin Costner

n

nThis film starts Kevin Costner as ‘The Mariner’. And like Clint Eastwood’s cowboy with no name; The Mariner has no name either, that’s just what you call him. But in a world as messed up as this one, who cares about a name!? What you need to care about is survival! In this post apocalyptic future, the world disappeared when the polar caps melted and the world as we know it was engulfed by water. A few humans survive in small Atolls spread out through the ocean. The Mariner is even more extreme, he survives on his own! Sailing around the world on his boat, he cares for no one but himself. But wait, there’s a little girl with a prophecy tattooed to her back! And the bad guys want her! Will The Mariner learn to care for others and help this young girl and her mother reach land? 

n

n

nSo basically, this is a film that was much maligned upon its original release. The film cost well over 200 million dollars and was a box office failure. Why? Maybe it’s because Costner’s character is played as a major asshole that only cares for himself? One things for sure, he’s not the a-typical good guy audiences where used seeing Costner play. Truth is, after a while you kind of get to hate the guy; and he’s supposed to be the films hero! But ultimately who knows what made this one tank? Maybe audiences where tired of seeing Costner in films? By this time, he’d made so many movies, chances are Costner burned himself out. Sometimes audiences choose to hate a film for no reason whatsoever; so who the heck knows. My take on it is that this is a fun film! I recently had a chance to re-watch this one and I saw nothing wrong with it. It’s a mega production with tons of action and effects. It’s got extended action sequences with planes, boats, jet ski’s flying through the air, things really get crazy! Art direction was pretty cool too, and I think this was a feat, considering a hurricane destroyed all the sets they had originally built for this film. This was a troubled production to say the least, but that’s what makes it all the more amazing to me. They managed to make a cool film none the less. The villain in the film is played by Dennis Hopper. He plays this dictator, who cares about nothing but destroying everything in his path, gathering an army, his machines, and his oil; his precious oil, which, as in many post apocalyptic films, is running out! He keeps people happy with cigarettes and lies. This was a fun performance from the great Hopper. Hey, even Jack Black has a blink and you’ll miss it cameo! This film definitely deserves a second look from film lovers; I recommend giving it a second chance. 

nnTitle: SIX STRING SAMURAI (1998)

n

nDirector: Lance Mungia 

n

nSix String Samurai is a post-apocalyptic film that mixes Rock and Roll with the end of the world. In this world, ‘Elvis’ was king. Yes, THAT Elvis. But now, Elvis really is dead and anyone can fight for the kings’ chair; so we get a bunch of different Rock and Roll Bands on their way to ‘Lost Vegas’ to fight for their right to rule the post apocalyptic wasteland. The main character in the film is ‘Buddy’ a young man who is as skilled with his Samurai Sword as he is with his Guitar; which by the way are one and the same! Oh and he’s pretty good at fighting as well; which is how he saves ‘The Kid’ a little kid that decides to tag along with Buddy wherever he goes; kind of like Chaplin’s The Kid (1921) or the kid from El Topo (1970); which is one of the films that Six String Samurai borrows a bit from, at least visually. Through out their journey they meet and fight against other rivaling Rock and Roll bands, mutants, cannibals and an enigmatic character called ‘Death’ who’s all dressed in black and is followed by his cronies; he represents the all powerful Heavy Metal while Buddy is the representative of Rock-a-Billy. Death is looking for his chance to challenge Buddy for the throne, but Buddy is a pretty determined dude, he’ll fight to the death to be King. This is a very low budget film that was obviously a labor of love. It’s stylish, inventive and fast paced which is what saves it. It’s a comic book of a film that in the end is all about pitting Rock-a-Billy vs. Heavy Metal. Six String Samurai ends up being a parody of many things: post apocalyptic films, samurai films and the Rock and Roll lifestyle. 

