What I hate most about this movie - The Andromeda Strain (1971) Discussion

[–] Elzna 12 years ago

Scratch that, about 20 minutes.

reply

Ditto for The Godfather I and War of the Worlds (Cruise version). I'd rather endure 24 hours straight of 'nails on a chalk board' while suspended upside down in a vat of Michael Moore arm pit sweat then sit through these scenes... ok, maybe the arm pit sweat is a bit much ...
Rosie O'Donnells ?

reply

[–] BertramWilberforceWooster 9 years ago

I'd rather endure 24 hours straight of 'nails on a chalk board' while suspended upside down in a vat of Michael Moore arm pit sweat then [sic] sit through these scenes...

No, I think I'd rather just sit through the scenes than be exposed to the rest.

--
Some days, you just can't get rid of a bomb.

reply

[–] krautdoggg 7 years ago

I don't remember a prolonged crying baby scene in Godfather I. Was it during the baptism at the end? In Godfather II there was the scene when baby Fredo was sick and they put the candle on his chest, but I don't remember prolonged crying. But it's been many years since I saw it.

reply

[–] rgcustomer 12 years ago

Really?

I thought that, by far, the most annoying aspect of the film was the incessant technobabble. It was almost a parody of itself. Any of the following announcements could have been made, to nobody in particular (certainly nobody seemed to care):

"Pressure level is minus 4 point 4 point 4"
"Three over eight delta column moves to ninety five"
"Chamber actuator elevation at B and R for nominal" (they love "nominal")

It's much worse than an episode of Star Trek: Voyager.

reply

[–] Elzna 12 years ago

PhaseTransition,

Thanks for your educated and well-put response!

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Owen-13 12 years ago

What I hate most in the movie, actually, is the insistence on portraying scientific method accurately, and then blowing it on critical points to help the movie generate suspense. Early on, we see the extreme measures taken to sterilize the people in the team as they descend into Wildfire, but when they are taking a break with a few pills and a chemical concoction to wash it all down, the question "why have a cafeteria" is answered with "Wildfire is not always on duty" or some such. So whats the point of sterilizing the team if the staff down there is not sterile, and for that matter, have contaminated the entire level with their non-sterile presences. No way that the entire lab could be sterilized between the discovery of the capsule and the time the team and capsule gets there. Of course, I also hate the whiny, irritating, obstructionist behavior of Dr. Leavit, that that's probably just me.

reply

[–] Henry J Sosenite 12 years ago

I didn't mind the baby crying. And I've never spent much time around babies, so it's not something I'd be used to. I guess it just doesn't bother me.

I agree that the character of Dr. Leavitt was much more annoying. Dr. Hall was also kind of annoying with his angsty and over-dramatic delivery of lines.

Do not click on this link without my permission: http://meonvarioustopics.blogspot.com

reply

[–] WyldeGoose 12 years ago

If you read the novel, the characters themselves come off a bit too clinical and the dialogue itself, particularly from Dr. Hall, does sound a bit over-the-top. So I think a lot of it was the writer's and director's fault, not the actors.

What bothered me wasn't really their overacting so much as it was the acting done by the guy that played Dr. Dutton when he overreacts to the projected spread of Andromeda if a nuke was dropped on Piedmont. He complains that Wildfire was meant for biological warfare. If I were Stone, my response would've been, "Duh! You helped go over all this, doctor! What the hell do you think you were working on? Didn't you read my memo that started this whole thing?"

reply

[–] Owen-13 12 years ago

I watched the movie again today, and was reminded again of the thing that makes no sense in the movie. They spend a deal of time establishing that the airplane was brought down by andromeda mutated to a form that eats polychron AND human skin, but when it mutates in the lab it eats polycrhon but NOT human skin. I can conceive of the possibility that it was a different mutation, but why make such a point of similarity in the first place? It always jars me when that point comes in the movie.

reply

[–] ELOrocks17 12 years ago

PLOT POINT AHEAD+++++++++++++++++++++++++++

It was the whole point of the movie! Andromeda could not affect humans with a PH inbalance, Thats why the baby and the old drunk survives, Polychrone does NOT have a PH inbalance, therefore Andromeda could destroy it. The pilot in the plane was in good health. no PH inbalance..therefore it killed him

*********************
Conservatives hate what people do -- Liberals hate who people are.

reply

[–] scottsteaux63-735-780576 12 years ago

Actually Dr Leavitt is my favorite character in the whole movie. Maybe I just have a thing for people who specialize in smartass.

:D

Never mess with a middle-aged, Bipolar queen with AIDS and an attitude problem!
><

reply

[–] Philo89 12 years ago

Ugh. I can't stand her, and I hate that they seem to have specifically crafted her to be "uppity dykey woman"

She acts all holier than thou, yet she's sloppy (wanting to rush the analysis) and she lies about a medical condition that results in her almost killing the planet. Just awful.

reply

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 11 years ago

I loved her too!