nTitle: CYBORG (1989) 

n

nDirector: Albert Pyun 

n

nCyborg was a high mark in director Albert Pyun’s cinematic career; and to be honest, that isn’t saying much because I’m not saying Cyborg’s a masterpiece. What it is, is entertaining; and cheesy; exquisitely so! Pyun might not be the greatest director who ever lived (actually he is often times compared to Edward Wood Jr. one of the worst directors who ever lived) but he does seem to be a filmmaker who enjoys making post apocalyptic films. I’m not saying they are good films, I’m just saying, he loves making post apocalyptic films. For example, Pyun got a chance to work with legendary actor Rutger Hauer in a film called Omega Doom (1996), unfortunately, it turned out to be a boring and extremely uneventful film with some terrible effects work. Trust me when I say, it’s not worth your time. He also directed Radioactive Dreams (1985), a film about a couple of dudes who spend most of their lives locked up inside of a bunker after an atomic attack on the United States. They live in the bunker until they are 19 years old! When they finally decide to return to the real world it’s a wasteland filled with cannibals and mutants! This is one of his better reviewed films (and one of his firsts!) unfortunately, as of my writing this; it hasn’t been released on DVD yet. He is also responsible for the Nemesis (1992-1996) series of films, which also dabble with the post apocalyptic theme; but it was Cyborg that was Pyun’s most successful film. It probably has a lot to do with the fact that Van Damme was attached as the films star; back when Van Damme was just starting to become a major action star. In contrast with Pyun’s other films, this one is action packed and has a glimmer of a story to it! Van Damme is a bounty hunter that is hired to protect a cyborg that carries a cure for the plague that’s annihilated most of humankind. He has to safely transport her to a group of scientists in Atlanta who are working on the cure. The film is a road trip movie of sorts, with Van Damme having to confront and fight a series of villainous gangs across the wasteland. Most of the film is composed of tough muscular dudes kicking the living daylight out of each other. There’s not a lot of dialog on this film, just a lot of grunts, but hey, at least you won’t complaint about being bored. Vin Diesel made a film that copied the formula presented in Cyborg, trying to improve on it but not succeeding very well, that film was Babylon A.D. (2008). 

nTitle: PARASITE 3-D (1982)

n

nDirector: Charles Band 

n

nThis film is a very low budget flick with lots of flaws, which is kind of standard operating procedure for many post apocalyptic films, but I have fond memories of seeing this one in theaters when I was 6 years old; I remember being completely terrified by it. On the way home, I was seeing slugs moving around the floor. Serves me right, this post apocalyptic monster movie was my first experience seeing a 3-D film! Little did I know back then that this was one of Demi Moore’s first adventures into acting! Actually, it was her second feature film ever. Also, this was Charles Bands third directorial effort, he would go on to direct a couple of theatrical released films like Metalstorm: The Destruction of Jared-Syn (1983) which by the way was also a 3-D film and many straight to video super low budget features like Trancers II (1991), Doctor Mordrid (1992), and most recently Evil Bong (2006). Parasite was also one of the first films in which make up effects legend Stan Winston worked his magic, he was the guy who designed and created the parasites we see on the film. You see, this is a film about this scientist who somehow creates a deadly parasite which he carries attached to his body for most of the film. He’s trying to find a way to destroy it without getting himself killed. Make no mistake; this is not a well made film. Half of it doesn’t make sense, the script is a joke, wich is kind of good in a way, because it will keep you giggling. Actually, Parasite serves as a perfect example that Italians weren’t the only ones good at ripping off films like Mad Max. Still, Parasite has its moments, mostly due to Stan Winston’s make up effects work. Some instances in this film will remind you of better films like David Cronenberg’s Shivers (1975), George Miller’s Mad Max (1979) and even Ridley Scott’s Alien (1979), but remember, this is simply one of those films that rips offs better films while trying to do its own thing. In fact, this is bottom rung, low brow entertainment my friends. But (and that’s a very big BUTT) if you enjoy cheap, low budget yet somehow lovable films, Parasites the ticket for you.

n

n