--------
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] film-collector 12 years ago

I agree. One of the annoying sounds of film that forever bother me. Others are incessant phone ringing, swallowing/gulping a beverage, LONG screaming (especially in horror films), ALL done too loudely. If they'd just cut back on the volume it renders it accecptable.
The funny thing about the babys crying in this picture is that it's necessary to the polot developement as it alters his health. But again, CUT BACK ON THE VOLUME!
Others here have complained about Ruth McDevit's character. I found it right on par and think she is one of our great actresses. Those times had radical groups bombing and killing a lot of pro-war institutions. Not gangs, but organized college educated groups.

reply

[–] ccr1633 12 years ago

Elzna wrote:
"The crying baby."
------------------------------------------------

Here's a little clue for you. You were one of those crying babies once. Too bad your momma wasn't similarly annoyed and didn't stick your whining butt in the microwave and end your miserable existence nice and early.

reply

[–] lastmidnite2 12 years ago

That's what I'd love to do to the crying babies I always get stuck with in back of me on planes. bring on the microwave!

reply

[–] artistathome 12 years ago

I am waqtching it now, I recorded it a couple of days ago. I remember it back in the 70s when we were young and idealistic. It still comes off ok. The crying baby had to cry to keep from dying!

But the constant nonsensical computer announcements when they were in the lowest level of the lab doing their work! OMG that is so dumb.

Seriously? This is an actual working ag station. So those AG techs/people don't need to be sterilized---- and if this is national security, then those AG people can't know anything, right> they just work for the Ag Dept of the govt.

So maybe ThEY NEED TO HEAR THE ANNOUNCEMENTS.

But the Fire Team, no they don't need to hear all that. I would think that that would distract them, like "HUH" does someone need to tell us something.?

I don't remember that being part of the novel, it would have been so superfluous.
So no doubt the screen writer inserted it thinking that dead air (while the team is actually talking to each other!!) would be worse than these announcements, which by the way, mean nothing in the real world.

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bjlevine 12 years ago

Umm...you do understand that it was one of the major plot points in the movie, right? The baby was still alive BECAUSE it cried all the time.

hÄbinngTfoÜvlewwuthtHewkolfRïginkeeyvoeRd...

reply

[–] pawtrax67 12 years ago

The baby crying was the reason it was alive, it's ph level in it's blood was affected.

Annoying? Yes. But it's part of the story.

Dr. Levitt was just as cranky and more of a smart-ass, than Dr. McCoy from Star Trek so that's nothing too shocking. In fact she's more of a refreshing character, and we see why she's so defensive because she's hiding her epilepsy.

It isn't too often in films we see the rationale on why a character acts a certain way.

The ending was a little forced, I think basically Crichton painted himself into a corner making the organism too strong. The jet plane crashing is to set up the seals leaking and the shut off of the nuclear device.

Then is almost magically goes away??? So Andromeda didn't effect anyone in California before it gets washed into the ocean? It mutated to a non-infectious form? Boy that was sure lucky right?

It reminds me a lot of the War of the Worlds just as you think it's all over, the Martians die from Earth-borne viruses.

It's still better than a lot of movies today. I'm glad the scientists didn't look like they are from the cover of GQ or Vogue.

reply

[–] GuyOnTheLeft 11 years ago

I agree with your entire analysis including the anticlimactic ending (which is why I only gave it a 7 despite really liking a lot of the earlier portion of the film). I have had four kids and have my youngest, a six month old baby boy, in my lap as I type, so I'm not sure how to take the post of the OP.

--------
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc

reply

[–] psl-409-88473 11 years ago

For a low budget movie I thought they did a good job with the entire tech angle. One of the best I've seen. As pointed out the baby crying was central to the plot and one of the first steps in the process of uncovering the nature of the virus.

Still think this was way better than the miniseries in 2008? and most Science fiction on TV today.

reply

[–] darryl-tahirali 10 years ago

For a low budget movie . . . -psi-409-88473

"Low budget"? The Andromeda Strain had a budget of $6.5 million in 1970-71. In today's dollars, that is around $39 million. Hardly low-budget.

I thought they did a good job with the entire tech angle. . . . Still think this was way better than the miniseries in 2008? and most Science fiction on TV today.

I agree that Andromeda did a good job with the tech angle--perhaps too good, as at times the narrative does get mired in the procedural aspects. I didn't see the later miniseries as Andromeda was such a strong film for its time, and I've become disenchanted with remakes.

------------------
"We hear very little, and we understand even less." - Refugee in Casablanca

reply

[–] lorddeseiz 11 years ago

Go ahead and slam away.
_____________________
Any last words ?
Shut the *beep* up
-Mutant Chronicles-

reply